Artificial perfusion techniques during XXXX : questions of experimental focus versus clinical need.

@entity13324 @entity2224 @entity1167
Contemporary cerebral-cardiopulmonary resuscitation investigations in the experimental laboratory have defined mechanisms for blood flow during closed-chest @entity13324 and have demonstrated that the current @entity13324 technique produces limited systemic perfusion. Modified closed-chest @entity13324 techniques usually improve perfusion. Unfortunately few laboratory @entity13324 studies have actually investigated resuscitation and survival. In addition, the animal model employed ( @entity2224 ) may have limited clinical relevance, based on clinical experience and resuscitation practice, and data reporting techniques and their interpretation may be affected by control values that are not normal because of the effects of anesthetics. Closed-chest @entity13324 was intended to buy time until a countershock could be delivered. Clinical and laboratory experience indicate that this goal can be met. Cerebral perfusion during closed-chest @entity13324 is low, but adequacy from a functional perspective following restoration of circulation has not been carefully studied. Preservation of neuronal integrity after restoration of spontaneous circulation may be more important than cerebral perfusion during @entity1167 and @entity13324 . The role and benefit of open-chest @entity13324 have yet to be determined, because this technique will most likely be used after conventional @entity13324 failure. New and different experimental models are required to meet clinical needs and challenges. The alliance between practitioner and investigator should be strengthened if common goals are to be attained.
