Clinical outcome of patients treated with an early invasive strategy after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Contemporary Management of Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest in the Cardiac Catheterisation Laboratory: Current Status and Future Directions

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is an important cause of mortality and morbidity in developed countries and remains an important public health burden. A primary cardiac aetiology is common in OHCA patients, and so patients are increasingly brought to specialist cardiac centres for consideration of coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention and mechanical circulatory support. This article focuses on the management of OHCA in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory. In particular, it addresses conveyance of the OHCA patient direct to a specialist centre, the role of targeted temperature management, pharmacological considerations, provision of early coronary angiography and mechanical circulatory support.

Clinical and Angiographic Predictors of Mortality in Sudden Cardiac Arrest Patients Having Cardiac Catheterisation: A Single Centre Registry

BACKGROUND

Immediate cardiac catheterisation (CC) is recommended in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) following sudden cardiac arrest (SCA). Guidelines advise urgent CC for SCA patients without-STEMI, at clinician discretion. We examined the clinical and angiographic factors predicting mortality in SCA patients having CC.

METHODS

Consecutive SCA patients having CC at Liverpool Hospital, Sydney (January 2011-September 2015) were retrospectively analysed. Patient data were retrieved from hospital records, and angiographic SYNTAX scores (SS) were quantified online. Independent predictors of mortality were derived using multivariate logistic analysis.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 104 SCA patients; mean age 61±12years, and 79% male. Immediate CC (<2hours post-SCA) was performed in 35% overall. Compared to the without-STEMI subgroup, STEMI patients had more ventricular fibrillation (91 vs 50%; p<0.0001), and higher mean peak serum high-sensitivity troponin-T (8.25±14.7 vs 1.97±6.13 ug/L; p=0.006); in the context of higher median SS (18 vs 6.5; p=0.002) and target-lesion SS (tSS, 10 vs 0; p<0.001). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI; 75 vs 23%; p<0.0001) and target vessel revascularisation (11 vs 0%; p=0.005) were more frequent for STEMI. All-cause mortality was 39%, at 1.3±1.5years follow-up. Independent mortality predictors were: delayed CC (HR 4.08), serum lactate >7mmol/L (HR 3.47), and tSS (HR 1.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated serum lactate, tSS, and delayed CC, were predictive of longer-term mortality in SCA patients having CC. Late CC in patients without-STEMI suggest scope for improvement in real-world systems of care. Closer scrutiny of target lesion complexity may aid prognostication in SCA survivors.

Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Predictors of Survival

Background

The use of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in the setting of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) has shown improved outcomes compared with conventional CPR. The aim of this study was to determine factors predictive of survival in extracorporeal CPR (E-CPR).

Methods

Consecutive 85 adult patients (median age, 59 years; range, 18 to 85 years; 56 males) who underwent E-CPR from May 2005 to December 2012 were evaluated.

Results

Causes of arrest were cardiogenic in 62 patients (72.9%), septic in 18 patients (21.2%), and hypovolemic in 3 patients (3.5%), while the etiology was not specified in 2 patients (2.4%). The survival rate in patients with septic etiology was significantly poorer compared with those with another etiology (0% vs. 24.6%, p=0.008). Septic etiology (hazard ratio [HR], 2.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49 to 5.44; p=0.002) and the interval between arrest and ECLS initiation (HR, 1.05 by 10 minutes increment; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.09; p=0.005) were independent risk factors for mortality. When the predictive value of the E-CPR timing for in-hospital mortality was assessed using the receiver operating characteristic curve method, the greatest accuracy was obtained at a cutoff of 60.5 minutes (area under the curve, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.80; p=0.032) with 47.8% sensitivity and 88.9% specificity. The survival rate was significantly different according to the cutoff of 60.5 minutes (p=0.001).

Conclusion

These results indicate that efforts should be made to minimize the time between arrest and ECLS application, optimally within 60 minutes. In addition, E-CPR in patients with septic etiology showed grave outcomes, suggesting it to be of questionable benefit in these patients.

Predictors of Mortality in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction and Resuscitated Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Introduction

In patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) complicating an ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the survival depends largely on the restoration of coronary flow in the infarct related artery. The aim of this study was to determine clinical and angiographic predictors of in-hospital mortality in patients with OHCA and STEMI, successfully resuscitated and undergoing primary percutaneous intervention (PCI).

Methods

From January 2013 to July 2015, 78 patients with STEMI presenting OHCA, successfully resuscitated, transferred immediately to the catheterization unit and treated with primary PCI, were analyzed. Clinical, laboratory and angiographic data were compared in 28 non-survivors and 50 survivors.

