Standardized post-resuscitation damage assessment of two mechanical chest compression devices: a prospective randomized large animal trial

Abstract Background Mechanical chest compression devices are accepted alternatives for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) under specific circumstances. Current lack prospective and comparative data on their cardiovascular effects potential severe thoracic injuries. Objectives To compare CPR effectiveness injuries of two mechanical in pigs. Study design Prospective randomised trial. Animals Eighteen male German landrace Methods Ventricular fibrillation was induced anaesthetised instrumented pigs the animals were into intervention groups. initiated by means LUCAS™ 2 (mCCD1) or Corpuls™ cpr (mCCD2) device. Advanced life support applied a maximum 10 cycles achieving ROSC monitored 8 h. Ventilation/perfusion measurements performed blood gas analyses taken. Thoracic assessed via standardised damage score. Results Five mCCD1 group one animal mCCD2 achieved ( p = 0.048). Only survived until end monitoring period < 0.01). MCCD1 showed less pulmonary shunt 0.025) higher normal V/Q 0.017) during CPR. MCCD2 significantly more 0.046). Conclusion The LUCAS device shows superior outcomes compared to Corpuls when used experimental juvenile Researchers should be aware that different mCCDs studies may influence respective outcome affect comparability trials. Controlled human post-resuscitation injury evaluation could help confirm hazards. Trial registration approval number: G16–1-042-E4.