Mechanical resuscitation assist devices

In Germany 100,000-160,000 people suffer from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) annually. The incidence of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) after OHCA varies between emergency ambulance services but is in the range of 30-90 CPR attempts per 100,000 inhabitants per year. Basic life support (BLS) involving chest compressions and ventilation is the key measure of resuscitation. Rapid initiation and quality of BLS are the most critical factors for CPR success. Even healthcare professionals are not always able to ensure the quality of CPR measures. Consequently in recent years mechanical resuscitation devices have been developed to optimize chest compression and the resulting circulation. In this article the mechanical resuscitation devices currently available in Germany are discussed and evaluated scientifically in context with available literature. The ANIMAX CPR device should not be used outside controlled trials as no clinical results have so far been published. The same applies to the new device Corpuls CPR which will be available on the market in early 2014. Based on the current published data a general recommendation for the routine use of LUCAS (TM) and AutoPulseA (R) CPR cannot be given. The preliminary data of the CIRC trial and the published data of the LINC trial revealed that mechanical CPR is apparently equivalent to good manual CPR. For the final assessment further publications of large randomized studies must be analyzed (e.g. the CIRC and PaRAMeDIC trials). However, case control studies, case series and small studies have already shown that in special situations and in some cases patients will benefit from the automatic mechanical resuscitation devices (LUCAS (TM), AutoPulseA (R)). This applies especially to emergency services where standard CPR quality is far below average and for patients who require prolonged CPR under difficult circumstances. This might be true in cases of resuscitation due to hypothermia, intoxication and pulmonary embolism as well as for patients requiring transport or coronary intervention when cardiac arrest persists. Three prospective randomized studies and the resulting meta-analysis are available for active compression-decompression resuscitation (ACD-CPR) in combination with an impedance threshold device (ITD). These studies compared ACD-ITD-CPR to standard CPR and clearly demonstrated that ACD-ITD-CPR is superior to standard CPR concerning short and long-term survival with good neurological recovery after OHCA.