NowComment
2-Pane Combined
Comments:
Full Summaries Sorted

Commenting period (July 16, 2023 20:24 – August 15, 2023 23:00) is closed

MON-10-v1


0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments


1 RECOVER 2.0 Worksheet

Paragraph 1 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 1, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

2 QUESTION ID: MON-10

Paragraph 2 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 2, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

3 PICO Question: In cats and dogs with CPA (P), does achieving any other specific ETCO2 during CPR (I), compared to achieving ETCO2 ≥ 15 mm Hg (C), improve ... (O)?

Paragraph 3 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 3, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 0
No paragraph-level conversations.

4 Outcomes: Favorable neurologic outcome, Survival to discharge, ROSC

Paragraph 4 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 4, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

5 Prioritized Outcomes (1= most critical; final number = least important):

Paragraph 5 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 5, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

6 1.Favorable neurologic outcome

Paragraph 6 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 6, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

7 2.Survival to Discharge

Paragraph 7 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 7, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

8 3.ROSC

Paragraph 8 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 8, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

9 Domain chairs: Selena Lane, Ben Brainard; final edit by Jamie Burkitt

Paragraph 9 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 9, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

10 Evidence evaluators: Aubrey Hnatusko, Tiffany Jagodich

Paragraph 10 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 10, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

11 Conflicts of interest: None reported

Paragraph 11 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 11, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

12 Search strategy: See attached document

Paragraph 12 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 12, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

13 Evidence Review:

Paragraph 13 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 13, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

14 Study Design

Paragraph 14 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 14, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

15 Reduced Quality Factors

Paragraph 15 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 15, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

16 0 = no serious, - = serious,

Paragraph 16 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 16, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

17 - - = very serious

Paragraph 17 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 17, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

18 Positive Quality Factors

Paragraph 18 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 18, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

19 0 = none, + = one, ++ = multiple

Paragraph 19 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 19, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

20 Dichotomous Outcome Summary

Paragraph 20 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 20, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

21 Non-Dichotomous Outcome Summary

Paragraph 21 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 21, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

22 Brief description

Paragraph 22 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 22, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

23 Overall Quality

Paragraph 23 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 23, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

24 High, moderate, low,
very low, none

Paragraph 24 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 24, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 24, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.

25 No of studies

Paragraph 25 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 25, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

26 Study Type

Paragraph 26 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 26, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

27 RoB

Paragraph 27 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 27, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

28 Indirectness

Paragraph 28 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 28, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

29 Imprecision

Paragraph 29 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 29, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

30 Inconsistency

Paragraph 30 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 30, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

31 Large Effect

Paragraph 31 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 31, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

32 Dose-Response

Paragraph 32 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 32, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

33 Confounder

Paragraph 33 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 33, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

34 # Intervention with Outcome

Paragraph 34 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 34, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

35 # Control with Outcome

Paragraph 35 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 35, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

36 RR (95% CI)

Paragraph 36 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 36, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

37 Outcome: Favorable neurologic outcome

Paragraph 37 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 37, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

38 3

Paragraph 38 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 38, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

39 OB

Paragraph 39 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 39, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

40 0

Paragraph 40 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 40, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

41 - -

Paragraph 41 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 41, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

42 0

Paragraph 42 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 42, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

43 -

Paragraph 43 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 43, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

44 0

Paragraph 44 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 44, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

45 0

Paragraph 45 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 45, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

46 0

Paragraph 46 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 46, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

47 Very low

Paragraph 47 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 47, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

48 Outcome: Survival to discharge

Paragraph 48 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 48, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

49 3

Paragraph 49 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 49, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

50 OB

Paragraph 50 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 50, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

51 0

Paragraph 51 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 51, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

52 - -

Paragraph 52 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 52, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

53 0

Paragraph 53 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 53, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

54 0

Paragraph 54 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 54, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

55 0

Paragraph 55 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 55, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

56 0

Paragraph 56 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 56, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

57 0

Paragraph 57 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 57, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

58 Very low

Paragraph 58 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 58, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

59 Outcome: ROSC

Paragraph 59 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 59, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

60 12

Paragraph 60 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 60, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

61 OB

Paragraph 61 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 61, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

62 0

Paragraph 62 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 62, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

63 - -

Paragraph 63 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 63, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

64 0

Paragraph 64 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 64, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

65 0

Paragraph 65 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 65, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

66 0

Paragraph 66 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 66, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

67 0

Paragraph 67 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 67, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

68 0

Paragraph 68 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 68, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

69 Very low

Paragraph 69 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 69, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

70 1

Paragraph 70 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 70, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

71 EX

Paragraph 71 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 71, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

72 0

Paragraph 72 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 72, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

73 -

Paragraph 73 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 73, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

74 -

Paragraph 74 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 74, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

75 0

Paragraph 75 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 75, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

