Dataset Information

A case series: alternative access for refractory shock during cardiac arrest.

ABSTRACT: Background:In patients with iliofemoral arterial disease, transcaval and percutaneous axillary artery access are safe alternatives for delivery of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis. In the setting of cardiac arrest, arterial access is crucial for delivery of mechanical circulatory support devices such as an Impella CP® or cannulation for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECMO). We report the use of transcaval and axillary artery access in three cases of cardiac arrest in which the emergent placement of an Impella CP® (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA) or cannulation for ECMO was instrumental in resuscitation from refractory cardiac arrest. Case summary:The first patient is a 59-year-old woman who developed ventricular fibrillation arrest after percutaneous intervention with emergent placement of a transcaval Impella CP®. In the second case, a 67-year-old man with coronary vasospasm developed cardiac arrest with an axillary artery Impella CP® placed. The third case highlights a 67-year-old man who developed cardiac arrest 1 day after unsuccessful chronic total occlusion repair requiring ECMO cannulation to his axillary artery. All three patients achieved spontaneous circulation after placement of assist devices. Discussion:To our knowledge, a case report of transcaval or percutaneous axillary artery access for Impella CP® during cardiac arrest has not been published. While the long-term prognosis following cardiac arrest is poor, younger patients deserve every chance for survival with rapid cardiopulmonary support by alternative access if necessary. Advanced large bore alternative access techniques should be learned by all interventional operators.

SUBMITTER: Cui CQ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6764545 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A case series: alternative access for refractory shock during cardiac arrest.

Cui Charles Q CQ Cook Bryon S BS Cauchi Matthew P MP Foerst Jason R JR

European heart journal. Case reports 20190704 3

<h4>Background</h4>In patients with iliofemoral arterial disease, transcaval and percutaneous axillary artery access are safe alternatives for delivery of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis. In the setting of cardiac arrest, arterial access is crucial for delivery of mechanical circulatory support devices such as an Impella CP<sup>®</sup> or cannulation for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECMO). We report the use of transcaval and axillary artery acce ...[more]

PMID: 31660478

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundVeno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has increasingly emerged as a feasible treatment to mitigate the progressive multiorgan dysfunction that occurs during cardiac arrest, in support of further resuscitation efforts.ObjectivesBecause the recent systematic review commissioned in 2018 by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Advanced Life Support task did not include studies without a control group, our objective was to conduct a review incorporating these studies to increase available evidence supporting the use of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for cardiac arrest patients, while waiting for high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).MethodsMEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index (Web of Science) were searched for eligible studies from database inception to July 20, 2020. The population of interest was adult patients who had suffered cardiac arrest in any setting. We included all cohort studies with 1 exposure/1 group and descriptive studies (ie, case series studies). We excluded RCTs, non-RCTs, and observational analytic studies with a control group. Outcomes included short-term survival and favorable neurological outcome. Short-term outcomes (ie, hospital discharge, 30 days, and 1 month) were combined into a single category.ResultsOur searches of databases and other sources yielded a total of 4302 citations. Sixty-two eligible studies were included (including a combined total of 3638 participants). Six studies were of in-hospital cardiac arrest, 34 studies were of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and 22 studies included both in-hospital and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Seven hundred and sixty-eight patients of 3352 (23%) had short-term survival; whereas, 602 of 3366 (18%) survived with favorable neurological outcome, defined as a cerebral performance category score of 1 or 2.ConclusionsCurrent clinical evidence is mostly drawn from observational studies, with their potential for confounding selection bias. Although studies without controls cannot supplant case-control or cohort studies, several ECPR studies without a control group show successful resuscitation with impressive results that may provide valuable information to inform a comparison.

