Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
July 3, 2026International Journal of Emergency MedicineOpen Access

Mechanical versus manual chest compressions during ECPR in the catheterization laboratory

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

SMStepan MaruniakMTMykhailo TodurovSSSerhii Sudakevych

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Retrospective cohort study compares outcomes of mechanical and manual chest compressions during ECPR, indicating differing low-flow times but similar survival rates.

Key Points

  • Assess clinical outcomes associated with mechanical versus manual chest compressions during ECPR in the CathLab.
  • Retrospective single-center observational cohort study from 2018 to 2025
  • Included 58 patients who experienced cardiac arrest in the CathLab
  • Divided patients into mechanical CPR and manual CPR groups
  • Mechanical CPR resulted in a shorter low-flow duration (34 min vs. 41 min, p = 0.024)
  • No significant differences in return of spontaneous circulation (9.1% vs. 13.9%, p = 0.698)
  • Similar survival to hospital discharge rates (22.7% mechanical vs. 19.4% manual, p = 0.752)

Cite This Study

Maruniak et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a4750f45c29257aa257873ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12245-026-01296-w
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Mechanical versus Manual Chest Compressions for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Emergency Department: A Comparative Study2025 · 1 citations
  2. 2Mechanical and manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation in traumatic cardiac arrest: a retrospective observational study2026
  3. 3Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for in- and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: The race against time2024 · 4 citations
  4. 4A56-13 Manual vs Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) - A Narrative Review and an Update2026
  5. 5816: NEUROLOGICAL OUTCOMES FOLLOWING ECPR VS CONVENTIONAL CPR: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS2026