James Christenson

What is the Role of Chest Compression Depth during Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Resuscitation?

Background:The 2010 international guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation recently recommended an increase in the minimum compression depth from 38 to 50 mm, although there are limited human data to support this. We sought to study patterns of cardiopulmonary resuscitation compression depth and their associations with patient outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases treated by the 2005 guideline standards. Design:Prospective cohort. Setting:Seven U.S. and Canadian urban regions. Patients:We studied emergency medical services treated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Epistry–Cardiac Arrest for whom electronic cardiopulmonary resuscitation compression depth data were available, from May 2006 to June 2009. Measurements:We calculated anterior chest wall depression in millimeters and the period of active cardiopulmonary resuscitation (chest compression fraction) for each minute of cardiopulmonary resuscitation. We controlled for covariates including compression rate and calculated adjusted odds ratios for any return of spontaneous circulation, 1-day survival, and hospital discharge. Main Results:We included 1029 adult patients from seven U.S. and Canadian cities with the following characteristics: Mean age 68 yrs; male 62%; bystander witnessed 40%; bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation 37%; initial rhythms: Ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia 24%, pulseless electrical activity 16%, asystole 48%, other nonshockable 12%; outcomes: Return of spontaneous circulation 26%, 1-day survival 18%, discharge 5%. For all patients, median compression rate was 106 per minute, median compression fraction 0.65, and median compression depth 37.3 mm with 52.8% of cases having depth <38 mm and 91.6% having depth <50 mm. We found an inverse association between depth and compression rate ( p < .001). Adjusted odds ratios for all depth measures (mean values, categories, and range) showed strong trends toward better outcomes with increased depth for all three survival measures. Conclusions:We found suboptimal compression depth in half of patients by 2005 guideline standards and almost all by 2010 standards as well as an inverse association between compression depth and rate. We found a strong association between survival outcomes and increased compression depth but no clear evidence to support or refute the 2010 recommendations of >50 mm. Although compression depth is an important component of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and should be measured routinely, the most effective depth is currently unknown. (Crit Care Med 2012; 40:–1198)

Early versus Later Rhythm Analysis in Patients with Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

BACKGROUNDnIn a departure from the previous strategy of immediate defibrillation, the 2005 resuscitation guidelines from the American Heart Association-International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation suggested that emergency medical service (EMS) personnel could provide 2 minutes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) before the first analysis of cardiac rhythm. We compared the strategy of a brief period of CPR with early analysis of rhythm with the strategy of a longer period of CPR with delayed analysis of rhythm.nnnMETHODSnWe conducted a cluster-randomized trial involving adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest at 10 Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium sites in the United States and Canada. Patients in the early-analysis group were assigned to receive 30 to 60 seconds of EMS-administered CPR and those in the later-analysis group were assigned to receive 180 seconds of CPR, before the initial electrocardiographic analysis. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge with satisfactory functional status (a modified Rankin scale score of ≤3, on a scale of 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability).nnnRESULTSnWe included 9933 patients, of whom 5290 were assigned to early analysis of cardiac rhythm and 4643 to later analysis. A total of 273 patients (5.9%) in the later-analysis group and 310 patients (5.9%) in the early-analysis group met the criteria for the primary outcome, with a cluster-adjusted difference of -0.2 percentage points (95% confidence interval, -1.1 to 0.7; P=0.59). Analyses of the data with adjustment for confounding factors, as well as subgroup analyses, also showed no survival benefit for either study group.nnnCONCLUSIONSnAmong patients who had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, we found no difference in the outcomes with a brief period, as compared with a longer period, of EMS-administered CPR before the first analysis of cardiac rhythm. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ROC PRIMED ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00394706.).

What is the optimal chest compression depth during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation of adult patients?

Background— The 2010 American Heart Association guidelines suggested an increase in cardiopulmonary resuscitation compression depth with a target >50 mm and no upper limit. This target is based on limited evidence, and we sought to determine the optimal compression depth range. Methods and Results— We studied emergency medical services–treated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Prehospital Resuscitation Impedance Valve and Early Versus Delayed Analysis clinical trial and the Epistry-Cardiac Arrest database. We calculated adjusted odds ratios for survival to hospital discharge, 1-day survival, and any return of circulation. We included 9136 adult patients from 9 US and Canadian cities with a mean age of 67.5 years, mean compression depth of 41.9 mm, and a return of circulation of 31.3%, 1-day survival of 22.8%, and survival to hospital discharge of 7.3%. For survival to discharge, the adjusted odds ratios were 1.04 (95% CI, 1.00–1.08) for each 5-mm increment in compression depth, 1.45 (95% CI, 1.20–1.76) for cases within 2005 depth range (>38 mm), and 1.05 (95% CI, 1.03–1.08) for percentage of minutes in depth range (10% change). Covariate-adjusted spline curves revealed that the maximum survival is at a depth of 45.6 mm (15-mm interval with highest survival between 40.3 and 55.3 mm) with no differences between men and women. Conclusions— This large study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients demonstrated that increased cardiopulmonary resuscitation compression depth is strongly associated with better survival. Our adjusted analyses, however, found that maximum survival was in the depth interval of 40.3 to 55.3 mm (peak, 45.6 mm), suggesting that the 2010 American Heart Association cardiopulmonary resuscitation guideline target may be too high. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00394706.

