Dataset Information

Time to administration of epinephrine and outcome after in-hospital cardiac arrest with non-shockable rhythms: retrospective analysis of large in-hospital data registry.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine if earlier administration of epinephrine (adrenaline) in patients with non-shockable cardiac arrest rhythms is associated with increased return of spontaneous circulation, survival, and neurologically intact survival.

Design

Post hoc analysis of prospectively collected data in a large multicenter registry of in-hospital cardiac arrests (Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation).

Setting

We utilized the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation database (formerly National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, NRCPR). The database is sponsored by the American Heart Association (AHA) and contains prospective data from 570 American hospitals collected from 1 January 2000 to 19 November 2009.

Participants

119,978 adults from 570 hospitals who had a cardiac arrest in hospital with asystole (55%) or pulseless electrical activity (45%) as the initial rhythm. Of these, 83,490 arrests were excluded because they took place in the emergency department, intensive care unit, or surgical or other specialty unit, 10,775 patients were excluded because of missing or incomplete data, 524 patients were excluded because they had a repeat cardiac arrest, and 85 patients were excluded as they received vasopressin before the first dose of epinephrine. The main study population therefore comprised 25,095 patients. The mean age was 72, and 57% were men.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included sustained return of spontaneous circulation, 24 hour survival, and survival with favorable neurologic status at hospital discharge.

Results

25,095 adults had in-hospital cardiac arrest with non-shockable rhythms. Median time to administration of the first dose of epinephrine was 3 minutes (interquartile range 1-5 minutes). There was a stepwise decrease in survival with increasing interval of time to epinephrine (analyzed by three minute intervals): adjusted odds ratio 1.0 for 1-3 minutes (reference group); 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.00; P=0.055) for 4-6 minutes; 0.74 (0.63 to 0.88; P<0.001) for 7-9 minutes; and 0.63 (0.52 to 0.76; P<0.001) for >9 minutes. A similar stepwise effect was observed across all outcome variables.

Conclusions

In patients with non-shockable cardiac arrest in hospital, earlier administration of epinephrine is associated with a higher probability of return of spontaneous circulation, survival in hospital, and neurologically intact survival.

SUBMITTER: Donnino MW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4027796 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the use of epinephrine (adrenaline) before defibrillation for treatment of in-hospital cardiac arrest due to a ventricular arrhythmia and examine its association with patient survival.DesignPropensity matched analysis.Setting2000-18 data from 497 hospitals participating in the American Heart Association’s Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry.ParticipantsAdults aged 18 and older with an index in-hospital cardiac arrest due to an initial shockable rhythm treated with defibrillation.InterventionsAdministration of epinephrine before first defibrillation.Main outcome measuresSurvival to discharge; favorable neurological survival, defined as survival to discharge with none, mild, or moderate neurological disability measured using cerebral performance category scores; and survival after acute resuscitation (that is, return of spontaneous circulation for >20 minutes). A time dependent, propensity matched analysis was performed to adjust for confounding due to indication and evaluate the independent association of epinephrine before defibrillation with study outcomes.ResultsAmong 34 820 patients with an initial shockable rhythm, 7054 (20.3%) were treated with epinephrine before defibrillation, contrary to current guidelines. In comparison with participants treated with defibrillation first, participants receiving epinephrine first were less likely to have a history of myocardial infarction or heart failure, but more likely to have renal failure, sepsis, respiratory insufficiency, and receive mechanical ventilation before in-hospital cardiac arrest (standardized differences >10% for all). Treatment with epinephrine before defibrillation was strongly associated with delayed defibrillation (median 4 minutes v 0 minutes). In propensity matched analysis (6569 matched pairs), epinephrine before defibrillation was associated with lower odds of survival to discharge (22.4% v 29.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.69; 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.74; P<0.001), favorable neurological survival (15.8% v 21.6%; 0.68; 0.61 to 0.76; P<0.001) and survival after acute resuscitation (61.7% v 69.5%; 0.73; 0.67 to 0.79; P<0.001). The above findings were consistent in a range of sensitivity analyses, including matching according to defibrillation time.ConclusionsContrary to current guidelines that prioritize immediate defibrillation for in-hospital cardiac arrest due to a shockable rhythm, one in five patients are treated with epinephrine before defibrillation. Use of epinephrine before defibrillation was associated with worse survival outcomes.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate whether patients who experience cardiac arrest in hospital receive epinephrine (adrenaline) within the two minutes after the first defibrillation (contrary to American Heart Association guidelines) and to evaluate the association between early administration of epinephrine and outcomes in this population.DesignProspective observational cohort study.SettingAnalysis of data from the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry, which includes data from more than 300 hospitals in the United States.ParticipantsAdults in hospital who experienced cardiac arrest with an initial shockable rhythm, including patients who had a first defibrillation within two minutes of the cardiac arrest and who remained in a shockable rhythm after defibrillation.InterventionEpinephrine given within two minutes after the first defibrillation.Main outcome measuresSurvival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation and survival to hospital discharge with a good functional outcome. A propensity score was calculated for the receipt of epinephrine within two minutes after the first defibrillation, based on multiple characteristics of patients, events, and hospitals. Patients who received epinephrine at either zero, one, or two minutes after the first defibrillation were then matched on the propensity score with patients who were "at risk" of receiving epinephrine within the same minute but who did not receive it.Results2978 patients were matched on the propensity score, and the groups were well balanced. 1510 (51%) patients received epinephrine within two minutes after the first defibrillation, which is contrary to current American Heart Association guidelines. Epinephrine given within the first two minutes after the first defibrillation was associated with decreased odds of survival in the propensity score matched analysis (odds ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.82; P<0.001). Early epinephrine administration was also associated with a decreased odds of return of spontaneous circulation (0.71, 0.60 to 0.83; P<0.001) and good functional outcome (0.69, 0.58 to 0.83; P<0.001).ConclusionHalf of patients with a persistent shockable rhythm received epinephrine within two minutes after the first defibrillation, contrary to current American Heart Association guidelines. The receipt of epinephrine within two minutes after the first defibrillation was associated with decreased odds of survival to hospital discharge as well as decreased odds of return of spontaneous circulation and survival to hospital discharge with a good functional outcome.