76 0

Paragraph 76 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 76, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

77 0

Paragraph 77 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 77, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

78 0

Paragraph 78 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 78, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

79 Very low

Paragraph 79 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 79, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

80 PICO Question Summary

Paragraph 80 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 80, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

81 Introduction

Paragraph 81 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 81, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

82 While it has been established that higher ETCO2 values are associated with better outcomes in CPR in people, the minimum ETCO2 target in dogs and cats is unknown.1 Hofmeister et al. (2009) reported that in their population of dogs, 17 of 18 (94%) with an ETCO2 < 15 mm Hg during CPR were not successfully resuscitated, whereas 25 of 29 (86%) with a ETCO2 ≥ 15 mm Hg achieved ROSC.2ofJ In the same study, 5 of 9 cats with a ETCO2 < 20 mm Hg were not successfully resuscitated, whereas 9 of 10 cats with a ETCO2 ≥ 20 mm Hg achieved ROSC. The best way to use ETCO2 to improve chest compression technique in dogs and cats is unknown.

Paragraph 82 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 82, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 82, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 82, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.

83 Consensus on science

Paragraph 83 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 83, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

84 Outcome 1: Favorable neurologic outcome

Paragraph 84 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 84, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

85 For the most critical outcome of FNO, 3 observational studies in people (very low quality of evidence, downgraded for very serious indirectness and inconsistency) were identified that addressed the PICO question. In 803 adults with IHCA, Sutton (2016) found that ETCO2 > 10 mmHg during CPR was significantly associated with FNO compared to people with ETCO2 ≤ 10 mmHg (OR 2.31, CI95 1.31, 4.09; P = 0.004).3 Calbay (2019) found no association between continuous ETCO2 value during CPR and FNO in 155 adults with OHCA.4 Finally, in 43 pediatric patients with IHCA, Berg et al (2018) found that all children who survived to discharge did so with a FNO, and that both survivors and non-survivors achieved median ETCO2 values > 20 mm Hg during CPR.5

Paragraph 85 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 85, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 85, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.

86 Outcome 2: Survival to discharge

Paragraph 86 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 86, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

87 For the next most critical outcome of survival to discharge, we identified 3 observational studies in people (very low quality of evidence, downgraded for very serious indirectness) that address the PICO question. In 803 adults with IHCA, Sutton (2016) found that ETCO2 > 10 mmHg during CPR was associated with survival to hospital discharge compared to patients with ETCO2 ≤ 10 mmHg (OR 2.41, CI95 1.35, 4.30; P = 0.003).3 A prospective, observational study in 102 adults undergoing CPR in the emergency department found that median ETCO2 during CPR was higher (35 mmHg) in patients that survived to hospital admission than in nonsurvivors (13.7 mmHg, P < 0.01); ETCO2 > 16 mmHg predicted survival to hospital admission.6 In 43 pediatric patients with IHCA, Berg et al. (2018) found no difference in survival to discharge when comparing pediatric patients with mean ETCO2 > 20 mmHg to those with lower mean ETCO2 during CPR.5

Paragraph 87 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 87, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 87, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 87, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.

88 Outcome 3: ROSC

Paragraph 88 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 88, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

89 For the next critical outcome of ROSC, 12 observational studies (very low quality of evidence, downgraded for very serious indirectness)5,7–17 and 1 experimental study in dogs (very low quality of evidence, downgraded for serious indirectness and imprecision)18 were identified that address the PICO question.

Paragraph 89 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 89, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

90 Observational clinical veterinary studies:

Paragraph 90 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 90, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

91 In a registry study of 109 dogs and cats undergoing CPR, median ETCO2 was significantly higher (23 mmHg) in those that achieved ROSC than in those that did not (15 mmHg; P = 0.0004); ETCO2 of 16.5 mmHg was recommended as the cutoff to maximize likelihood of ROSC (sensitivity 75%, CI95 60%, 86%; specificity 64%, CI95 52%,75%).7 One clinical observational study in 35 dogs and cats undergoing CPR found that patients that achieved ROSC had significantly higher initial (P = 0.0083), peak (P < 0.0001), mean (P < 0.0001), and change in (P = 0.0004) ETCO2 than patients that did not achieve ROSC; optimal ETCO2 cutoff to predict ROSC was 18 mmHg.8

Paragraph 91 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 91, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

92 Observational clinical human studies of 100 people or more:

Paragraph 92 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 92, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

93 A prospective, observational study in 737 adults with OHCA found that ETCO2 at 20 minutes into ALS was higher in patients that achieved ROSC (32.8 mmHg ± 9.1 mmHg) than in those that did not (6.9 ± 2.2 mmHg; P < 0.001).11 One observational study in 575 adults with OHCA found that mean ETCO2 was higher in patients with ROSC than in those that did not achieve ROSC, regardless of cause of arrest or arrest rhythm.17 One prospective observational study of 114 adults with OHCA found significantly higher ETCO2 from 5 minutes into CPR to the final value obtained in people achieving ROSC than in those who did not, regardless of cause of arrest.16 Finally, Singer (2018) described an optimal ETCO2 target of ≥ 19 mm Hg based on the prospective observational study of 100 adult human patients with OHCA.13

