Abstract Introduction This study reports the epidemiology and outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in England during 2014. Methods Prospective observational study from the national ...OHCA registry. The incidence, demographic and outcomes of patients who were treated for an OHCA between 1st January, 2014 and 31st December 2014 in 10 English ambulance service (EMS) regions, serving a population of almost 54 million, are reported in accordance with Utstein recommendations. Results 28,729 OHCA cases of EMS treated cardiac arrests were reported (53 per 100,000 of resident population). The mean age was 68.6 (SD = 19.6) years and 41.3% were female. Most (83%) occurred in a place of residence, 52.7% were witnessed by either the EMS or a bystander. In non-EMS witnessed cases, 55.2% received bystander CPR whilst public access defibrillation was used rarely (2.3%). Cardiac aetiology was the leading cause of cardiac arrest (60.9%). The initial rhythm was asystole in 42.4% of all cases and was shockable (VF or pVT) in 20.6%. Return of spontaneous circulation at hospital transfer was evident in 25.8% (n = 6302) and survival to hospital discharge was 7.9%. Conclusion Cardiac arrest is an important cause of death in England. With less than one in ten patients surviving, there is scope to improve outcomes. Survival rates were highest amongst those who received bystander CPR and public access defibrillation.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZRSKP
Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) during COVID-19 has been reported by countries with high case numbers and overwhelmed healthcare services. Imposed restrictions and treatment precautions may ...have also influenced OHCA processes-of-care. We investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic period on incidence, characteristics, and survival from OHCA in Victoria, Australia.
Using data from the Victorian Ambulance Cardiac Arrest Registry, we compared 380 adult OHCA patients who received resuscitation between 16th March 2020 and 12th May 2020, with 1218 cases occurring during the same dates in 2017−2019. No OHCA patients were COVID-19 positive. Arrest incidence, characteristics and survival rates were compared. Regression analysis was performed to understand the independent effect of the pandemic period on survival.
Incidence of OHCA did not differ during the pandemic period. However, initiation of resuscitation by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) significantly decreased (46.9% versus 40.6%, p = 0.001). Arrests in public locations decreased in the pandemic period (20.8% versus 10.0%; p < 0.001), as did initial shocks by public access defibrillation/first-responders (p = 0.037). EMS caseload decreased during the pandemic period, however, delays to key interventions (time-to-first defibrillation, time-to-first epinephrine) significantly increased. Survival-to-discharge decreased by 50% during the pandemic period (11.7% versus 6.1%; p = 0.002). Survivors per million person-years dropped in 2020, resulting in 35 excess deaths per million person-years. On adjusted analysis, the pandemic period remained associated with a 50% reduction in survival-to-discharge.
The COVID-19 pandemic period did not influence OHCA incidence but appears to have disrupted the system-of-care in Australia. However, this could not completely explain reductions in survival.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZRSKP
Abstract Purpose Association estimates between baseline characteristics and outcomes are imprecise and inconsistent among extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) recipients following ...refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the prognostic significance of pre-specified characteristics for OHCA treated with ECPR. Methods The Medline electronic database was searched via PubMed for articles published from January 2000 to September 2016. The electronic search was supplemented by scanning the reference lists of retrieved articles and contacting field experts. Eligible studies were historical and prospective cohort studies of adult patients undergoing ECPR following OHCA. Results Fifteen primary studies were included, totaling 841 participants. The median prevalence of the primary outcome (i.e., short- or long-term survival for five studies and cerebral performance for ten studies) was 15% (range, 0–50%). The primary outcome was associated with an increased odds ratio of initial shockable cardiac rhythm (2.20; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.30–3.72; P = 0.003), shorter low-flow duration (geometric mean ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.81–0.99; P = 0.04), higher arterial pH value (difference, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03–0.22; P = 0.01) and lower serum lactate concentration (difference, −3.52 mmol/L; 95% CI, −5.05 to −1.99; P < 0.001). No significant association was found between the primary outcome and patient age (the odds of female gender and bystander CPR attempt. Conclusion Observational evidence from published primary studies indicates that shorter low-flow duration, shockable cardiac rhythm, higher arterial pH value and lower serum lactate concentration on hospital admission are associated with better outcomes for ECPR recipients after OHCA.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZRSKP
Patients who had cardiac arrest without ST-segment elevation were assigned to undergo either immediate coronary angiography or delayed coronary angiography (after neurologic recovery). All patients ...underwent PCI if indicated. There was no significant between-group difference in overall survival at 90 days.
