Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41704529›Full record

ArticleResuscitation plus2026

Comparison of different airway pressures in (synchronized) ventilation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in pigs.

Miriam Renz, Lea Müller, Jan Köhler, Roman Paul, Katja Mohnke, Andrea Urmann, Johanna Hain, René Rissel, Alexander Ziebart, Robert Ruemmler

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Resuscitation plus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Miriam RenzDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Lea MüllerDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Jan KöhlerDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Roman PaulInstitute for Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany.
Katja MohnkeDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Andrea UrmannDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Johanna HainDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
René RisselDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Alexander ZiebartDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Robert RuemmlerDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The optimal ventilation strategy during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) remains undetermined. Synchronizing ventilation to chest compressions has been proposed to enhance end-organ perfusion and oxygenation. This study evaluates the pulmonary function and injury in a synchronized ventilation (SV) strategy using lower peak pressure compared to chest compression synchronized ventilation (CCSV) with higher peak pressures and intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV). Materials/methods: 35 pigs underwent cardiac arrest, followed by basic and advanced life support with mechanical chest compressions and ventilation according to randomized groups: IPPV (peak pressure ( Results: During CPR, CCSV demonstrated superior oxygenation compared to SV (p Conclusions: SV resulted in lower oxygenation but utilized lower airway pressures compared with CCSV and IPPV, produced less lactate, and achieved ROSC rates comparable to IPPV with fewer complications compared to CCSV. These findings suggest that SV may represent a viable alternative ventilation strategy during CPR. Further studies are needed to confirm these results.

Indexed as

Cardiac arrestPorcine studiesResuscitationSynchronized ventilationVentilation

Identifiers

PMID41704529
PMCPMC12907900

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.