Myocardial perfusion and oxidative stress after 21% vs. 100% oxygen ventilation and uninterrupted chest compressions in severely asphyxiated piglets

AimDespite the minimal evidence, neonatal resuscitation guidelines recommend using 100% oxygen when chest compressions (CC) are needed. Uninterrupted CC in adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) may improve CPR hemodynamics. We aimed to examine 21% oxygen (air) vs. 100% oxygen in 3:1 CC:ventilation (C:V) CPR or continuous CC with asynchronous ventilation (CCaV) in asphyxiated newborn piglets following cardiac arrest.MethodsPiglets (1-3 days old) were progressively asphyxiated until cardiac arrest and randomized to 4 experimental groups (n = 8 each): air and 3:1 C:V CPR, 100% oxygen and 3:1 C:V CPR, air and CCaV, or 100% oxygen and CCaV. Time to return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), mortality, and clinical and biochemical parameters were compared between groups. We used echocardiography to measure left ventricular (LV) stroke volume at baseline, at 30 min and 4 h after ROSC. Left common carotid artery blood pressure was measured continuously.ResultsTime to ROSC (heart rate ≥100 min−1) ranged from 75 to 592 s and mortality 50-75%, with no differences between groups. Resuscitation with air was associated with higher LV stroke volume after ROSC and less myocardial oxidative stress compared to 100% oxygen groups. CCaV was associated with lower mean arterial blood pressure after ROSC and higher myocardial lactate than those of 3:1 C:V CPR.ConclusionIn neonatal asphyxia-induced cardiac arrest, using air during CC may reduce myocardial oxidative stress and improve cardiac function compared to 100% oxygen. Although overall recovery may be similar, CCaV may impair tissue perfusion compared to 3:1 C:V CPR.