Study finds mechanical chest compressions are equally as effective as manual CPR

September 1, 2013, European Society of Cardiology

Mechanical chest compressions with defibrillation during ongoing compressions are just as effective, but not superior to manual compressions, for delivering cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to patients in cardiac arrest, according to the results of the LUCAS in Cardiac Arrest study.

"The study was designed to show a better 4-hour survival in the group treated with mechanical chest compressions, and this was not achieved," said lead investigator Sten Rubertsson, MD, PhD, professor and specialist consultant at Uppsala University and Uppsala University Hospital.

"But we now have the scientific support to allow us to use mechanical chest compressions and defibrillate during ongoing compressions," he said, adding that this could potentially increase the efficiency and safety of emergency personnel as they deliver care during transportation of patients.

The LINC study included 2,589 patients from six European sites who had suffered an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and needed resuscitation.

Manual chest compressions were started on all patients as soon as EMS personnel arrived on the scene.

Patients were then randomized to either be kept on manual chest compressions (n=1289) or be switched to mechanical compressions with during ongoing chest compressions (n=1300). Mechanical chest compressions were delivered with the LUCAS Chest Compression System (Physio-Control/Jolife AB, Lund Sweden), a piston-driven device with a designed to deliver compressions according to resuscitation guidelines.

In both groups, ventilation and drugs were given according to guidelines.

The study showed that four hours after the initiation of CPR, were similar in both the mechanical and manual CPR groups (23.6% versus 23.7%).

Later outcomes were also similar, including the rate of restoration of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), the number of patients who arrived at the with a palpable pulse, the number of patients who survived until discharge from intensive care, and neurological outcomes at one and six months.

Theoretically, mechanical chest compressions should offer an advantage over manual chest compressions because the latter often have insufficient depth, incorrect rate and frequent interruptions, explained Dr. Rubertsson.

"The efficacy of traditional manual chest compression is heavily dependent on the skills and endurance of rescuers, and is compromised by periods of hands-off time and transportation interruptions," he said. Even at high efficiency it delivers only approximately 30% of normal cardiac output, resulting in decreased blood flow to vital organs."

Mechanical compressions should theoretically improve CPR, but to date there is no definitive evidence from large randomised trials to show this.

Two randomized pilot studies of out-of-hospital patients have compared mechanical with mechanical compressions from the LUCAS device (1-2), and neither study found any significant difference between groups; however, the study populations were small.

The results of the current study suggest clinical equipoise, said Dr. Rubertsson - although, he said slight adjustments to the treatment algorithms might result in clinically significant differences in the future.

"With the algorithm we used for mechanical CPR we found that time to first defibrillation was delayed compared to manual CPR and this could explain why we were not able to show improved outcome. Therefore in the future we will recommend defibrillation without delay, before deployment of the device."

Regarding safety, "I would say that we can deem the device is safe, based upon the low number of severe adverse events and adverse events reported in the study, " he said.

"Survivors at 6 months had good neurologic outcome (99% in the mechanical group and 94% in the manual) and in a previously published pilot study of 85 patients we did not find any difference between groups in injuries at autopsy. What remains to be finally analysed is the cohort of 200 patients within LINC that underwent autopsy."

Evidence showing equal efficacy for both manual and mechanical compressions is an added benefit to Emergency Medical Systems (EMS) workers.

"EMS workers can now use a device to provide CPR which means they have an extra pair of hands available for other possible interventions," said Dr. Rubertsson.

"Safety during transportation in the ambulance can also be improved since now the crew can have safety belts and still provide CPR."

He emphasized that the results of the LINC trial are only applicable to the LUCAS device and cannot be generalized to other mechanical chest compressors.

Explore further: Varied quality of CPR among EMS, hospitals hurts survival

More information: 1. Axelsson C, Nestin J, Svensson L, Axelsson A.B, Herlitz J. Clinical consequences of the introduction of mechanical chest compression in the EMS system for treatment of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest-a pilot study. Resuscitation 2006;71:47-55.

2. Smekal D, Johansson J, Huzevka T, Rubertsson S. A pilot study of mechanical chest compressions with the LUCAS device in cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 2011;82:702-06.

Related Stories

Varied quality of CPR among EMS, hospitals hurts survival

June 25, 2013
The quality of CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) you receive may vary, depending on the EMS department or hospital administering it, according to the American Heart Association.

Eliminating mouth-to-mouth boosts CPR results, study shows

December 10, 2012
(HealthDayNews)—Bystander CPR saves more lives when just chest compression is performed without mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, a new study from Japan shows.

Study finds improved CPR quality saves lives

May 20, 2013
(Medical Xpress)—Life-saving CPR has been a foundation of emergency medicine for more than a half century. But researchers at the University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix are continuing to refine the procedure, ...

Recommended for you

Researchers borrow from AIDS playbook to tackle rheumatic heart disease

January 22, 2018
Billions of US taxpayer dollars have been invested in Africa over the past 15 years to improve care for millions suffering from the HIV/AIDS epidemic; yet health systems on the continent continue to struggle. What if the ...

A nanoparticle inhalant for treating heart disease

January 18, 2018
A team of researchers from Italy and Germany has developed a nanoparticle inhalant for treating people suffering from heart disease. In their paper published in the journal Science Translational Medicine, the group describes ...

Starting periods before age of 12 linked to heightened risk of heart disease and stroke

January 15, 2018
Starting periods early—before the age of 12—is linked to a heightened risk of heart disease and stroke in later life, suggests an analysis of data from the UK Biobank study, published online in the journal Heart.

'Decorated' stem cells could offer targeted heart repair

January 10, 2018
Although cardiac stem cell therapy is a promising treatment for heart attack patients, directing the cells to the site of an injury - and getting them to stay there - remains challenging. In a new pilot study using an animal ...

Two simple tests could help to pinpoint cause of stroke

January 10, 2018
Detecting the cause of the deadliest form of stroke could be improved by a simple blood test added alongside a routine brain scan, research suggests.

Exercise is good for the heart, high blood pressure is bad—researchers find out why

January 10, 2018
When the heart is put under stress during exercise, it is considered healthy. Yet stress due to high blood pressure is bad for the heart. Why? And is this always the case? Researchers of the German Centre for Cardiovascular ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.