Project description:ImportanceAdministration of epinephrine has been found to be associated with an increased chance of survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), but the optimal timing of administration has not been fully investigated.ObjectiveTo ascertain whether there is an association between timing of epinephrine administration and patient outcomes after OHCA.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study included adults 18 years or older with OHCA treated by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel from April 1, 2011, to June 30, 2015. Initial cardiac rhythm was stratified as either initially shockable (ventricular defibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia) or nonshockable (pulseless electrical activity or asystole). Eligible individuals were identified from among publicly available, deidentified patient-level data from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Cardiac Epidemiologic Registry, a prospective registry of adults with EMS-treated, nontraumatic OHCA with 10 sites in North America. Data analysis was conducted from May 2019 to April 2021.ExposuresInterval between advanced life support (ALS)-trained EMS personnel arrival at the scene and the first prehospital intravenous or intraosseous administration of epinephrine.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. In each cohort of initial cardiac rhythms, patients who received epinephrine at any period (minutes) after EMS arrival at the scene were matched with patients who were at risk of receiving epinephrine within the same period using time-dependent propensity scores calculated from patient demographic characteristics, arrest characteristics, and EMS interventions.ResultsOf 41 079 eligible individuals (median [interquartile range] age, 67 [55-79] years), 26 579 (64.7%) were men. A total of 10 088 individuals (24.6%) initially had shockable cardiac rhythms, and 30 991 (75.4%) had nonshockable rhythms. Those who received epinephrine included 8223 patients (81.5%) with shockable cardiac rhythms and 27 901 (90.0%) with nonshockable rhythms. In the shockable cardiac rhythm cohort, the risk ratio (RR) for receipt of epinephrine with survival to hospital discharge was highest between 0 and 5 minutes after EMS arrival (1.12; 95% CI, 0.99-1.26) across the categorized timing of the administration of epinephrine by 5-minute intervals after EMS arrival; however, that finding was not statistically significant. Treating the timing of epinephrine administration as a continuous variable, the RR for survival to hospital discharge decreased 5.5% (95% CI, 3.4%-7.5%; P < .001 for the interaction between epinephrine administration and time to matching) per minute after EMS arrival. In the nonshockable cardiac rhythm cohort, the RR for the association of receipt of epinephrine with survival to hospital discharge was the highest between 0 and 5 minutes (1.28; 95% CI, 0.95-1.72), although not statistically significant, and decreased 4.4% (95% CI, 0.8%-7.9%; P for interaction = .02) per minute after EMS arrival.Conclusions and relevanceAmong adults with OHCA, survival to hospital discharge differed across the timing of epinephrine administration and decreased with delayed administration for both shockable and nonshockable rhythms.

