| 1. |
- Dankiewicz, Josef, et al.
(författare)
-
Safety, Feasibility, and Outcomes of Induced Hypothermia Therapy Following In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest-Evaluation of a Large Prospective Registry
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Critical Care Medicine. - 0090-3493 .- 1530-0293. ; 42:12, s. 2537-2545
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: Despite a lack of randomized trials, practice guidelines recommend that mild induced hypothermia be considered for comatose survivors of in-hospital cardiac arrest. This study describes the safety, feasibility, and outcomes of mild induced hypothermia treatment following in-hospital cardiac arrest. Design: Prospective, observational, registry-based study. Setting: Forty-six critical care facilities in eight countries in Europe and the United States reporting in the Hypothermia Network Registry and the International Cardiac Arrest Registry. Patients: A total of 663 patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest and treated with mild induced hypothermia were included between January 2004 and February 2012. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: A cerebral performance category of 1 or 2 was considered a good outcome. At hospital discharge 41% of patients had a good outcome. At median 6-month follow-up, 34% had a good outcome. Among in-hospital deaths, 52% were of cardiac causes and 44% of cerebral cause. A higher initial body temperature was associated with reduced odds of a good outcome (odds ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.92). Adverse events were common; bleeding requiring transfusion (odds ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.31-1.00) and sepsis (odds ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30-0.91) were associated with reduced odds for a good outcome. Conclusions: In this registry study of an in-hospital cardiac arrest population treated with mild induced hypothermia, we found a 41% good outcome at hospital discharge and 34% at follow-up. Infectious complications occurred in 43% of cases, and 11% of patients required a transfusion for bleeding. The majority of deaths were of cardiac origin.
|
|
| 2. |
- Harhash, Ahmed A., et al.
(författare)
-
Incidence of cardiac interventions and associated cardiac arrest outcomes in patients with nonshockable initial rhythms and no ST elevation post resuscitation
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Resuscitation. - : Elsevier. - 0300-9572 .- 1873-1570. ; 167, s. 188-197
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Out of Hospital Cardiac arrest (OHCA) survivors with ST elevation (STE) with or without shockable rhythms often benefit from coronary angiography (CAG) and, if indicated, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the benefits of CAG and PCI in OHCA survivors with nonshockable rhythms (PEA/asystole) and no STE are debated.Methods: Using the International Cardiac Arrest Registry (INTCAR 2.0), representing 44 centers in the US and Europe, comatose OHCA survivors with known presenting rhythms and post resuscitation ECGs were identified. Survival to hospital discharge, neurological recovery on discharge, and impact of CAG with or without PCI on such outcome were assessed and compared with other groups (shockable rhythms with or without STE).Results: Total of 2113 OHCA survivors were identified and described as; nonshockable/no STE (Nsh-NST) (n = 940, 44.5%), shockable/no STE (Sh-NST) (n = 716, 33.9%), nonshockable/STE (Nsh-ST) (n = 110, 5.2%), and shockable/STE (Sh-ST) (n = 347, 16.4%). Of Nsh-NST, 13.7% (129) were previously healthy before CA and only 17.3% (161) underwent CAG; of those, 30.4% (52) underwent PCI. A total of 18.6% (174) Nsh-NST patients survived to hospital discharge, with 57.5% (100) of such survivors having good neurological recovery (cerebral performance category 1 or 2) on discharge. Coronary angiography was associated with improved odds for survival and neurological recovery among all groups, including those with NSh-NST.Conclusions: Nonshockable initial rhythms with no ST elevation post resuscitation was the most common presentation after OHCA. Although most of these patients did not undergo coronary angiography, among those who did, 1 in 4 patients had a culprit lesion and underwent revascularization. Invasive CAG should be at least considered for all OHCA survivors, including those with nonshockable rhythms and no ST elevation post resuscitation.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- May, Teresa L., et al.
(författare)
-
Variability in functional outcome and treatment practices by treatment center after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest : analysis of International Cardiac Arrest Registry
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Intensive Care Medicine. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0342-4642 .- 1432-1238. ; 45:5, s. 637-646
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PurposeFunctional outcomes vary between centers after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and are partially explained by pre-existing health status and arrest characteristics, while the effects of in-hospital treatments on functional outcome are less understood. We examined variation in functional outcomes by center after adjusting for patient- and arrest-specific characteristics and evaluated how in-hospital management differs between high- and low-performing centers.MethodsAnalysis of observational registry data within the International Cardiac Arrest Registry was used to perform a hierarchical model of center-specific risk standardized rates for good outcome, adjusted for demographics, pre-existing functional status, and arrest-related factors with treatment center as a random effect variable. We described the variability in treatments and diagnostic tests that may influence outcome at centers with adjusted rates significantly above and below registry average.ResultsA total of 3855 patients were admitted to an ICU following cardiac arrest with return of spontaneous circulation. The overall prevalence of good outcome was 11-63% among centers. After adjustment, center-specific risk standardized rates for good functional outcome ranged from 0.47 (0.37-0.58) to 0.20 (0.12-0.26). High-performing centers had faster time to goal temperature, were more likely to have goal temperature of 33 degrees C, more likely to perform unconscious cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention, and had differing prognostication practices than low-performing centers.ConclusionsCenter-specific differences in outcomes after OHCA after adjusting for patient-specific factors exist. This variation could partially be explained by in-hospital management differences. Future research should address the contribution of these factors to the differences in outcomes after resuscitation.
|
|