Paragraph 93 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 93, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

94 Observational clinical human studies of 99 people or fewer:

Paragraph 94 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 94, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

95 An observational study in 97 adults with IHCA or OHCA found that the final ETCO2 (36.4±4.46 mm Hg vs 11.74±7.01 mm Hg; P < 0.05) and the difference between initial and final ETCO2 (P < 0.05) were different between patients that achieved ROSC and those that did not.12 An observational study of OHCA in 90 adults found that people who achieved ROSC had significantly higher ETCO2 just prior to ROSC (31 ± 5.3 mmHg) than those who did not achieve ROSC by 20 minutes into ALS (3.9 ± 2.8 mmHg).14 Savastano (2017) evaluated defibrillation success of 207 defibrillation events in 62 people with OHCA in shockable rhythms and determined that a higher ETCO2 was associated with defibrillation success (P = 0.003; P for trend < 0.001); no shocks administered to patients with ETCO2 > 45 mm Hg were unsuccessful.10 Finally, a study in 32 young to middle-aged adults suffering non-traumatic OHCA or IHCA found that mean ETCO2 during CPR was lower in those who failed to achieve ROSC (19.1 ± 7.8 mm Hg) than in those that achieved ROSC (26.3 ± 6.5 mm Hg; P = 0.01).9

Paragraph 95 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 95, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

96 Only 2 identified studies found a lack of association between ETCO2 and ROSC, including one in a small population of adults15 and one in pediatrics.5

Paragraph 96 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 96, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

97 Experimental study in target species:

Paragraph 97 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 97, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

98 Finally, an experimental study in dogs supported the relationship of higher ETCO2 with ROSC, however showed much lower mean ETCO2 in the survivor group than reported in other studies (9.6 +/- 3.2 mm Hg).18

Paragraph 98 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 98, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

99 Treatment recommendation

Paragraph 99 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 99, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

100 We recommend optimizing CPR to maximize ETCO2 to no less than 18 mmHg in dogs and cats undergoing CPR. (strong recommendation, very low quality of evidence)

Paragraph 100 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 100, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

101 Justification of treatment recommendation

Paragraph 101 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 101, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

102 Observational veterinary and human studies, in addition to some experimental data, suggest that higher ETCO2 targets are positively correlated with ROSC. There was no direct comparison identified of 15 mm Hg versus higher ETCO2 values, which was the specific PICO question. Therefore, this recommendation is to target the high value found in clinical observational studies of dogs and cats (ETCO2 > 18 mm Hg), with the understanding that as a concept, higher ETCO2s into the low 30s in mm Hg are associated with ROSC in observational studies of people.

Paragraph 102 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 102, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 102, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 102, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.

103 Knowledge gaps

Paragraph 103 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 103, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

104 Optimal ETCO2 targets in dogs and cats undergoing CPR are unknown, and larger studies are warranted. The effects of precise targets, and the collateral damage (ie. more damage to thoracic structures) that may occur with more aggressive CPR to achieve higher ETCO2 raises questions about how high an ETCO2 is too high, or if such a value exists.

Paragraph 104 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 104, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 104, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.

105 References:

Paragraph 105 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 105, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.

106 1. Levine RL, Wayne MA, Miller CC. End-tidal carbon dioxide and outcome of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med. 1997;337(5):301-306.

Paragraph 106 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 106, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 106, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 106, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 106, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 106, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

107 2. Hofmeister EH, Brainard BM, Egger CM, Kang SW. Prognostic indicators for dogs and cats with cardiopulmonary arrest treated by cardiopulmonary cerebral resuscitation at a university teaching hospital. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 2009;235(1):50-57.

Paragraph 107 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 107, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 107, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 107, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 107, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 107, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

108 3. Sutton RM, French B, Meaney PA, et al. Physiologic monitoring of CPR quality during adult cardiac arrest: A propensity-matched cohort study. Resuscitation. 2016;106:76-82.

Paragraph 108 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 108, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 108, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 108, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 108, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 108, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

109 4. Çalbay A, Çakır Z, Bayramoğlu A. Prognostic value of blood gas parameters and end-tidal carbon dioxide values in out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary arrest patients. Turk J Med Sci. 2019;49(5):1298-1302.

Paragraph 109 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 109, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 109, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 109, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.

110 5. Berg RA, Reeder RW, Meert KL, et al. End-tidal carbon dioxide during pediatric in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation. 2018;133:173-179.

