Il massaggiatore meccanico cardiaco nel percorso “Best Perfusion” della USL Toscana Sud Est. Studio retrospettivo nella centrale operativa 118 di Siena-Grosseto

Lorenzo Righi, Giulia Olivagnoli, Riccardo Bolognini, Ilo Mazzolai, Marianna Pastore, Stefano Trapassi

Abstract

Il massaggio cardiopolmonare (RCP) è una procedura fondamentale per soccorrere un paziente in arresto cardiaco. Tuttavia, in diverse situazioni la RCP manuale non risulta essere di qualità. Per questo sono stati sviluppati dispositivi meccanici per le compressioni toraciche esterne che, non essendo inclini all’affaticamento, potrebbero potenzialmente superare alcuni limiti della RCP manuale: uno di questi sistemi è il Lund University Cardiopulmonary Assist System (LUCAS), attualmente in uso nella USL Toscana Sud Est e regolamentato dal Percorso Aziendale “Best Perfusion”.

Riferimenti bibliografici

Arresto cardiaco improvviso, Best Perfusion per garantire la più alta qualità di cura. InSaluteNews. testo disponibile al sito: https://www.insalutenews.it/in-salute/arresto-cardiaco-improvviso-best-perfusion-per-garantire-la-piu-alta-qualita-di-cura [ultimo accesso online 05/12/2021];

Liu M, Shuai Z, Ai J, Tang K. et al. Mechanical chest compression with LUCAS device does not improve clinical outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients. Medicina. 2019; 98 (44), e17550;

Merchant RM, Topjian AA, Panchal AR, Cheng A, et al. Adult Basic and Advanced Life Support, Pediatric Basic and Advanced Life Support, Neonatal Life Support, Resuscitation Education Science, and Systems of Care Writing Groups. Part 1: Executive Summary: 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation. 2020 Oct 20;142(16_suppl_2):S337-S357.

Jasmeet Soar, Jerry P. Nolan, Bernd W. Böttiger, Gavin D. Perkins, et al. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2015: Section 3. Adult advanced life support, Resuscitation, Volume 95, 2015, Pages 100-147, ISSN 0300-9572, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.07.016.

Putzer G, Braun P, Zimmermann A, Pedross F. et al. LUCAS compared to manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation is more effective during helicopter rescue-a prospective, randomized, cross-over manikin study. Am J Emerg Med. 2013; 31(2), 384-389;

Lee JG, Kim JS, Roh SG. Comparison of chest compression and ventilation volume using LUCAS and manual in virtual reality-based ambulance simulation - A manikin study. Korean J Emerg Med Ser 2018; 2 (3): 67-76;

Dutto L, Ricca M. Manovre e procedure cardiocircolatorie. AHA Advisory Statement. Circulation 2008; 117: 2162. Sezione III - Manovre e procedure cardiocircolatori.

Bonnemeier H, Simonis G, Olivecrona G, Weidtmann B. et al. Continuous mechanical chest compression during in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation of patients with pulseless electrical activity. Resuscitation. 2011; 82 (2), 155-159;

Kim HT, Kim JG, Jang YS, et al. Comparison of in-hospital use of mechanical chest compression devices for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients. (AUTOPULSE vs LUCAS). Medicina (Baltimora). 2019; 98 (45):e17881;

Perkins GD, Brace S, Gates S. Mechanical chest-compression devices: current and future roles. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2010; 16 (3): 203-210;

Smekal D, Lindgren E, Sandler H, Johansson J. et al. CPR-related injuries after manual or mechanical chest compressions with the LUCAS device: a multicentre study of victims after unsuccessful resuscitation. Resuscitation. 2014; 85 (12): 1708-12;

Koster RW, Beenen LF, van der Boom EB, et al. Safety of mechanical chest compression devices AutoPulse and LUCAS in cardiac arrest: a randomized clinical trial for non-inferiority. Eur Heart J. 2017; 38 (40): 3006-3013;

Kahn PA, Dhruva SS, Rhee TG, Ross JS. Use of Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Devices for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest, 2010-2016. JAMA Netw Open. 2019; 2 (10):e1913298. Published 2019 Oct 2;

Marti J, Hulme C, Ferreira Z, et al. The cost-effectiveness of a mechanical compression device in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2017; 117: 1-7;

Czyz R, Leśkiewicz M, Czyz I. Mechanical devices to compress the patient's chest in a state of sudden cardiac arrest - future or everyday life of emergency medicine. Journal of Education, Health and Sport. 2018; 8 (3): 51-66;

Wang PL, Brooks SC. Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018; 8 (8): CD007260. Published 2018 Aug 20;

Liu M, Tang K, Ai J, Shuai Z et al. Efficiency of mechanical chest compressions with the LUCAS device in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients: a meta-analysis. Yournal of Xiangya Medicine. 2020; 2 (5): 10;

Perkins GD, Woollard M, Cooke MW, et al. Prehospital randomised assessment of a mechanical compression device in cardiac arrest (PaRAMeDIC) trial protocol. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2010;18:58. Published 2010 Nov 5.

Refback

  • Non ci sono refbacks, per ora.