The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) consensus on science with treatment recommendations for pediatric and neonatal patients: Pediatric basic and advanced life support

Dianne L. Atkins, Marc D. Berg, Robert A. Berg, Adnan T. Bhutta, Dominique Biarent, Robert Bingham, Dana Braner, Renato Carrera, Leon Chameides, Ashraf Coovadia, Allan De Caen, Douglas S. Diekema, Diana G. Fendya, Melinda L. Fiedor, Richard T. Fiser, Susan Fuchs, Mike Gerardi, William Hammill, George W. Hatch, Mary Fran HazinskiRobert W. Hickey, John Kattwinkel, Monica E. Kleinman, Jesús López-Herce, Peter Morley, Marilyn Morris, Vinay M. Nadkarni, Jerry Nolan, Jeffrey Perlman, Lester T. Proctor, Linda Quan, Amelia Gorete Reis, Sam Richmond, Antonio Rodriguez-Nuñez, Ricardo Samson, Anthony J. Scalzo, L. R. Scherer, Stephen M. Schexnayder, Charles L. Schleien, Naoki Shimizu, Paul M. Shore, Vijay Srinivasan, Edward R. Stapleton, James Tibballs, Elise W. Van Der Jagt, Arno Zaritsky, David Zideman

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

200 Scopus citations


This publication contains the pediatric and neonatal sections of the 2005 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (COSTR). The consensus process that produced this document was sponsored by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR). ILCOR was formed in 1993 and consists of representatives of resuscitation councils from all over the world. Its mission is to identify and review international science and knowledge relevant to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and emergency cardiovascular care (ECC) and to generate consensus on treatment recommendations. ECC includes all responses necessary to treat life-threatening cardiovascular and respiratory events. The COSTR document presents international consensus statements on the science of resuscitation. ILCOR member organizations are each publishing resuscitation guidelines that are consistent with the science in this consensus document, but they also take into consideration geographic, economic, and system differences in practice and the regional availability of medical devices and drugs. The American Heart Association (AHA) pediatric and the American Academy of Pediatrics/AHA neonatal sections of the resuscitation guidelines are reprinted in this issue of Pediatrics (see pages e978-e988). The 2005 evidence evaluation process began shortly after publication of the 2000 International Guidelines for CPR and ECC. The process included topic identification, expert topic review, discussion and debate at 6 international meetings, further review, and debate within ILCOR member organizations and ultimate approval by the member organizations, an Editorial Board, and peer reviewers. The complete COSTR document was published simultaneously in Circulation (International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. 2005 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Circulation. 2005;112 (suppl):73-90) and Resuscitation (International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. 2005 International Consensus Conference on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Resuscitation. 2005;67:271-291). Readers are encouraged to review the 2005 COSTR document in its entirety. It can be accessed through the CPR and ECC link at the AHA Web site: www.americanheart. org. The complete publication represents the largest evaluation of resuscitation literature ever published and contains electronic links to more detailed information about the international collaborative process. To organize the evidence evaluation, ILCOR representatives established 6 task forces: basic life support, advanced life support, acute coronary syndromes, pediatric life support, neonatal life support, and an interdisciplinary task force to consider overlapping topics such as educational issues. The AHA established additional task forces on stroke and, in collaboration with the American Red Cross, a task force on first aid. Each task force identified topics requiring evaluation and appointed international experts to review them. A detailed worksheet template was created to help the experts document their literature review, evaluate studies, determine levels of evidence, develop treatment recommendations, and disclose conflicts of interest. Two evidence evaluation experts reviewed all worksheets and assisted the worksheet reviewers to ensure that the worksheets met a consistently high standard. A total of 281 experts completed 403 worksheets on 275 topics, reviewing more than 22 000 published studies. In December 2004 the evidence review and summary portions of the evidence evaluation worksheets, with worksheet author conflict of interest statements, were posted on the Internet at, where readers can continue to access them. Journal advertisements and e-mails invited public comment. Two hundred forty-nine worksheet authors (141 from the United States and 108 from 17 other countries) and additional invited experts and reviewers attended the 2005 International Consensus Conference for presentation, discussion, and debate of the evidence. All 380 participants at the conference received electronic copies of the worksheets. Internet access was available to all conference participants during the conference to facilitate real-time verification of the literature. Expert reviewers presented topics in plenary, concurrent, and poster conference sessions with strict adherence to a novel and rigorous conflict of interest process. Presenters and participants then debated the evidence, conclusions, and draft summary statements. Wording of science statements and treatment recommendations was refined after further review by ILCOR member organizations and the international editorial board. This format ensured that the final document represented a truly international consensus process. The COSTR manuscript was ultimately approved by all ILCOR member organizations and by an international editorial board. The AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee and the editor of Circulation obtained peer reviews of this document before it was accepted for publication. The most important changes in recommendations for pediatric resuscitation since the last ILCOR review in 2000 include: • Increased emphasis on performing high quality CPR: "Push hard, push fast, minimize interruptions of chest compression; allow full chest recoil, and don't provide excessive ventilation" • Recommended chest compression-ventilation ratio: • For lone rescuers with victims of all ages: 30:2 • For health care providers performing 2-rescuer CPR for infants and children: 15:2 (except 3:1 for neonates) • Either a 2- or 1-hand technique is acceptable for chest compressions in children • Use of 1 shock followed by immediate CPR is recommended for each defibrillation attempt, instead of 3 stacked shocks • Biphasic shocks with an automated external defibrillator (AED) are acceptable for children 1 year of age. Attenuated shocks using child cables or activation of a key or switch are recommended in children <8 years old. • Routine use of high-dose intravenous (IV) epinephrine is no longer recommended. • Intravascular (IV and intraosseous) route of drug administration is preferred to the endotracheal route. • Cuffed endotracheal tubes can be used in infants and children provided correct tube size and cuff inflation pressure are used. • Exhaled CO2 detection is recommended for confirmation of endotracheal tube placement. • Consider induced hypothermia for 12 to 24 hours in patients who remain comatose following resuscitation. Some of the most important changes in recommendations for neonatal resuscitation since the last ILCOR review in 2000 include less emphasis on using 100% oxygen when initiating resuscitation, de-emphasis of the need for routine intrapartum oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal suctioning for infants born to mothers with meconium staining of amniotic fluid, proven value of occlusive wrapping of very low birth weight infants <28 weeks' gestation to reduce heat loss, preference for the IV versus the endotracheal route for epinephrine, and an increased emphasis on parental autonomy at the threshold of viability. The scientific evidence supporting these recommendations is summarized in the neonatal document (see pages e978-e988).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)e955-e977
Issue number5
StatePublished - May 2006


  • Evidence-based medicine
  • Neonatal resuscitation
  • Resuscitation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health


Dive into the research topics of 'The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) consensus on science with treatment recommendations for pediatric and neonatal patients: Pediatric basic and advanced life support'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this