Shopping Cart
The following summaries are based on scientific studies that looked at how well new suction-based devices, like LifeVac and Dechoker, work in real choking emergencies. These devices are designed to help when someone is choking and other standard methods, like back blows or abdominal thrusts, don’t succeed. The research includes real-life cases and tests with medical mannequins and shows that these tools have helped save lives—especially in children and elderly people who are at higher risk. The results so far suggest that devices like LifeVac can make a real difference and could become an important part of first aid in choking situations.
Resuscitation Plus, Volume 16, December 2023, 100496
A 2-year prospective evaluation of airway clearance devices in foreign body airway obstructions
Cody L Dunne, Kayla Viguers, Selena Osman, Ana Catarina Queiroga, David Szpilman, Amy E Peden
Summary:
This study presents the first prospective, independent data on the use of airway clearance devices (LifeVac and Dechoker) for treating foreign body airway obstructions (FBAO) in adults. From July 2021 to June 2023, 186 users were enrolled. LifeVac was used in 157 cases and successfully relieved the obstruction in 151, with 150 patients surviving to discharge. Dechoker was used in 29 cases, successfully resolving the obstruction in 27, with all patients surviving. Minor adverse events were reported with both devices. Although the results suggest these devices may be effective, the findings are preliminary and further rigorous evaluation is recommended.
International Journal of Environtal Research and Public Health 2022, 19(7), 3846
Phase One of a Global Evaluation of Suction-Based Airway Clearance Devices in Foreign Body Airway Obstructions: A Retrospective Descriptive Analysis
Cody L. Dunne, Selena Osman, Kayla Viguers, Ana Catarina Queiroga, David Szpilman and Amy E. Peden
Summary:
This retrospective study assessed the effectiveness and safety of suction-based airway clearance devices (ACDs) used as choking interventions before July 1, 2021. It analyzed 124 LifeVac and 61 Dechoker cases reported by users to manufacturers. Most patients were either very young (<5 years) or elderly (80+ years), and food was the most common obstructing item. Traditional methods like abdominal thrusts and back blows were often used prior to the ACDs. Symptom resolution was reported in 123 LifeVac and 60 Dechoker cases. Three minor adverse events occurred. While findings suggest ACDs may be effective in treating choking, the study emphasizes the need for more rigorous, prospective, and independent evaluations to guide future recommendations.
International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, Volume 118, March 2019, Pages 31-35
Poster presentation at: Combined Otolaryngology Spring Meetings (COSM), American Bronchoesophagological Association (ABEA), National Harbor, Maryland, USA, April 18, 2018 to April 22, 2018
Portable, non-powered, suction-generating device for management of life-threatening aerodigestive tract foreign bodies: Novel prototype and literature review
Pratik B. Patel, Nina L. Shapiro
Summary:
This study explores the use of a portable, non-powered, suction-generating device (PNSD) for emergency, pre-hospital management of life-threatening foreign body aspiration. A comprehensive literature review was conducted alongside independent testing of PNSD pressure output. Laboratory tests showed the device can generate peak airway pressures significantly higher than traditional methods. Simulation and cadaver studies demonstrated high success rates (94–98%) in foreign body removal, especially with repeated attempts. Case reports also support its effective use in high-risk populations, such as the elderly and disabled. The findings suggest that PNSDs could be valuable in pre-hospital choking emergencies, though larger studies are needed to confirm safety and efficacy.
Pediatrics & Therapeutics, Vol. 10 Iss. 4 No: 371
Resuscitation of Choking Victims in a Pediatric Population Using a Novel Portable Non-Powered Suction Device: Real-World Data
Laura Levinson Gal, Pamela Pugliesi, Diane Peterman
Summary:
This study evaluated the use of a portable, non-powered suction device (LifeVac) in pediatric choking emergencies where standard resuscitative methods had failed. It summarizes 21 self-reported cases from 2014 to 2020 in which pediatric patients recovered after use of the device. No long-term complications or device failures were reported. While the results suggest the device may be effective in such emergencies, the findings are limited by the self-reported nature of the data. Further research is recommended to confirm its safety and efficacy.
International Journal of Clinical Skills, (2018) 12(3), 216-219
Successful Use of a Novel Device Called the Lifevac to Resuscitate Choking Victims World-wide Results
Saperstein DM, Pugliesi PR, Ulteig C, Schreiber N
Summary:
Choking is the fourth leading cause of accidental death globally, and current protocols offer no device-based solution when standard methods fail. LifeVac, a portable, non-powered suction device, was developed to address this gap. It is noninvasive, easy to use, and has shown 100% success in reported real-life cases, with minimal to no side effects. The device holds significant potential for saving lives, particularly among vulnerable groups like children and the elderly. Its application may be valuable in various settings, including EMS, hospitals, nursing homes, and schools. The evidence supports considering LifeVac as an option when traditional choking interventions fail.
Resuscitation Plus, Volume 5, March 2021, 100067
The efficacy and usability of suction-based airway clearance devices for foreign body airway obstruction: a manikin randomised crossover trial
Emma Patterson, Ho Tsun Tang, Chen Ji, Gavin D. Perkins, Keith Couper
Summary:
This randomized controlled crossover manikin study compared the effectiveness and usability of two suction-based airway clearance devices—LifeVac and Dechoker—with standard abdominal thrusts. Ninety medical students attempted to remove a simulated airway obstruction using all three methods in a randomized order. LifeVac achieved significantly higher success rates than abdominal thrusts, while Dechoker showed no significant improvement. Usability ratings were generally more favorable for LifeVac and abdominal thrusts compared to Dechoker. The findings suggest that LifeVac may be more effective than traditional methods in simulated choking scenarios, whereas Dechoker did not demonstrate a clear advantage.
Frontiers in Medicine, 02 February 2022, Sec. Translational Medicine, Volume 8 - 2021
Use of a Novel Portable Non-powered Suction Device in Patients With Oropharyngeal Dysphagia During a Choking Emergency
Matthew J. McKinley, Jennifer Deede, Brian Markowitz
Summary:
Choking remains a major global cause of accidental death, especially in patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia. This case series reviews self-reported data from 2014 to 2020 on the use of a portable, non-powered suction device (LifeVac) in adult patients with dysphagia during real-world choking emergencies. Out of 39 reported cases, the device successfully removed the obstruction in all, but one patient did not survive. The results suggest that the device may be an effective and low-risk option for resuscitating choking victims when standard interventions such as abdominal thrusts or back blows fail, particularly in high-risk populations.
BMC Medical Education volume 23, Article number: 365 (2023)
Would anti‐choking devices be correctly and quickly managed by health science students? A manikin crossover trial
Borja Cardalda‐Serantes, Aida Carballo‐Fazanes, Emilio Rodríguez‐Ruiz, Cristian Abelairas‐Gómez and Antonio Rodríguez‐Núñez
Summary:
This study assessed how effectively untrained health science students could use two anti-choking devices—LifeVac and Dechoker—compared to the standard foreign body airway obstruction (FBAO) protocol in simulated adult choking scenarios. Forty-three students participated in three simulation tests. Both devices had high compliance rates (80–100%), with no significant difference between them. However, LifeVac enabled significantly faster completion times than Dechoker. In contrast, students showed lower compliance with the recommended FBAO protocol, especially those without prior training. The findings suggest that these devices may be easier for untrained individuals to use effectively in emergencies than traditional methods.