| 1. |
- Claesson, Andreas, et al.
(author)
-
Medical versus non medical etiology in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest-Changes in outcome in relation to the revised Utstein template.
- 2016
-
In: Resuscitation. - : Elsevier. - 0300-9572 .- 1873-1570. ; 110, s. 48-55
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- INTRODUCTION:The Utstein-style recommendations for reporting etiology and outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) from 2004 have recently been revised. Among other etiologies a medical category is now introduced, replacing the cardiac category from Utstein template 2004.AIM:The aim of this study is to describe characteristics and temporal trends from reporting OHCA etiology according to the revised Utstein template 2014 in regards to patient characteristics and 30-day survival rates.METHODS:This registry study is based on consecutive OHCA cases reported from the Emergency medical services (EMS) to the Swedish Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (SRCR) 1992-2014. Characteristics, including a presumed cardiac etiology in Utstein template 2004, were transcribed to a medical etiology in Utstein template 2014.RESULTS:Of a total of n=70,846 cases, 92% were categorized as having a medical etiology and 8% as having a non-medical cause. Using the new classifications, the 30-day survival rate has significantly increased over a 20-year period from 4.7% to 11.0% in the medical group and from 3% to 9.9% in the non-medical group (p≤0.001). Trauma was the most common cause in OHCA of a non-medical etiology (26%) with a 30-day survival rate of 3.4% whilst drowning and drug overdose had the highest survival rates (14% and 10% respectively).CONCLUSION:Based on Utstein 2014 categories of etiology, overall survival after OHCA with a medical etiology has more than doubled in a 20-year period and tripled for non-medical cases. Patients with a medical etiology found in a shockable rhythm have the highest chance of survival. There is great variability in characteristics among non-medical cases.
|
|
| 2. |
- Jerkeman, Matilda, et al.
(author)
-
Trends in survival after cardiac arrest: a Swedish nationwide study over 30 years
- 2022
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press. - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645.
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AimsTrends in characteristics, management, and survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) were studied in the Swedish Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Registry (SCRR). Methods and resultsThe SCRR was used to study 106 296 cases of OHCA (1990–2020) and 30 032 cases of IHCA (2004–20) in whom resuscitation was attempted. In OHCA, survival increased from 5.7% in 1990 to 10.1% in 2011 and remained unchanged thereafter. Odds ratios [ORs, 95% confidence interval (CI)] for survival in 2017–20 vs. 1990–93 were 2.17 (1.93–2.43) overall, 2.36 (2.07–2.71) for men, and 1.67 (1.34–2.10) for women. Survival increased for all aetiologies, except trauma, suffocation, and drowning. OR for cardiac aetiology in 2017–20 vs. 1990–93 was 0.45 (0.42–0.48). Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation increased from 30.9% to 82.2%. Shockable rhythm decreased from 39.5% in 1990 to 17.4% in 2020. Use of targeted temperature management decreased from 42.1% (2010) to 18.2% (2020). In IHCA, OR for survival in 2017–20 vs. 2004–07 was 1.18 (1.06–1.31), showing a non-linear trend with probability of survival increasing by 46.6% during 2011–20. Myocardial ischaemia or infarction as aetiology decreased during 2004–20 from 67.4% to 28.3% [OR 0.30 (0.27–0.34)]. Shockable rhythm decreased from 37.4% to 23.0% [OR 0.57 (0.51–0.64)]. Approximately 90% of survivors (IHCA and OHCA) had no or mild neurological sequelae. ConclusionSurvival increased 2.2-fold in OHCA during 1990–2020 but without any improvement in the final decade, and 1.2-fold in IHCA during 2004–20, with rapid improvement the last decade. Cardiac aetiology and shockable rhythms were halved. Neurological outcome has not improved.
|
|
| 3. |
- Lundin, Andreas, et al.
(author)
-
Drug therapy in cardiac arrest : a review of the literature
- 2016
-
In: European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 2055-6845 .- 2055-6837. ; 2:1, s. 54-75
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The aim of this study was to review the literature on human studies of drug therapy in cardiac arrest during the last 25 years. In May 2015, a systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and CRD databases. Prospective interventional and observational studies evaluating a specified drug therapy in human cardiac arrest reporting a clinical endpoint [i.e. return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) or survival] and published in English 1990 or later were included, whereas animal studies, case series and reports, studies of drug administration, drug pharmacology, non-specified drug therapies, preventive drug therapy, drug administration after ROSC, studies with primarily physiological endpoints, and studies of traumatic cardiac arrest were excluded. The literature search identified a total of 8936 articles. Eighty-eight articles met our inclusion criteria and were included in the review. We identified no human study in which drug therapy, compared with placebo, improved long-term survival. Regarding adrenaline and amiodarone, the drugs currently recommended in cardiac arrest, two prospective randomized placebo-controlled trials, were identified for adrenaline, and one for amiodarone, but they were all underpowered to detect differences in survival to hospital discharge. Of all reviewed studies, only one recent prospective study demonstrated improved neurological outcome with one therapy over another using a combination of vasopressin, steroids, and adrenaline as the intervention compared with standard adrenaline administration. The evidence base for drug therapy in cardiac arrest is scarce. However, many human studies on drug therapy in cardiac arrest have not been powered to identify differences in important clinical outcomes such as survival to hospital discharge and favourable neurological outcome. Efforts are needed to initiate large multicentre prospective randomized clinical trials to evaluate both currently recommended and future drug therapies.
|
|