Results

The clinical baseline characteristics of the study population showed no significant differences between the survivors and non-survivors in respect to age (p=0.06), gender (p=0.8), the presence of hypertension (p=0.4), dyslipidemia (p=0.09) obesity (p=1), smoking status (p=0.2), presence of diabetes (p=0.2), a clinical history of acute myocardial infarction (p=0.7) or stroke (p=0.17). Compared to survivors, the non-survivor group exhibited a significantly higher incidence of cardiogenic shock (50% vs 24%, p=0.02), renal failure (64.3% vs 30.0%, p=0.004) and anaemia (35.7% vs 12.0%, p=0.02). Three-vessel disease was significantly higher in the non-survivor group (42.8% vs. 20.0%, p=0.03), while there was a significantly higher percentage of TIMI 3 flow postPCI in the infarct-related artery in the survivor group (80.% vs. 57.1%, p=0.03). The time from the onset of symptoms to revascularization was significantly higher in patients who died compared to those who survived (387.5 +/- 211.3 minutes vs 300.8 +/- 166.1 minutes, p=0.04), as was the time from the onset of cardiac arrest to revascularization (103.0 +/- 56.34 minutes vs 67.0 +/- 44.4 minutes, p=0.002). Multivariate analysis identified the presence of cardiogenic shock (odds ratio [OR]: 3.17, p=0.02), multivessel disease (OR: 3.0, p=0.03), renal failure (OR: 4.2, p=0.004), anaemia (OR: 4.07, p=0.02), need for mechanical ventilation >48 hours (OR: 8.07, p=0.0002) and a duration of stay in the ICU longer than 5 days (OR: 9.96, p=0.0002) as the most significant independent predictors for mortality in patients with OHCA and STEMI.

Conclusion

In patients surviving an OHCA in the early phase of a myocardial infarction, the presence of cardiogenic shock, renal failure, anaemia or multivessel disease, as well as a longer time from the onset of symptoms or of cardiac arrest to revascularization, are independent predictors of mortality. However, the most powerful predictor of death is the duration of stay in the ICU and the requirement of mechanical ventilation for more than forty-eight hours.

An optimal transition time to extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for predicting good neurological outcome in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a propensity-matched study

INTRODUCTION

Prolonged conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR) is associated with a poor prognosis in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients. Alternative methods can be needed to improve the outcome in patients with prolonged CCPR and extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) can be considered as an alternative method. The objectives of this study were to estimate the optimal duration of CPR to consider ECPR as an alternative resuscitation method in patients with CCPR, and to find the indications for predicting good neurologic outcome in OHCA patients who received ECPR.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis based on a prospective cohort. We included patients ≥ 18 years of age without suspected or confirmed trauma and who experienced an OHCA from May 2006 to December 2013. First, we determined the appropriate cut-off duration for CPR based on the discrimination of good and poor neurological outcomes in the patients who received only CCPR, and then we compared the outcome between the CCPR group and ECPR group by using propensity score matching. Second, we compared CPR related data according to the neurologic outcome in matched ECPR group.

RESULTS

Of 499 patients suitable for inclusion, 444 and 55 patients were enrolled in the CCPR and ECPR group, respectively. The predicted duration for a favorable neurologic outcome (CPC1, 2) is < 21 minutes of CPR in only CCPR patients. The matched ECPR group with ≥ 21 minutes of CPR duration had a more favorable neurological outcome than the matched CCPR group at 3 months post-arrest. In matched ECPR group, younger age, witnessed arrest without initial asystole rhythm, early achievement of mean arterial pressure ≥ 60 mmHg, low rate of ECPR-related complications, and therapeutic hypothermia were significant factors for expecting good neurologic outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

ECPR should be considered as an alternative method for attaining good neurological outcomes in OHCA patients who required prolonged CPR, especially of ≥ 21 minutes. Younger or witnessed arrest patients without initial asystole were good candidates for ECPR. After implantation of ECPR, early hemodynamic stabilization, prevention of ECPR-related complications, and application of therapeutic hypothermia may improve the neurological outcome.

Invasive strategy in patients with resuscitated cardiac arrest and ST elevation myocardial infarction

Coronary artery disease is the most frequent cause of sudden cardiac death. There is general consensus that immediate coronary angiography with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) should be performed in all conscious and unconscious patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction in post-resuscitation electrocardiogram. In these patients acute coronary thrombotic lesion (“ACS” lesion) suitable for PCI is typically present in more than 90%. PCI in these patients is not only feasible and safe but highly effective and there is evidence of improved survival with good neurological outcome. PCI of the culprit lesion is the primary goal while PCI of stable obstructive lesions may be postponed unless post-resuscitation cardiogenic shock is present.

Acute coronary angiography in patients resuscitated from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest--a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest has a poor prognosis. The main aetiology is ischaemic heart disease.

AIM

To make a systematic review addressing the question: "In patients with return of spontaneous circulation following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, does acute coronary angiography with coronary intervention improve survival compared to conventional treatment?"

METHODS

Peer reviewed articles written in English with relevant prognostic data were included. Comparison studies on patients with and without acute coronary angiography were pooled in a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-two non-randomised studies were included of which 22 were case-series without patients with conservative treatment. Seven studies with specific efforts to control confounding had statistical evidence to support the use of acute coronary angiography following resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The remaining 25 studies were considered neutral. Following acute coronary angiography, the survival to hospital discharge, 30 days or six months ranged from 23% to 86%. In patients without an obvious non-cardiac aetiology, the prevalence of significant coronary artery disease ranged from 59% to 71%. Electrocardiographic findings were unreliable for identifying angiographic findings of acute coronary syndrome. Ten comparison studies demonstrated a pooled unadjusted odds ratio for survival of 2.78 (1.89; 4.10) favouring acute coronary angiography.

CONCLUSION

No randomised studies exist on acute coronary angiography following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. An increasing number of observational studies support feasibility and a possible survival benefit of an early invasive approach. In patients without an obvious non-cardiac aetiology, acute coronary angiography should be strongly considered irrespective of electrocardiographic findings due to a high prevalence of coronary artery disease.