Vasopressin: improving resuscitation?

Historically, epinephrine has been used in the treatment of cardiac arrest for its alpha effects of peripheral vasoconstriction to promote vital organ perfusion. Unfortunately, epinephrine, like many other pharmacological agents, targets other receptor sites that can have a detrimental effect on the patient in cardiac arrest. Vasopressin is an endogenous hormone that may be an ideal alternative or adjunctive to epinephrine in the setting of cardiac arrest. Vasopressin, like epinephrine, promotes selective but potent vasoconstriction of smooth muscle, but unlike epinephrine, without the potentially harmful side effects of increasing myocardial workload, therefore increasing oxygen demand and subsequent worsening of cardiac function. The newest data on the impact of vasopressin in cardiac arrest is promising. Further studies are required to determine if vasopressin has a significantly positive impact in outcome as measured by discharge of the neurologically intact patient in the North American EMS model.     

New airways for resuscitation?

Over the last 15 years supraglottic airway devices (SADs), most notably the classic laryngeal mask airway (LMA) have revolutionised airway management in anaesthesia. In contrast for resuscitation, both in and outside hospital, facemask ventilation and tracheal intubation remain the mainstays of airway management. However there is evidence that both these techniques have complications and are often poorly performed by inexperienced personnel. Tracheal intubation also has the potential to cause serious harm or death through unrecognised oesophageal intubation. SADs may have a role in airway management for resuscitation as first responder devices, rescue devices or for use during patient extraction. In particular they may be beneficial as the level of skill required to use the device safely may be less than for the tracheal tube. Concerns have been expressed over the ability to ventilate the lungs successfully and also the risk of aspiration with SADs. The only SADs recommended by ILCOR in its current guidance are the classic LMA and combitube. Several SADs have recently been introduced with claims that ventilation and airway protection is improved. This pragmatic review examines recent developments in SAD technology and the relevance of this to the potential for using SADs during resuscitation. In addition to examining research directly related to resuscitation both on bench models and in patients the review also examines evidence from anaesthetic practice. SADS discussed include the classic, intubating and Proseal LMAs, the combitube, the laryngeal tube, laryngeal tube sonda mark I and II and single use laryngeal masks.     

Does naloxone alone increase resuscitation rate during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a rat asphyxia model?

Cardiac arrest was induced with asphyxia to identify if naloxone alone increases resuscitation rate during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a rat asphyxia model. The animals were randomized into either a saline group (Sal-gro, treated with normal saline 1 ml iv, n = 8), a low-dose naloxone group (treated with naloxone 0.5 mg/kg iv, n = 8), or a high-dose naloxone group (HN-gro, treated with naloxone 1 mg/kg iv, n = 8) in a blinded fashion during resuscitation. At the end of 10 minutes of asphyxia, cardiopulmonary resuscitation was started, and each drug was administered at the same time. The rate of restoration of spontaneous circulation was seen in 1 of 8, 3 of 8, and 7 of 8 animals in the Sal-gro, LN-gro, and HN-gro, respectively. The rate of restoration of spontaneous circulation in HN-gro was significantly higher than that in Sal-gro (P < .05). Naloxone (1 mg/kg) alone can increase resuscitation rate following asphyxial cardiac arrest in rats.     

Are the new resuscitation guidelines optimal?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to evaluate the 2005 guidelines on cardiopulmonary resuscitation. RECENT FINDINGS: International guidelines are based ideally on results from robust clinical trials. They are necessarily constrained in how far they can draw conclusions from experimental data, and have to pay regard to perceived safety and educational issues. Informed opinion can be more radical in drawing from compelling recent experimental findings, particularly when supported by unreplicated or indirect clinical evidence. Those already available cover a range of issues relevant to the guidelines; the most important ones are reviewed here. SUMMARY: The 2005 guidelines represent a major advance on those previously in use, but on the evidence already available they cannot be considered optimal. Deviations based on good evidence should not be discouraged provided they are approved and preferably monitored by authoritative bodies that should see this as a legitimate role in developing the science of resuscitation medicine. Guidelines for the most pressing of medical emergencies should not be set and inflexible over several years whilst the science behind them continues to advance.     

Can cardiopulmonary resuscitation injure the back?

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is performed frequently by nurses in general hospitals and often in compromised positions. This may induce injury to the rescuer's spine particularly if the CPR procedure is continued for a considerable time before medical staff arrive. Back pain as an occupational symptom in nurses has received considerable attention in the medical literature, but there is no report on the effect of CPR on back discomfort. This article reports a survey of the CPR experience of nurses in general hospitals and nursing homes and explores the difficulties encountered by nurses during the CPR procedure. A questionnaire was sent to nurses who had CPR experience in three general hospitals and 20 nursing homes through the nursing administrators of the respective units. Analysis of 205 completed questionnaires showed that the duration of the CPR procedure could last up to 27 min. While 86% of the nurses performed CPR on a bed, 70% of them had their legs hanging over the edge of the bed without support and 55% had to turn their head or back to look at the ECG monitor during the procedure. Over 80% experienced back discomfort during or after the CPR procedure and 56% considered their back discomfort was related to the duration of the procedure. Twenty percent of the nurses suffered back injury or prolapsed disc and over 40% of these 'injured' nurses considered their back injury was related to or aggravated by CPR. Results of this survey suggest there is a need to review the support given to nurses to ensure safe administration of the CPR procedure in the general ward environment.     