The impact of COVID-19 on pre-hospital and hospital services and hence on the prevalence and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) remain unclear. The review aimed to evaluate the ...influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the incidence, process, and outcomes of OHCA.
A systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, and pre-print websites was performed. Studies reporting comparative data on OHCA within the same jurisdiction, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were included. Study quality was assessed based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
Ten studies reporting data from 35,379 OHCA events were included. There was a 120% increase in OHCA events since the pandemic. Time from OHCA to ambulance arrival was longer during the pandemic (p = 0.036). While mortality (OR = 0.67, 95%-CI 0.49−0.91) and supraglottic airway use (OR = 0.36, 95%-CI 0.27−0.46) was higher during the pandemic, automated external defibrillator use (OR = 1.78 95%-CI 1.06–2.98), return of spontaneous circulation (OR = 1.63, 95%CI 1.18-2.26) and intubation (OR = 1.87, 95%-CI 1.12-–3.13) was more common before the pandemic. More patients survived to hospital admission (OR = 1.75, 95%-CI 1.42–2.17) and discharge (OR = 1.65, 95%-CI 1.28–2.12) before the pandemic. Bystander CPR (OR = 1.18, 95%-CI 0.95-1.46), unwitnessed OHCA (OR = 0.84, 95%-CI 0.66–1.07), paramedic-resuscitation attempts (OR = 1.19 95%-CI 1.00–1.42) and mechanical CPR device use (OR = 1.57 95%-CI 0.55–4.55) did not defer significantly.
The incidence and mortality following OHCA was higher during the COVID-19 pandemic. There were significant variations in resuscitation practices during the pandemic. Research to define optimal processes of pre-hospital care during a pandemic is urgently required.
PROSPERO (CRD42020203371).
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZRSKP
Pulmonary embolism (PE) represents 2% to 5% of all causes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and is associated with extremely unfavorable prognosis. In PE-related OHCA, inconsistent data showed ...that thrombolysis during cardiopulmonary resuscitation may favor survival.
This was a retrospective, observational, multicenter study from July 2011 to March 2018. All adults with OHCA, treated by a mobile ICU and with a diagnosis of PE confirmed on hospital admission, were included. The primary end point was 30-day survival in a weighted population.
Of the 14,253 patients admitted to hospitals, 328 had a final diagnosis of PE and 246 were included in the analysis. In the group that received thrombolysis during resuscitation (n = 58), 14 (24%) received alteplase, 43 (74%) received tenecteplase, and one (2%) received streptokinase. Thirty-day survival was higher in the thrombolysis group than in the control group (16% vs 6%; P = .005; adjusted log-rank test) but the good neurologic outcome was not significantly different (10% vs 5%; adjusted relative risk, 1.97; 95% CI, 0.70-5.56). Median duration of stay in the ICU was 1 (0-5) day for the thrombolysis group and 1 (0-3) day for the control group (P = .23).
In patients with OHCA with confirmed PE and admitted with recuperation of spontaneous circulation in the hospital, there was significantly higher 30-day survival in those who received thrombolysis during cardiopulmonary resuscitation compared with patients who did not receive thrombolysis.
Background
Out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a major cause of death worldwide. Cardiac arrest can be subdivided into asphyxial and non asphyxial etiologies. An asphyxia arrest is caused by ...lack of oxygen in the blood and occurs in drowning and choking victims and in other circumstances. A non asphyxial arrest is usually a loss of functioning cardiac electrical activity. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a well‐established treatment for cardiac arrest. Conventional CPR includes both chest compressions and ‘rescue breathing’ such as mouth‐to‐mouth breathing. Rescue breathing is delivered between chest compressions using a fixed ratio, such as two breaths to 30 compressions or can be delivered asynchronously without interrupting chest compression. Studies show that applying continuous chest compressions is critical for survival and interrupting them for rescue breathing might increase risk of death. Continuous chest compression CPR may be performed with or without rescue breathing.
Objectives
To assess the effects of continuous chest compression CPR (with or without rescue breathing) versus conventional CPR plus rescue breathing (interrupted chest compression with pauses for breaths) of non‐asphyxial OHCA.
Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 1 2017); MEDLINE (Ovid) (from 1985 to February 2017); Embase (1985 to February 2017); Web of Science (1985 to February 2017). We searched ongoing trials databases including controlledtrials.com and clinicaltrials.gov. We did not impose any language or publication restrictions.
