Sign In    Register

World Journal of Emergency Medicine ›› 2021, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (4): 303-308.doi: 10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2021.04.009

• Orginal Articles • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Protective effect of extracorporeal membrane pulmonary oxygenation combined with cardiopulmonary resuscitation on post-resuscitation lung injury

Ji-yang Ling1, Chun-sheng Li2(), Yun Zhang1, Xiao-li Yuan1, Bo Liu3, Yong Liang3, Qiang Zhang3   

  1. 1Department of Emergency Medicine, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100730, China
    2Department of Emergency Medicine, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China
    3Department of Emergency Medicine, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100020, China
  • Received:2020-12-15 Accepted:2021-05-26 Online:2021-09-01 Published:2021-08-17
  • Contact: Chun-sheng Li E-mail:lcscyyy@163.com

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Cardiac arrest (CA) is a critical condition that is a concern to healthcare workers. Comparative studies on extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) and conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR) technologies have shown that ECPR is superior to CCPR. However, there is a lack of studies that compare the protective effects of these two resuscitative methods on organs. Therefore, we aim to perform experiments in swine models of ventricular fibrillation-induced CA to study whether the early application of ECPR has advantages over CCPR in the lung injury and to explore the protective mechanism of ECPR on the post-resuscitation pulmonary injury.
METHODS: Sixteen male swine were randomized to CCPR (CCPR; n=8; CCPR alone) and ECPR (ECPR; n=8; extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with CCPR) groups, with the restoration of spontaneous circulation at 6 hours as an endpoint.
RESULTS: For the two groups, the survival rates between the two groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05), the blood and lung biomarkers were statistically significant (P<0.05), and the extravascular lung water and pulmonary vascular permeability index were statistically significant (P<0.01). Compared with the ECPR group, electron microscopy revealed mostly vacuolated intracellular alveolar type II lamellar bodies and a fuzzy lamellar structure with widening and blurring of the blood-gas barrier in the CCPR group.
CONCLUSIONS: ECPR may have pulmonary protective effects, possibly related to the regulation of alveolar surface-active proteins and mitigated oxidative stress response post-resuscitation.

Key words: Cardiac arrest, Swine, Alveolar surface-active protein, Oxidative stress injury, Pulmonary edema