Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Traumatic injuries after mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (LUCAS™2): a forensic autopsy study

International Journal of Legal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim

The aim of our study was to compare traumatic injuries observed after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by means of standard (manual) or assisted (mechanical) chest compression by Lund University Cardiopulmonary Assist System, 2nd generation (LUCAS™2) device.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted including cases from 2011 to 2013, analysing consecutive autopsy reports in two groups of patients who underwent medicolegal autopsy after unsuccessful CPR. We focused on traumatic injuries from dermal to internal trauma, collecting data according to a standardised protocol.

Results

The study group was comprised of 26 cases, while 32 cases were included in the control group. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation performed by LUCAS™2 was longer than manual CPR performed in control cases (study group: mean duration 51.5 min; controls 29.4 min; p = 0.004). Anterior chest lesions (from bruises to abrasions) were described in 18/26 patients in the LUCAS™2 group and in 6/32 of the control group. A mean of 6.6 rib fractures per case was observed in the LUCAS™2 group, but this was only 3.1 in the control group (p = 0.007). Rib fractures were less frequently observed in younger patients. The frequency of sternal factures was similar in both groups. A few trauma injuries to internal organs (mainly cardiac, pulmonary and hepatic bruises), and some petechiae (study 46 %; control 41 %; p = 0.79) were recorded in both groups.

Conclusion

LUCAS™2-CPR is associated with more rib fractures than standard CPR. Typical round concentric skin lesions were observed in cases of mechanical reanimation. No life-threatening injuries were reported. Petechiae were common findings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kouwenhoven WB, Jude JR, Knickerbocker GG (1960) Closed chest cardiac massage. JAMA 173:1064–1067

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Jude JR, Kouwenhoven WB, Knickerbocker GG (1961) Cardiac arrest: report of application of external cardiac massage on 118 patients. JAMA 178:1063–1070

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Plaisance P, Adnet F, Vicaut E et al (1997) Benefit of active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation as a pre-hospital advances cardiac life support. A randomised multicentre study. Circulation 95:955–961

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wik L (2000) Automatic and manual mechanical external chest compression devices for cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 47:7–25

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Steen S, Liao Q, Pierre L, Paskevicius A, Sjöberg T (2002) Evaluation of LUCAS, a new device for automatic mechanical compression and active decompression resuscitation. Resuscitation 55:285–299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gaxiola A, Varon J (2008) Evolution and new perspective of chest compression mechanical devices. Am J Emerg Med 26:923–931

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rubertsson S, Karlsten R (2005) Increased cortical blood flow with LUCAS: a new device for mechanical chest compressions compared to standard external compressions during experimental cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 65:357–363

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Tambe SP, Rasmussen VG, Modrau IS (2012) Continuous mechanical chest compression using the LUCAS-2 device as a bridge to emergency aortic valve surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 26:e50–e52. doi:10.1053/j.jvca.2012.03.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Putzer G, Braun P, Zimmermann A, Pedross F, Strapazzon G, Brugger H, Paal P (2013) LUCAS compared to manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation is more effective during helicopter rescue—a prospective, randomised, cross-over manikin study. Am J Emerg Med 31:384–389. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2012.07.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Himmelhoch SR, Dekker A, Gazzniga AB (1964) Closed-chest cardiac resuscitation. A prospective clinical and pathological study. N Engl J Med 270:118–122

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Buschmann CT, Tsokos M (2009) Frequent and rare complications of resuscitation attempts. Intensive Care Med 35:397–404. doi:10.1007/s00134-008-1255-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pinto DC, Haden-Pinneri K, Love JC (2013) Manual and automated cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR): a comparison of associated injury patterns. J Forensic Sci 58:904–909. doi:10.1111/1556-4029.12146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Baubin M, Sumann G, Rabl W, Eibl G, Wenzel V, Mair P (1999) Increased frequency of thorax injuries with ACD-CPR. Resuscitation 41:33–38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hoke RS, Chamberlain D (2004) Skeletal chest injuries secondary to cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 64:327–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Smekal D, Johansson J, Huzevka T, Rubertsson S (2009) No difference in autopsy detected injuries in cardiac arrest patients treated with manual chest compressions compared with mechanical compressions with the LUCAS™ device—a pilot study. Resuscitation 80:1104–1107. doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.06.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Englund E, Kongstad PC (2006) Active compression-decompression CPR necessitates follow-up post mortem. Resuscitation 68:161–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fanton L, David JS, Gueugniaud PY, Malicier D (2008) Forensic aspects of automated chest compression. Resuscitation 77:273–274. doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2007.12.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mateos-Rodriguez A, Pardillos-Ferrer L, Navalpotro JM et al (2010) Kidney transplant function using organs from non-heart-beating donors maintained by mechanical chest compressions. Resuscitation 81:904–907. doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.04.024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wang CH, Chou NK, Becker LB et al (2014) Improved outcome of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest—a comparison with that for extracorporeal rescue for in-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 85:1219–1224. doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.06.022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Field JM, Hazinski MF, Sayre MR et al (2010) Part 1: Executive summary. 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. Circulation 122:640–656. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.970889

