This study allowed the comparison of surgical coniotomy to several ready-to-use devices in a standardized setting utilizing a reusable plastic mannequin. The interpretation for real emergency conditions is limited as individual anatomy, traumatic alterations of the neck or complications, such as bleeding or damage of important structures were not part of the study objectives. However, all participating emergency physicians successfully used the coniotomy sets provided at the first attempt. No device required significantly more time than the surgical approach. The procedures using cuffed devices lasted longer in comparison to procedures using uncuffed ones; however, this difference would only play a minor role in reality as effective ventilation with minute volumes greater than 7 l/min will only be achieved by a cuffed cannula with a minimum internal diameter of 4 mm. Devices with no cuff or with tube diameters smaller than 4 mm will only allow oxygenation of the patient, which in turn requires an inspiratory oxygen concentration of 100% and a relatively high ventilation frequency.

Sudden cardiac death is a leading cause of death in Europe. In the vast majority, myocardial infarction or pulmonary embolism is the underlying cause. Lethality is still high, especially if the arrest occurs out of hospital. For these two severe conditions, thrombolysis has proven to be an established therapy. Coronary perfusion is restored or the occlusion in the pulmonary arteries is removed, restoring normal circulation and normalising right-ventricular afterload. Nevertheless, thrombolysis was contraindicated during cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for many years due to the fear of severe bleeding complications. Case reports and series using thrombolysis as successful ultima ratio therapy during prolonged CPR were soon followed by retrospective and interventional studies. These trials showed significantly improved survival for patients after thrombolysis during CPR. Nevertheless, none of these trials was randomised. Other trials showed that bleeding complications do not occur more frequently after thrombolysis during CPR. Experimental investigations demonstrated that thrombolysis during CPR improves cerebral microcirculation. The results of the randomised, multicenter trial TROICA show that tenecteplase alone, does not significantly improve survival. Further studies on thrombolysis during CPR with additional administration of heparin and acetylsalicylic acid must follow to ascertain the role of thrombolysis during CPR. Although thrombolysis during CPR is not a standard therapy, it should not be withheld from patients in whom pulmonary embolism is the suspected cause of cardiac arrest, as well as in selected other patients on the physician's individual decision according to recent guidelines.