Selection criteria
We included randomized and quasi‐randomized studies in adults and children suffering non‐asphyxial OHCA due to any cause. Studies compared the effects of continuous chest compression CPR (with or without rescue breathing) with interrupted CPR plus rescue breathing provided by rescuers (bystanders or professional CPR providers).
Data collection and analysis
Two authors extracted the data and summarized the effects as risk ratios (RRs), adjusted risk differences (ARDs) or mean differences (MDs). We assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE.
Main results
We included three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one cluster‐RCT (with a total of 26,742 participants analysed). We identified one ongoing study. While predominantly adult patients, one study included children.
Untrained bystander‐administered CPR
Three studies assessed CPR provided by untrained bystanders in urban areas of the USA, Sweden and the UK. Bystanders administered CPR under telephone instruction from emergency services. There was an unclear risk of selection bias in two trials and low risk of detection, attrition, and reporting bias in all three trials. Survival outcomes were unlikely to be affected by the unblinded design of the studies.
We found high‐quality evidence that continuous chest compression CPR without rescue breathing improved participants’ survival to hospital discharge compared with interrupted chest compression with pauses for rescue breathing (ratio 15:2) by 2.4% (14% versus 11.6%; RR 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.46; 3 studies, 3031 participants).
One trial reported survival to hospital admission, but the number of participants was too low to be certain about the effects of the different treatment strategies on survival to admission(RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.48; 1 study, 520 participants; moderate‐quality evidence).
There were no data available for survival at one year, quality of life, return of spontaneous circulation or adverse effects.
There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect of the different strategies on neurological outcomes at hospital discharge (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.66; 1 study, 1286 participants; moderate‐quality evidence). The proportion of participants categorized as having good or moderate cerebral performance was 11% following treatment with interrupted chest compression plus rescue breathing compared with 10% to 18% for those treated with continuous chest compression CPR without rescue breathing.
CPR administered by a trained professional
In one trial that assessed OHCA CPR administered by emergency medical service professionals (EMS) 23,711 participants received either continuous chest compression CPR (100/minute) with asynchronous rescue breathing (10/minute) or interrupted chest compression with pauses for rescue breathing (ratio 30:2). The study was at low risk of bias overall.
After OHCA, risk of survival to hospital discharge is probably slightly lower for continuous chest compression CPR with asynchronous rescue breathing compared with interrupted chest compression plus rescue breathing (9.0% versus 9.7%) with an adjusted risk difference (ARD) of ‐0.7%; 95% CI (‐1.5% to 0.1%); moderate‐quality evidence.
There is high‐quality evidence that survival to hospital admission is 1.3% lower with continuous chest compression CPR with asynchronous rescue breathing compared with interrupted chest compression plus rescue breathing (24.6% versus 25.9%; ARD ‐1.3% 95% CI (‐2.4% to ‐0.2%)).
Survival at one year and quality of life were not reported.
Return of spontaneous circulation is likely to be slightly lower in people treated with continuous chest compression CPR plus asynchronous rescue breathing (24.2% versus 25.3%; ‐1.1% (95% CI ‐2.4 to 0.1)), high‐quality evidence.
There is high‐quality evidence of little or no difference in neurological outcome at discharge between these two interventions (7.0% versus 7.7%; ARD ‐0.6% (95% CI ‐1.4 to 0.1).
Rates of adverse events were 54.4% in those treated with continuous chest compressions plus asynchronous rescue breathing versus 55.4% in people treated with interrupted chest compression plus rescue breathing compared with the ARD being ‐1% (‐2.3 to 0.4), moderate‐quality evidence).
Authors' conclusions
Following OHCA, we have found that bystander‐administered chest compression‐only CPR, supported by telephone instruction, increases the proportion of people who survive to hospital discharge compared with conventional interrupted chest compression CPR plus rescue breathing. Some uncertainty remains about how well neurological function is preserved in this population and there is no information available regarding adverse effects.
When CPR was performed by EMS providers, continuous chest compressions plus asynchronous rescue breathing did not result in higher rates for survival to hospital discharge compared to interrupted chest compression plus rescue breathing. The results indicate slightly lower rates of survival to admission or discharge, favourable neurological outcome and return of spontaneous circulation observed following continuous chest compression. Adverse effects are probably slightly lower with continuous chest compression.
Increased availability of automated external defibrillators (AEDs), and AED use in CPR need to be examined, and also whether continuous chest compression CPR is appropriate for paediatric cardiac arrest.