Time matters – Realism in resuscitation training

Background

The advanced life support guidelines recommend 2 min of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and minimal hands-off time to ensure sufficient cardiac and cerebral perfusion. We have observed doctors who shorten the CPR intervals during resuscitation attempts. During simulation-based resuscitation training, the recommended 2-min CPR cycles are often deliberately decreased in order to increase the number of scenarios. The aim of this study was to test if keeping 2-min CPR cycles during resuscitation training ensures better adherence to time during resuscitation in a simulated setting.

Methods

This study was designed as a randomised control trial. Fifty-four 4th-year medical students with no prior advanced resuscitation training participated in an extra-curricular one-day advanced life support course. Participants were either randomised to simulation-based training using real-time (120 s) or shortened CPR cycles (30–45 s instead of 120 s) in the scenarios. Adherence to time was measured using the European Resuscitation Council's Cardiac Arrest Simulation Test (CASTest) in retention tests conducted one and 12 weeks after the course.

Results

The real-time group adhered significantly better to the recommended 2-min CPR cycles (time-120 s) (mean 13; standard derivation (SD) 8) than the shortened CPR cycle group (mean 45; SD 19) when tested (p < 0.001.)

Conclusion

This study indicates that time is an important part of fidelity. Variables critical for performance, like adherence to time in resuscitation, should therefore be kept realistic during training to optimise outcome.     

Should families be present during resuscitation?

Weigh the pros and cons of family presence during a crisis, then tell us what you think.     

Witnessed resuscitation: beneficial or detrimental?

This article explores the existing literature and discusses the benefits and disadvantages of witnessed resuscitation for health professionals, relatives, and patients themselves. Keywords "witnessed resuscitation," "patient perspective," "health professionals," and "resuscitation room" were entered into MEDLINE, Medscape, and Science Direct databases. The issue of witnessed resuscitation, along with the benefits and disadvantages of its implementation, is discussed widely with increasing controversy among health professionals. Many authors accept the existence of benefits of witnessed resuscitation, but they each have reservations on certain aspects of the practice. Although witnessed resuscitation has demonstrable benefits, the dearth of research literature on the subject makes it difficult to come to a concrete conclusion about its value in practice. More studies are needed focusing on the impact of witnessed resuscitation on staff, family members, and patients. Larger sample sizes are needed in future studies, and studies are needed in which geographical, cultural, religious, and sociological factors are taken into consideration.     

Rational or rationalized choices in fluid resuscitation?

The war between colloids and crystalloids wages on. In a large multinational survey of fluid prescribing practices in critically ill patients, we have a new and intriguing snapshot of global fluid resuscitation practices. Colloids are more often used for impaired perfusion or low cardiac output, and the choice of colloid or crystalloid varies enormously between countries. Why are some ICUs prescribing colloids more often than crystalloids when there is little convincing evidence that colloids are superior for fluid resuscitation? Are colloids advantageous in certain diseases, or in specific regional patient populations that have not yet been elucidated? Perhaps we should look inwards: the answer may not be more randomized clinical trials, but better adherence to current guidelines and treatment recommendations.     

Fluid resuscitation in diabetic emergencies — a reappraisal

The first objective in diabetic ketoacidosis is to restore the circulating volume and improve tissue perfusion. In any form of hypovolaemic shock the most efficient way of restoring circulating volume is to be use colloid solutions rather than crystalloids. At least three times the amount of crystalloid must be used to achieve the same effect. The historical reason for using isotonic saline in diabetic ketoacidosis is related not to its similarity to the fluid lost, but to its supposed efficiency in correcting the circulating volume. Excess crystalloid expands the interstitial space which results in pulmonary oedema, peripheral oedema and possibly cerebral oedema. Although currently difficult to define precisely in their more subtle forms, they all produce adverse pathophysiological effects. The fluid loss in diabetic ketoacidosis is equivalent to "half-normal" saline, a relatively hypotonic solution. As well as causing extensive oedema, resuscitation with isotonic saline can increase serum sodium and osmolarity while not providing free water to replace the intracellular losses.     

Is family presence practical during emergency resuscitation?

When family members ask to be present during the resuscitation of their loved ones, should health care providers grant their requests?     

Witnessed resuscitation: good practice or not?

Should relatives be given the choice to witness the resuscitation of a family member? From the available literature, three main topic areas emerge: research studies that allow witnessed resuscitation, the effects on relatives of witnessed resuscitation, and A&E staff attitudes towards witnessed resuscitation. There is abundant literature on the positive effects for relatives of witnessing the attempted resuscitation of a loved-one, the main benefit being that the grieving process was made easier. However, staff attitudes are mixed, making witnessed resuscitation a controversial topic.