Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with mechanical chest compression for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A porcine model study

IF 1.9
Federico Sertic MD , Paulo Gregorio MD , Shampa Chatterjee PhD , Asad Usman MD , Gerald Broniec CCP , Andres Bermudez BSE , Thomas Richards PhD , Jonathan Salas BS , Kathryn Gray CCP, MHA , Cory Tschabrunn PhD , Christian Andres Bermudez MD
{"title":"Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with mechanical chest compression for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A porcine model study","authors":"Federico Sertic MD ,&nbsp;Paulo Gregorio MD ,&nbsp;Shampa Chatterjee PhD ,&nbsp;Asad Usman MD ,&nbsp;Gerald Broniec CCP ,&nbsp;Andres Bermudez BSE ,&nbsp;Thomas Richards PhD ,&nbsp;Jonathan Salas BS ,&nbsp;Kathryn Gray CCP, MHA ,&nbsp;Cory Tschabrunn PhD ,&nbsp;Christian Andres Bermudez MD","doi":"10.1016/j.xjon.2025.04.016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To evaluate the effectiveness of venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) using a dual-lumen cannula coupled with continuous mechanical chest compressions (cMCC) for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and compare it with venoarterial (VA) ECMO or cMCC only, in a preclinical model.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Twenty-three pigs were allocated into 3 experimental groups: cMCC using a LUCAS 3 compression device, VA-ECMO, and cMCC + VV-ECMO. After cannulation, ventricular fibrillation was induced and circulatory support initiated per allocation. Defibrillation occurred after 30 minutes of support initiation. Hemodynamic, echocardiographic, and laboratory measurements were collected at different timepoints. The primary outcome was the rate of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>ROSC was achieved in 1 of 8 of animals with cMCC only (13%), 5 of 7 (71%) animals with cMCC + VV-ECMO, and 8 of 8 (100%) animals with VA-ECMO. cMCC + VV-ECMO was associated with a significantly greater ROSC rate as compared with compressions alone (<em>P</em> = .04). Arterial oxygen tension was significantly greater with cMCC + VV-ECMO as compared with cMCC alone at all time points. After defibrillation, lactate was lower in the VA-ECMO group as compared with cMCC alone (5.1 mmol/L vs 8.6 mmol/L; <em>P</em> &lt; .01) and in the VV-ECMO group (6.3 mmol/L vs 8.6 mmol/L; <em>P</em> = .06).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>cMCC in association with VV-ECMO using a single dual-lumen femoral cannula may be a viable option of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, potentially leading to greater rates of ROSC when compared with cMCC alone. Additional studies are needed to determine whether this strategy could serve as an early alternative to VA-ECMO in the out-of-hospital cardiac arrest setting.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74032,"journal":{"name":"JTCVS open","volume":"25 ","pages":"Pages 215-224"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JTCVS open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666273625001469","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) using a dual-lumen cannula coupled with continuous mechanical chest compressions (cMCC) for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and compare it with venoarterial (VA) ECMO or cMCC only, in a preclinical model.

Methods

Twenty-three pigs were allocated into 3 experimental groups: cMCC using a LUCAS 3 compression device, VA-ECMO, and cMCC + VV-ECMO. After cannulation, ventricular fibrillation was induced and circulatory support initiated per allocation. Defibrillation occurred after 30 minutes of support initiation. Hemodynamic, echocardiographic, and laboratory measurements were collected at different timepoints. The primary outcome was the rate of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC).

Results

ROSC was achieved in 1 of 8 of animals with cMCC only (13%), 5 of 7 (71%) animals with cMCC + VV-ECMO, and 8 of 8 (100%) animals with VA-ECMO. cMCC + VV-ECMO was associated with a significantly greater ROSC rate as compared with compressions alone (P = .04). Arterial oxygen tension was significantly greater with cMCC + VV-ECMO as compared with cMCC alone at all time points. After defibrillation, lactate was lower in the VA-ECMO group as compared with cMCC alone (5.1 mmol/L vs 8.6 mmol/L; P < .01) and in the VV-ECMO group (6.3 mmol/L vs 8.6 mmol/L; P = .06).

Conclusions

cMCC in association with VV-ECMO using a single dual-lumen femoral cannula may be a viable option of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, potentially leading to greater rates of ROSC when compared with cMCC alone. Additional studies are needed to determine whether this strategy could serve as an early alternative to VA-ECMO in the out-of-hospital cardiac arrest setting.
体外膜氧合加机械胸外按压用于心肺复苏的猪模型研究
目的评价双腔插管联合持续机械胸外按压(cMCC)进行体外膜氧合(ECMO)心肺复苏的效果,并与单纯静脉膜氧合(VA)或体外膜氧合(cMCC)进行临床前比较。方法将23头猪分为3个实验组:采用LUCAS 3压缩装置的cMCC组、VA-ECMO组和cMCC + VV-ECMO组。插管后,心室颤动被诱导,循环支持被启动。支持开始30分钟后发生除颤。血流动力学、超声心动图和实验室测量在不同时间点收集。主要观察指标为自发循环恢复率(ROSC)。结果cMCC + VV-ECMO组8只动物中有1只(13%)达到rosc, cMCC + VV-ECMO组7只动物中有5只(71%)达到rosc, VA-ECMO组8只动物中有8只(100%)达到rosc。与单纯按压相比,cMCC + VV-ECMO的ROSC率显著提高(P = 0.04)。在所有时间点,cMCC + VV-ECMO与单独cMCC相比,动脉氧张力显著升高。除颤后,VA-ECMO组乳酸浓度低于单独cMCC组(5.1 mmol/L vs 8.6 mmol/L;P & lt;VV-ECMO组(6.3 mmol/L vs 8.6 mmol/L;P = .06)。结论scmcc联合VV-ECMO使用单双腔股导管可能是体外心肺复苏的可行选择,与单独cMCC相比,可能导致更高的ROSC发生率。需要进一步的研究来确定该策略是否可以作为院外心脏骤停情况下VA-ECMO的早期替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信