Early coronary angiography and induced hypothermia are associated with survival and functional recovery after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

BACKGROUNDnThe rate and effect of coronary interventions and induced hypothermia after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) are unknown. We measured the association of early (≤24h after arrival) coronary angiography, reperfusion, and induced hypothermia with favorable outcome after OHCA.nnnMETHODSnWe performed a secondary analysis of a multicenter clinical trial (NCT00394706) conducted between 2007 and 2009 in 10 North American regions. Subjects were adults (≥18 years) hospitalized after OHCA with pulses sustained ≥60min. We measured the association of early coronary catheterization, percutaneous coronary intervention, fibrinolysis, and induced hypothermia with survival to hospital discharge with favorable functional status (modified Rankin Score≤3).nnnRESULTSnFrom 16,875 OHCA subjects, 3981 (23.6%) arrived at 151 hospitals with sustained pulses. 1317 (33.1%) survived to hospital discharge, with 1006 (25.3%) favorable outcomes. Rates of early coronary catheterization (19.2%), coronary reperfusion (17.7%) or induced hypothermia (39.3%) varied among hospitals, and were higher in hospitals treating more subjects per year. Odds of survival and favorable outcome increased with hospital volume (per 5 subjects/year OR 1.06; 95%CI: 1.04-1.08 and OR 1.06; 95%CI: 1.04, 1.08, respectively). Survival and favorable outcome were independently associated with early coronary angiography (OR 1.69; 95%CI 1.06-2.70 and OR 1.87; 95%CI 1.15-3.04), coronary reperfusion (OR 1.94; 95%CI 1.34-2.82 and OR 2.14; 95%CI 1.46-3.14), and induced hypothermia (OR 1.36; 95%CI 1.01-1.83 and OR 1.42; 95%CI 1.04-1.94).nnnINTERPRETATIONnEarly coronary intervention and induced hypothermia are associated with favorable outcome and are more frequent in hospitals that treat higher numbers of OHCA subjects per year.

The Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) trial: study design and rationale.

The PAD Trial is a prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical study testing whether volunteer, non-medical responders can improve survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OOH-CA) by using automated external defibrillators (AEDs). These lay volunteers, who have no traditional responsibility to respond to a medical emergency as part of their primary job description, will form part of a comprehensive, integrated community approach to the treatment of OOH-CA. The study is being conducted at 24 field centers in the United States and Canada. Approximately 1000 community units (e.g. apartment or office buildings, gated communities, sports facilities, senior centers, shopping malls, etc.) were randomized to treatment by trained laypersons who will provide either cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) alone or CPR plus use of an AED, while awaiting arrival of the communitys emergency medical services responders. The primary endpoint is the number of OOH-CA victims who survive to hospital discharge. Secondary endpoints include neurological status, health-related quality of life (HRQL), cost, and cost-effectiveness. Data collection will last approximately 15 months and is expected to be completed in September 2003.

BIPHASIC Trial A Randomized Comparison of Fixed Lower Versus Escalating Higher Energy Levels for Defibrillation in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Background— There is little clear evidence as to the optimal energy levels for initial and subsequent shocks in biphasic waveform defibrillation. The present study compared fixed lower- and escalating higher-energy regimens for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Methods and Results— The Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare Fixed Versus Escalating Energy Regimens for Biphasic Waveform Defibrillation (BIPHASIC Trial) was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial of 221 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients who received ≥1 shock given by biphasic automated external defibrillator devices that were randomly programmed to provide, blindly, fixed lower-energy (150-150-150 J) or escalating higher-energy (200-300-360 J) regimens. Patient mean age was 66.0 years; 79.6% were male. The cardiac arrest was witnessed in 63.8%; a bystander performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation in 23.5%; and initial rhythm was ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia in 92.3%. The fixed lower- and escalating higher-energy regimen cases were similar for the 106 multishock patients and for all 221 patients. In the primary analysis in multishock patients, conversion rates differed significantly (fixed lower, 24.7%, versus escalating higher, 36.6%; P=0.035; absolute difference, 11.9%; 95% CI, 1.2 to 24.4). Ventricular fibrillation termination rates also were significantly different between groups (71.2% versus 82.5%; P=0.027; absolute difference, 11.3%; 95% CI, 1.6 to 20.9). For the secondary analysis of first shock success, conversion rates were similar between the fixed lower and escalating higher study groups (38.4% versus 36.7%; P=0.92), as were ventricular fibrillation termination rates (86.8% versus 88.8%; P=0.81). There were no distinguishable differences between regimens for survival outcomes or adverse effects. Conclusions— This is the first randomized trial to compare fixed lower and escalating higher biphasic energy regimens in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, and it demonstrated higher rates of ventricular fibrillation conversion and termination with an escalating higher-energy regimen for patients requiring multiple shocks. These results suggest that patients in ventricular fibrillation benefit from higher biphasic energy levels if multiple defibrillation shocks are required.

