Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

A pilot study of mechanical chest compressions with the LUCAS™ device in cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Smekal, David ; Johansson, Jakob ; Huzevka, Tibor LU and Rubertsson, Sten (2011) In Resuscitation 82(6). p.6-702
Abstract

AIM: The LUCAS™ device has been shown to improve organ perfusion during cardiac arrest in experimental studies. In this pilot study the aim was to compare short-term survival between cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed with mechanical chest compressions using the LUCAS™ device and CPR performed with manual chest compressions. The intention was to use the results for power calculation in a larger randomised multicentre trial.

METHODS: In a prospective pilot study, from February 1, 2005, to April 1, 2007, 149 patients with out-of hospital cardiac arrest in two Swedish cities were randomised to mechanical chest compressions or standard CPR with manual chest compressions.

RESULTS: After exclusion, the LUCAS and the... (More)

AIM: The LUCAS™ device has been shown to improve organ perfusion during cardiac arrest in experimental studies. In this pilot study the aim was to compare short-term survival between cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed with mechanical chest compressions using the LUCAS™ device and CPR performed with manual chest compressions. The intention was to use the results for power calculation in a larger randomised multicentre trial.

METHODS: In a prospective pilot study, from February 1, 2005, to April 1, 2007, 149 patients with out-of hospital cardiac arrest in two Swedish cities were randomised to mechanical chest compressions or standard CPR with manual chest compressions.

RESULTS: After exclusion, the LUCAS and the manual groups contained 75 and 73 patients, respectively. In the LUCAS and manual groups, spontaneous circulation with a palpable pulse returned in 30 and 23 patients (p = 0.30), spontaneous circulation with blood pressure above 80/50 mm Hg remained for at least 5 min in 23 and 19 patients (p = 0.59), the number of patients hospitalised alive >4h were 18 and 15 (p = 0.69), and the number discharged, alive 6 and 7 (p = 0.78), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients we found no difference in early survival between CPR performed with mechanical chest compression with the LUCAS™ device and CPR with manual chest compressions. Data have been used for power calculation in a forthcoming multicentre trial.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; and
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Aged, Algorithms, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/instrumentation, Female, Humans, Male, Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy, Pilot Projects, Prospective Studies
in
Resuscitation
volume
82
issue
6
pages
5 pages
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • scopus:79956106363
  • pmid:21419560
ISSN
1873-1570
DOI
10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.01.032
language
English
LU publication?
no
additional info
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
id
00d5d58e-f976-4d86-a3f5-66fd7e6f0dbd
date added to LUP
2023-09-14 10:06:08
date last changed
2024-04-05 23:27:40
@article{00d5d58e-f976-4d86-a3f5-66fd7e6f0dbd,
  abstract     = {{<p>AIM: The LUCAS™ device has been shown to improve organ perfusion during cardiac arrest in experimental studies. In this pilot study the aim was to compare short-term survival between cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed with mechanical chest compressions using the LUCAS™ device and CPR performed with manual chest compressions. The intention was to use the results for power calculation in a larger randomised multicentre trial.</p><p>METHODS: In a prospective pilot study, from February 1, 2005, to April 1, 2007, 149 patients with out-of hospital cardiac arrest in two Swedish cities were randomised to mechanical chest compressions or standard CPR with manual chest compressions.</p><p>RESULTS: After exclusion, the LUCAS and the manual groups contained 75 and 73 patients, respectively. In the LUCAS and manual groups, spontaneous circulation with a palpable pulse returned in 30 and 23 patients (p = 0.30), spontaneous circulation with blood pressure above 80/50 mm Hg remained for at least 5 min in 23 and 19 patients (p = 0.59), the number of patients hospitalised alive &gt;4h were 18 and 15 (p = 0.69), and the number discharged, alive 6 and 7 (p = 0.78), respectively.</p><p>CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients we found no difference in early survival between CPR performed with mechanical chest compression with the LUCAS™ device and CPR with manual chest compressions. Data have been used for power calculation in a forthcoming multicentre trial.</p>}},
  author       = {{Smekal, David and Johansson, Jakob and Huzevka, Tibor and Rubertsson, Sten}},
  issn         = {{1873-1570}},
  keywords     = {{Aged; Algorithms; Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/instrumentation; Female; Humans; Male; Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy; Pilot Projects; Prospective Studies}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{6}},
  pages        = {{6--702}},
  publisher    = {{Elsevier}},
  series       = {{Resuscitation}},
  title        = {{A pilot study of mechanical chest compressions with the LUCAS™ device in cardiopulmonary resuscitation}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.01.032}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.01.032}},
  volume       = {{82}},
  year         = {{2011}},
}