Paragraph 110 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 110, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 110, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 110, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 110, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 110, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

111 6. Salen P, O’Connor R, Sierzenski P, et al. Can cardiac sonography and capnography be used independently and in combination to predict resuscitation outcomes? Acad Emerg Med. 2001;8(6):610-615.

Paragraph 111 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 111, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 111, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 111, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 111, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 111, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

112 7. Hoehne SN, Hopper K, Epstein SE. Prospective Evaluation of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Performed in Dogs and Cats According to the RECOVER Guidelines. Part 2: Patient Outcomes and CPR Practice Since Guideline Implementation. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2019;6.

Paragraph 112 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 112, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 112, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 112, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 112, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 112, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 112, Sentence 6 0
No sentence-level conversations.

113 8. Hogen T, Cole SG, Drobatz KJ. Evaluation of end-tidal carbon dioxide as a predictor of return of spontaneous circulation in dogs and cats undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation. J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio). 2018;28(5):398-407.

Paragraph 113 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 113, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 113, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 113, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 113, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 113, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

114 9. Yilmaz G, Silcan M, Serin S, Caglar B, Erarslan Ö, Parlak İ. A comparison of carotid doppler ultrasonography and capnography in evaluating the efficacy of CPR. Am J Emerg Med. 2018;36(9):1545-1549.

Paragraph 114 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 114, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 114, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 114, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 114, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 114, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

115 10. Savastano S, Baldi E, Raimondi M, et al. End-tidal carbon dioxide and defibrillation success in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2017;121:71-75.

Paragraph 115 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 115, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 115, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 115, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 115, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 115, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

116 11. Kolar M, Krizmaric M, Klemen P, Grmec S. Partial pressure of end-tidal carbon dioxide successful predicts cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the field: a prospective observational study. Crit Care. 2008;12(5):R115.

Paragraph 116 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 116, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 116, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 116, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 116, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.

117 12. Ozturk F, Parlak I, Yolcu S, et al. Effect of End-Tidal Carbon Dioxide Measurement on Resuscitation Efficiency and Termination of Resuscitation. Turk J Emerg Med. 2014;14(1):25-31.

Paragraph 117 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 117, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 117, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 117, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 117, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 117, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

118 13. Singer AJ, Nguyen RT, Ravishankar ST, et al. Cerebral oximetry versus end tidal CO(2) in predicting ROSC after cardiac arrest. Am J Emerg Med. 2018;36(3):403-407.

Paragraph 118 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 118, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 118, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 118, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 118, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 118, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

119 14. Wayne MA, Levine RL, Miller CC. Use of end-tidal carbon dioxide to predict outcome in prehospital cardiac arrest. Ann Emerg Med. 1995;25(6):762-767.

Paragraph 119 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 119, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 119, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 119, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 119, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 119, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

120 15. Garnett AR, Ornato JP, Gonzalez ER, Johnson EB. End-tidal carbon dioxide monitoring during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. JAMA. 1987;257(4):512-515.

Paragraph 120 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 120, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 120, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 120, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 120, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 120, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

121 16. Lah K, Križmarić M, Grmec S. The dynamic pattern of end-tidal carbon dioxide during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: difference between asphyxial cardiac arrest and ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia cardiac arrest. Crit Care. 2011;15(1):R13.

Paragraph 121 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 121, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 121, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 121, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 121, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.

122 17. Heradstveit BE, Sunde K, Sunde GA, Wentzel-Larsen T, Heltne JK. Factors complicating interpretation of capnography during advanced life support in cardiac arrest--a clinical retrospective study in 575 patients. Resuscitation. 2012;83(7):813-818.

Paragraph 122 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 122, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 122, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 122, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 122, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 122, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

123 18. Sanders AB, Ewy GA, Bragg S, Atlas M, Kern KB. Expired PCO2 as a prognostic indicator of successful resuscitation from cardiac arrest. Ann Emerg Med. 1985;14(10):948-952.

Paragraph 123 0
No paragraph-level conversations.
Paragraph 123, Sentence 1 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 123, Sentence 2 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 123, Sentence 3 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 123, Sentence 4 0
No sentence-level conversations.
Paragraph 123, Sentence 5 0
No sentence-level conversations.

DMU Timestamp: July 13, 2023 21:18

General Document Comments 0

Image
0 comments, 0 areas
add area
add comment
change display
Video
add comment

Quickstart: Commenting and Sharing

How to Comment
  • Click icons on the left to see existing comments.
  • Desktop/Laptop: double-click any text, highlight a section of an image, or add a comment while a video is playing to start a new conversation.
    Tablet/Phone: single click then click on the "Start One" link (look right or below).
  • Click "Reply" on a comment to join the conversation.
How to Share Documents
  1. "Upload" a new document.
  2. "Invite" others to it.

Logging in, please wait... Blue_on_grey_spinner