Project description:Background: This study assessed the effects of esmolol injection in patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) with refractory ventricular fibrillation (VF)/pulseless ventricular tachycardia (pVT). Methods: From January 2018 to December 2021, 29 patients with IHCA with refractory shockable rhythm were retrospectively reviewed. Esmolol was administered after advanced cardiovascular life support (ACLS)-directed procedures, and outcomes were assessed. Results: Among the 29 cases, the rates of sustained return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), 24-h ROSC, and 72-h ROSC were 79%, 62%, and 59%, respectively. Of those patients, 59% ultimately survived to discharge. Four patients with cardiac insufficiency died. The duration from CA to esmolol infusion was significantly shorter for patients in the survival group (SG) than for patients in the dead group (DG) (12 min, IQR: 8.5-19.5 vs. 23.5 min, IQR: 14.4-27 min; p = 0.013). Of those patients, 76% (22 of 29) started esmolol administration after the second dose of amiodarone. No significant difference was observed in the survival rate between this group and groups administered an esmolol bolus simultaneously or before the second dose of amiodarone (43% vs. 64%, p = 0.403). Of those patients, 31% (9 of 29) were administered an esmolol bolus for defibrillation attempts ≤ 5, while the remaining 69% of patients received an esmolol injection after the fifth defibrillation attempt. No significant differences were observed in the rates of ≥ 24-h ROSC (67% vs. 60%, p = 0.73), ≥ 72-h ROSC (67% vs. 55%, p = 0.56), and survival to hospital discharge (67% vs. 55%, p = 0.56) between the groups administered an esmolol bolus for defibrillation attempts ≤ 5 and defibrillation attempts > 5. Conclusion: IHCA patients with refractory shockable rhythms receiving esmolol bolus exhibited a high chance of sustained ROSC and survival to hospital discharge. Patients with end-stage heart failure tended to have attenuated benefits from beta-blockers. Further large-scale, prospective studies are necessary to determine the effects of esmolol in patients with IHCA with refractory shockable rhythms.

Project description:BackgroundAntiarrhythmic drugs have not proven to significantly improve overall survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest from shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia. How this might be influenced by the route of drug administration is not known.MethodsIn this prespecified analysis of a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial, we compared the differences in survival to hospital discharge in adults with shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who were randomly assigned by emergency medical services personnel to an antiarrhythmic drug versus placebo in the ALPS trial (Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Amiodarone, Lidocaine or Placebo Study), when stratified by the intravenous versus intraosseous route of administration.ResultsOf 3019 randomly assigned patients with a known vascular access site, 2358 received ALPS drugs intravenously and 661 patients by the intraosseous route. Intraosseous and intravenous groups differed in sex, time-to-emergency medical services arrival, and some cardiopulmonary resuscitation characteristics, but were similar in others, including time-to-intravenous/intrasosseous drug receipt. Overall hospital discharge survival was 23%. In comparison with placebo, discharge survival was significantly higher in recipients of intravenous amiodarone (adjusted risk ratio, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.06-1.50]; adjusted absolute survival difference, 5.5% [95% CI, 1.5-9.5]) and intravenous lidocaine (adjusted risk ratio, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.02-1.45]; adjusted absolute survival difference, 4.7% [95% CI, 0.7-8.8]); but not in recipients of intraosseous amiodarone (adjusted risk ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.66-1.32]) or intraosseous lidocaine (adjusted risk ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.74-1.44]). Survival to hospital admission also increased significantly when drugs were given intravenously but not intraosseously, and favored improved neurological outcome at discharge. There were no outcome differences between intravenous and intraosseous placebo, indicating that the access route itself did not demarcate patients with poor prognosis. The study was underpowered to assess intravenous/intraosseous drug interactions, which were not statistically significant.ConclusionsWe found no significant effect modification by drug administration route for amiodarone or lidocaine in comparison with placebo during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. However, point estimates for the effects of both drugs in comparison with placebo were significantly greater for the intravenous than for the intraosseous route across virtually all outcomes and beneficial only for the intravenous route. Given that the study was underpowered to statistically assess interactions, these findings signal the potential importance of the drug administration route during resuscitation that merits further investigation.

Dataset Information

A case series: alternative access for refractory shock during cardiac arrest.

Publications

A case series: alternative access for refractory shock during cardiac arrest.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets