• Muhammad Omar Larik, Ayesha Ahmed, Moeez Ibrahim Shiraz, Seemin Afshan Shiraz, Muhammad Umair Anjum, and Pratik Bhattarai.
• Department of Medicine, Dow International Medical College, Karachi, Pakistan.
• Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Feb 23; 103 (8): e37294e37294.

BackgroundOut-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a life-threatening condition that requires immediate intervention to increase the prospect of survival. There are various ways to achieve cardiopulmonary resuscitation in such patients, either through manual chest compression or mechanical chest compression. Thus, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the differences between these interventions.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were explored from inception to May 2023. Additionally, the bibliographies of relevant studies were searched. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Controlled Trials, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies-I tools were utilized to perform quality and risk of bias assessments.ResultsThere were 24 studies included within this quantitative synthesis, featuring a total of 111,681 cardiac arrest patients. Overall, no statistically significant differences were observed between the return of spontaneous circulation, survival to hospital discharge, short-term survival, and long-term survival. However, manual chest compression was associated with a significantly superior favorability of neurological outcomes (OR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.84; P = .01).ConclusionAlthough there were no major differences between the strategies, the poorer post-resuscitation neurological outcomes observed in mechanical chest compression indicate the need for further innovation and advancements within the current array of mechanical devices. However, future high-quality studies are necessary in order to arrive at a valid conclusion.Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

19 keywords...

hide…