Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 715

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Adverse Hemodynamic Effects of Interrupting Chest Compressions for Rescue Breathing During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Ventricular Fibrillation Cardiac Arrest

Berg, Robert A., Sanders, Arthur B., Kern, Karl B., Hilwig, Ronald W., Heidenreich, Joseph W., Porter, Matthew E., Ewy, Gordon A.·2001·Circulation

Abstract

Background Despite improving arterial oxygen saturation and pH, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with chest compressions plus rescue breathing (CC+RB) has not improved survival from ventricular fibrillation (VF) compared with chest compressions alone (CC) in numerous animal models and 2 clinical investigations. Methods and Results After 3 minutes of untreated VF, 14 swine (32±1 kg) were randomly assigned to receive CC+RB or CC for 12 minutes, followed by advanced cardiac life support. All 14 animals survived 24 hours, 13 with good neurological outcome. For the CC+RB group, the aortic relaxation pressures routinely decreased during the 2 rescue breaths. Therefore, the mean coronary perfusion pressure of the first 2 compressions in each compression cycle was lower than those of the final 2 compressions (14±1 versus 21±2 mm Hg, P <0.001). During each minute of CPR, the number of chest compressions was also lower in the CC+RB group (62±1 versus 92±1 compressions, P <0.001). Consequently, the integrated coronary perfusion pressure was lower with CC+RB during each minute of CPR ( P <0.05 for the first 8 minutes). Moreover, at 2 to 5 minutes of CPR, the median left ventricular blood flow by fluorescent microsphere technique was 60 mL · 100 g −1 · min −1 with CC+RB versus 96 mL · 100 g −1 · min −1 with CC, P <0.05. Because the arterial oxygen saturation was higher with CC+RB, the left ventricular myocardial oxygen delivery did not differ. Conclusions Interrupting chest compressions for rescue breathing can adversely affect hemodynamics during CPR for VF.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/hc4501.098926

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 715

Metadata

Authors
Berg, R. A., Sanders, A. B., Kern, K. B., Hilwig, R. W., Heidenreich, J. W., Porter, M. E., & Ewy, G. A.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2001-11-13
Volume
104
Issue
20
Pages
2465-2470
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2106659642
Cited by
715
References
0
FWCI
13.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Adverse Hemodynamic Effects of Interrupting Chest Compressions for Rescue Breathing During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Ventricular Fibrillation Cardiac Arrest. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/hc4501.098926
The paper
Berg, R. A., Sanders, A. B., Kern, K. B., Hilwig, R. W., Heidenreich, J. W., Porter, M. E., & Ewy, G. A. (2001). Adverse Hemodynamic Effects of Interrupting Chest Compressions for Rescue Breathing During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Ventricular Fibrillation Cardiac Arrest. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/hc4501.098926

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.