Project description:For patients with in-hospital cardiac arrests attributable to nonshockable rhythms, delays in epinephrine administration beyond 5 minutes is associated with worse survival. However, the extent of hospital variation in delayed epinephrine administration and its effect on hospital-level outcomes is unknown.Within Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation, we identified 103?932 adult patients (?18 years) at 548 hospitals with an in-hospital cardiac arrest attributable to a nonshockable rhythm who received at least 1 dose of epinephrine between 2000 and 2014. We constructed 2-level hierarchical regression models to quantify hospital variation in rates of delayed epinephrine administration (>5 minutes) and its association with hospital rates of survival to discharge and survival with functional recovery.Overall, 13?213 (12.7%) patients had delays to epinephrine, and this rate varied markedly across hospitals (range, 0%-53.8%). The odds of delay in epinephrine administration were 58% higher at 1 randomly selected hospital in comparison with a similar patient at another randomly selected hospital (median odds ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.51-1.64). The median risk-standardized survival rate was 12.0% (range, 5.4%-31.9%), and the risk-standardized survival with functional recovery was 7.4% (range, 0.9%-30.8%). There was an inverse correlation between a hospital's rate of delayed epinephrine administration and its risk-standardized rate of survival to discharge (?=-0.22, P<0.0001) and survival with functional recovery (?=-0.14, P=0.001). In comparison with a median survival rate of 12.9% (interquartile range, 11.1%-15.4%) at hospitals in the lowest quartile of epinephrine delay, risk-standardized survival was 16% lower at hospitals in the quartile with the highest rate of epinephrine delays (10.8%; interquartile range, 9.7%-12.7%).Delays in epinephrine administration following in-hospital cardiac arrest are common and variy across hospitals. Hospitals with high rates of delayed epinephrine administration had lower rates of overall survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest attributable to nonshockable rhythm. Further studies are needed to determine whether improving hospital performance on time to epinephrine administration, especially at hospitals with poor performance on this metric, will lead to improved outcomes.

Project description:IMPORTANCE:Delay in administration of the first epinephrine dose is associated with decreased survival among adults after in-hospital, nonshockable cardiac arrest. Whether this association is true in the pediatric in-hospital cardiac arrest population remains unknown. OBJECTIVE:To determine whether time to first epinephrine dose is associated with outcomes in pediatric in-hospital cardiac arrest. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:We performed an analysis of data from the Get With the Guidelines-Resuscitation registry. We included US pediatric patients (age <18 years) with an in-hospital cardiac arrest and an initial nonshockable rhythm who received at least 1 dose of epinephrine. A total of 1558 patients (median age, 9 months [interquartile range [IQR], 13 days-5 years]) were included in the final cohort. EXPOSURE:Time to epinephrine, defined as time in minutes from recognition of loss of pulse to the first dose of epinephrine. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival at 24 hours, and neurological outcome. A favorable neurological outcome was defined as a score of 1 to 2 on the Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category scale. RESULTS:Among the 1558 patients, 487 (31.3%) survived to hospital discharge. The median time to first epinephrine dose was 1 minute (IQR, 0-4; range, 0-20; mean [SD], 2.6 [3.4] minutes). Longer time to epinephrine administration was associated with lower risk of survival to discharge in multivariable analysis (multivariable-adjusted risk ratio [RR] per minute delay, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.93-0.98]). Longer time to epinephrine administration was also associated with decreased risk of ROSC (multivariable-adjusted RR per minute delay, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.96-0.99]), decreased risk of survival at 24 hours (multivariable-adjusted RR per minute delay, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95-0.99]), and decreased risk of survival with favorable neurological outcome (multivariable-adjusted RR per minute delay, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.91-0.99]). Patients with time to epinephrine administration of longer than 5 minutes (233/1558) compared with those with time to epinephrine of 5 minutes or less (1325/1558) had lower risk of in-hospital survival to discharge (21.0% [49/233] vs 33.1% [438/1325]; multivariable-adjusted RR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.60-0.93]; P?=?.01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Among children with in-hospital cardiac arrest with an initial nonshockable rhythm who received epinephrine, delay in administration of epinephrine was associated with decreased chance of survival to hospital discharge, ROSC, 24-hour survival, and survival to hospital discharge with a favorable neurological outcome.