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Idris AH, Becker LB, Ornato JP et al (1996) Utstein-style guidelines for uniform reporting of laboratory CPR research. A statement for healthcare professionals from a task force of the American Heart Association, the American College of Emergency Physicians, the American College of Cardiology, the European Resuscitation Council, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, the Institute of Critical Care Medicine, the Safar Center for Resuscitation Research, and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. Writing Group. Circulation 94:2324–2336

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. European Concil of Legal Medicine, Harmonization of medico-legal autopsy, Updated version October 2012, available at http://eclm.org/docs/Documents/Harmonization_of_Medico_legal_Autopsy_Protocol_.pdf. Accessed 13 October 2014

  23. Smekal D, Lindgren E, Sandler H, Johansson J, Rubertsson S (2014) CPR-related injuries after manual or mechanical chest compressions with the LUCAS™ device: a multicentre study of victims after unsuccessful resuscitation. Resuscitation. doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.09.017

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Baubin M, Rabl W, Pfeiffer KF, Benzer A, Gilly H (1999) Chest injuries after active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ACD-CPR) in cadavers. Resuscitation 43:9–15

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Krischer JP, Fine EG, Davis JH, Nagel EL (1987) Complications of cardiac resuscitation. Chest 92:287–291

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Liao Q, Sjöberg T, Paskevicius A, Wohlfart B, Steen S (2010) Manual versus mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation. An experimental study in pigs. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 10:53. doi:10.1186/1471-2261-10-53

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Xanthos T, Pantazopoulos I, Roumelioti H et al (2011) A comparison of autopsy detected injuries in a porcine model of cardiac arrest treated with either manual or mechanical chest compressions. Eur J Emerg Med 18:108–110. doi:10.1097/MEJ.0b013e32833e79cf

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. McKay DR, Fawzy HF, McKay KM, Nitsch R, Mahoney JL (2010) Are chest compressions safe for the patient reconstructed with sternal plates? Evaluating the safety of cardiopulmonary resuscitation using a human cadaveric model. J Cardiothorac Surg 5:64. doi:10.1186/1749-8090-5-64

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Cho J, Chung HS, Chung SP, Kim Y-M, Cho YS (2010) Airway scope vs. Macintosh laryngoscope during chest compressions on a fresh cadaver model. Am J Emerg Med 28:741–744

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wininger KL (2007) Chest compressions: biomechanics and injury. Radiol Technol 78:269–274

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lederer W, Mair D, Rabl W, Baubin M (2004) Frequency of rib and sternum fractures associated with out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation is underestimated by conventional chest X-ray. Resuscitation 60:157–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Oberladstaetter D, Braun P, Freund MC, Rabl W, Paal P, Baubin M (2012) Autopsy is more sensitive than computed tomography in detection of LUCAS-CPR related non-dislocated chest fractures. Resuscitation 83:e89–e90. doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.12.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hashimoto Y, Moriya F, Furumiya J (2007) Forensic aspects of complications resulting from cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Legal Med 9:94–99

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hood I, Ryan D, Spitz WU (1988) Resuscitation and petechiae. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 9:35–37

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Raven KP, Reay DT, Harruff RC (1999) Artifactual injuries of the larynx produced by resuscitative intubation. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 20:31–36

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Maxeiner H (2001) Congestion bleeding of the face and cardiopulmonary resuscitation—an attempt to evaluate their relationship. Forensic Sci Int 117:191–198

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Maxeiner H, Jekat R (2010) Resuscitation and conjunctival petechial haemorrhages. J Forensic Leg Med 17:87–91. doi:10.1016/j.jflm.2009.09.010

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Bush CM, Jones JS, Cohle SD, Johnson H (1996) Paediatric injuries from cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Ann Emerg Med 28(1):40–44

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Perkins GD, Woollard M, Cooke MW et al (2010) Pre-hospital randomised assessment of a mechanical compression device in cardiac arrest (PaRAMeDIC) trial protocol. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 18:58. doi:10.1186/1757-7241-18-58

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Rubertsson S, Silfverstolpe J, Rehn L et al (2013) The study protocol for the LINC (LUCAS in cardiac arrest) study: a study comparing conventional adult out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation with a concept with mechanical chest compressions and simultaneous defibrillation. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 21:5. doi:10.1186/1757-7241-21-5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Rubertsson S, Lindgren E, Smekal D et al (2014) Mechanical chest compressions and simultaneous defibrillation vs. conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the LINC randomised trial. JAMA 311:53–61. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.282538

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to express their gratitude to Aurélie Bornand and Paula Reynaud for their help with review of literature and data collection and to Hélène Deham for her comments on biostatistics.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christelle Lardi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lardi, C., Egger, C., Larribau, R. et al. Traumatic injuries after mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (LUCAS™2): a forensic autopsy study. Int J Legal Med 129, 1035–1042 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-015-1146-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-015-1146-x

Keywords

Navigation