Utstein-style guidelines contribute to improved public health internationally by providing a structured framework with which to compare emergency medical services systems. Advances in resuscitation ...science, new insights into important predictors of outcome from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and lessons learned from methodological research prompted this review and update of the 2004 Utstein guidelines. Representatives of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation developed an updated Utstein reporting framework iteratively by meeting face to face, by teleconference, and by Web survey during 2012 through 2014. Herein are recommendations for reporting out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Data elements were grouped by system factors, dispatch/recognition, patient variables, resuscitation/postresuscitation processes, and outcomes. Elements were classified as core or supplemental using a modified Delphi process primarily based on respondents' assessment of the evidence-based importance of capturing those elements, tempered by the challenges to collect them. New or modified elements reflected consensus on the need to account for emergency medical services system factors, increasing availability of automated external defibrillators, data collection processes, epidemiology trends, increasing use of dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation, emerging field treatments, postresuscitation care, prognostication tools, and trends in organ recovery. A standard reporting template is recommended to promote standardized reporting. This template facilitates reporting of the bystander-witnessed, shockable rhythm as a measure of emergency medical services system efficacy and all emergency medical services system-treated arrests as a measure of system effectiveness. Several additional important subgroups are identified that enable an estimate of the specific contribution of rhythm and bystander actions that are key determinants of outcome.
Abstract Background Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains a leading cause of death and a 2010 meta-analysis concluded that outcomes have not improved over several decades. However, guidelines ...have changed to emphasize CPR quality, minimization of interruptions, and standardized post-resuscitation care. We sought to evaluate whether OHCA outcomes have improved over time among agencies participating in the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) cardiac arrest registry (Epistry) and randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Methods Observational cohort study of 47,148 EMS-treated OHCA cases in Epistry from 139 EMS agencies at 10 ROC sites that participated in at least one RCT between 1/1/2006 and 12/31/2010. We reviewed patient, scene, event characteristics, and outcomes of EMS-treated OHCA over time, including subgroups with initial rhythm of pulseless ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF). Results Mean response interval, median age and male proportion remained similar over time. Unadjusted survival to discharge increased between 2006 and 2010 for treated OHCA (from 8.2% to 10.4%), as well as for subgroups of VT/VF (21.4% to 29.3%) and bystander witnessed VT/VF (23.5% to 30.3%). Compared with 2006, adjusted survival to discharge was significantly higher in 2010 for treated cases (OR = 1.72; 95% CI 1.53, 1.94), VT/VF cases (OR = 1.69; 95% CI 1.45, 1.98) and bystander witnessed VT/VF cases (OR = 1.65; 95% CI 1.36, 2.00). Tests for trend in each subgroup were significant ( p < 0.001). Conclusions ROC-wide survival increased significantly between 2006 and 2010. Additional research efforts are warranted to identify specific factors associated with this improvement.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Coronary artery disease is prevalent in different causes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), especially in individuals presenting with shockable rhythms of ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ...ventricular tachycardia (VF/pVT). The purpose of this report is to review the known prevalence and potential importance of coronary artery disease in patients with OHCA and to describe the emerging paradigm of treatment with advanced perfusion/reperfusion techniques and their potential benefits on the basis of available evidence. Although randomized clinical trials are planned or ongoing, current scientific evidence rests principally on observational case series with their potential confounding selection bias. Among patients resuscitated from VF/pVT OHCA with ST-segment elevation on their postresuscitation ECG, the prevalence of coronary artery disease has been shown to be 70% to 85%. More than 90% of these patients have had successful percutaneous coronary intervention. Conversely, among patients resuscitated from VF/pVT OHCA without ST-segment elevation on their postresuscitation ECG, the prevalence of coronary artery disease has been shown to be 25% to 50%. For these patients, early access to the cardiac catheterization laboratory is associated with a 10% to 15% absolute higher functionally favorable survival rate compared with more conservative approaches of late or no access to the cardiac catheterization laboratory. In patients with VF/pVT OHCA refractory to standard treatment, a new treatment paradigm is also emerging that uses venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to facilitate return of normal perfusion and to support further resuscitation efforts, including coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. The burden of coronary artery disease is high in this patient population, presumably causative in most patients. The strategy of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, coronary angiography, and percutaneous coronary intervention has resulted in functionally favorable survival rates ranging from 9% to 45% in observational studies in this patient population. Patients with VF/pVT should be considered at the highest severity in the continuum of acute coronary syndromes. These patients have a significant burden of coronary artery disease and acute coronary thrombotic events. Evidence from randomized trials will further define optimal clinical practice.
PDF