Project description:To investigate the impact of coronary artery disease in a cohort of patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest with non-diagnostic electrocardiogram.From March 2004 to February 2016, 203 consecutive patients resuscitated from in or out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest and non-diagnostic post-resuscitation electrocardiogram (defined as ST segment elevation or pre-sumably new left bundle branch block) who underwent invasive coronary angiogram during hospitalization were included. For purpose of analysis and comparison, patients were classified in two groups: Initial shockable rhythm (ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation; n = 148, 72.9%) and initial non-shockable rhythm (n = 55, 27.1%). Baseline characteristics, coronary angiogram findings including Syntax Score and long-term survival rates were compared.Sudden cardiac arrest was witnessed in 95.2% of cases, 66.7% were out-of-hospital patients and 72.4% were male. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between groups except for higher mean age (68.1 years vs 61 years, P = 0.001) in the non-shockable rhythm group. Overall 5-year mortality of the resuscitated patients was 37.4%. Patients with non-shockable rhythms had higher mortality (60% vs 29.1%, P < 0.001) and a worst neurological status at hospital discharge based on cerebral performance category score (CPC 1-2: 32.7% vs 53.4%, P = 0.02). Although there were no significant differences in global burden of coronary artery disease defined by Syntax Score (mean Syntax Score: 10.2 vs 10.3, P = 0.96) there was a trend towards a higher incidence of acute coronary lesions in patients with shockable rhythm (29.7% vs 16.4%, P = 0.054). There was also a higher need for ad-hoc percutaneous coronary intervention in this group (21.9% vs 9.1%, P = 0.03).Initial shockable group of patients had a trend towards higher incidence of acute coronary lesions and higher need of ad-hoc percutaneous intervention vs non-shockable group.

Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about the effectiveness of surface cooling (SC) and endovascular cooling (EC) on the outcome of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients receiving target temperature management (TTM) according to their initial rhythm.MethodsWe retrospectively analysed data from the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest registry, a multicentre, prospective nationwide database in Japan. For our analysis, OHCA patients aged ≥ 18 years who were treated with TTM between June 2014 and December 2017 were included. The primary outcome was 30-day survival with favourable neurological outcome defined as a Glasgow-Pittsburgh cerebral performance category score of 1 or 2. Cooling methods were divided into the following groups: SC (ice packs, fans, air blankets, and surface gel pads) and EC (endovascular catheters and any dialysis technique). We investigated the efficacy of the two categories of cooling methods in two different patient groups divided according to their initially documented rhythm at the scene (shockable or non-shockable) using multivariable logistic regression analysis and propensity score analysis with inverse probability weighting (IPW).ResultsIn the final analysis, 1082 patients were included. Of these, 513 (47.4%) had an initial shockable rhythm and 569 (52.6%) had an initial non-shockable rhythm. The proportion of patients with favourable neurological outcomes in SC and EC was 59.9% vs. 58.3% (264/441 vs. 42/72), and 11.8% (58/490) vs. 21.5% (17/79) in the initial shockable patients and the initial non-shockable patients, respectively. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, differences between the two cooling methods were not observed among the initial shockable patients (adjusted odd ratio [AOR] 1.51, 95% CI 0.76-3.03), while EC was associated with better neurological outcome among the initial non-shockable patients (AOR 2.21, 95% CI 1.19-4.11). This association was constant in propensity score analysis with IPW (OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.83-2.36; OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.01-3.47 among the initial shockable and non-shockable patients, respectively).ConclusionWe suggested that the use of EC was associated with better neurological outcomes in OHCA patients with initial non-shockable rhythm, but not in those with initial shockable rhythm. A TTM implementation strategy based on initial rhythm may be important.