Increased survival after EMS witnessed cardiac arrest. Observations from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) Epistry-Cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUNDnOut of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is common and lethal. It has been suggested that OHCA witnessed by EMS providers is a predictor of survival because advanced help is immediately available. We examined EMS witnessed OHCA from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) to determine the effect of EMS witnessed vs. bystander witnessed and unwitnessed OHCA.nnnMETHODSnData were analyzed from a prospective, population-based cohort study in 10 U.S. and Canadian ROC sites. Individuals with non-traumatic OHCA treated 04/01/06-03/31/07 by EMS providers with defibrillation or chest compressions were included. Cases were grouped into EMS-witnessed, bystander witnessed, and unwitnessed and further stratified for bystander CPR. Multiple logistic regressions evaluated the odds ratio (OR) for survival to discharge relative to the EMS-witnessed group after adjusting for age, sex, public/private location of collapse, ROC site, and initial ECG rhythm. Of 9991 OHCA, 1022 (10.2%) of EMS-witnessed, 3369 (33.7%) bystander witnessed, and 5600 (56.1%) unwitnessed.nnnRESULTSnThe most common initial rhythm in the EMS-witnessed group was PEA which was higher than in the bystander- and unwitnessed groups (p<0.001). The adjusted OR (95% CI) of survival compared to the EMS-witnessed group was 0.41, (0.36, 0.46) in bystander witnessed with bystander CPR, 0.37 (0.33, 0.43) in bystander witnessed without bystander CPR, 0.17 (0.14, 0.20) in unwitnessed with bystander CPR and 0.21 (0.18, 0.24) in unwitnessed cases without bystander CPR.nnnCONCLUSIONSnImmediate application of prehospital care for OHCA may improve survival. Efforts should be made to educate patients to access 9-1-1 for prodromal symptoms.

A quantitative analysis of out-of-hospital pediatric and adolescent resuscitation quality – A report from the ROC epistry-cardiac arrest☆

AIMnHigh-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) may improve survival. The quality of CPR performed during pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (p-OHCA) is largely unknown. The main objective of this study was to describe the quality of CPR performed during p-OHCA resuscitation attempts.nnnMETHODSnProspective observational multi-center cohort study of p-OHCA patients ≥ 1 and < 19 years of age registered in the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) Epistry database. The primary outcome was an a priori composite variable of compliance with American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines for both chest compression (CC) rate and CC fraction (CCF). Event compliance was defined as a case with 60% or more of its minute epochs compliant with AHA targets (rate 100-120 min(-1); depth ≥ 38 mm; and CCF ≥ 0.80). In a secondary analysis, multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between guideline compliance and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC).nnnRESULTSnBetween December 2005 and December 2012, 2564 pediatric events were treated by EMS providers, 390 of which were included in the final cohort. Of these events, 22% achieved AHA compliance for both rate and CCF, 36% for rate alone, 53% for CCF alone, and 58% for depth alone. Over time, there was a significant increase in CCF (p < 0.001) and depth (p = 0.03). After controlling for potential confounders, there was no significant association between AHA guideline compliance and ROSC.nnnCONCLUSIONSnIn this multi-center study, we have established that there are opportunities for professional rescuers to improve prehospital CPR quality. Encouragingly, CCF and depth both increased significantly over time.

A Geospatial Assessment of Transport Distance and Survival to Discharge In Out Of Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients: Implications for Resuscitation Centers

OBJECTIVESnNational leaders have suggested that patients with an out of hospital cardiac arrest (OOHCA) may benefit from transport to specialized hospitals. We sought to assess the survival of OOHCA patients by transport distance and hospital proximity.nnnMETHODSnProspective, cohort study of OOHCA patients in 11 Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) sites across North America. Transport distance and hospital proximity was calculated using weighted centroid of census tract location by Geographic Information Systems (GIS). Patients were stratified into quartiles based on transport distance to the receiving hospital calculated via GIS. Descriptive statistics were used to describe characteristics by transport distance and to compare proximity to other hospitals. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the impact of transport distance on survival.nnnRESULTSn26,628 patients were identified, 7540 (28%) were transported by EMS and included in the final analysis. The median transport time was 6.3 min (IQR 5.4); the median transport distance being 2.4 miles (3.9 km). Most patients were taken to the closest hospital (71.7%; N=5412). However, unadjusted survival to discharge was lower for those taken to the closest compared to further hospitals (12.1% vs. 16.5%) despite similar patient characteristics. Transport distance was not associated with survival on logistic analysis (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.99-1.01).nnnCONCLUSIONSnSurvival to discharge was higher in OOHCA patients taken to hospitals located further than the closest hospital while transport distance was not associated with survival. This suggests that longer transport distance/time might not adversely affect outcome. Further studies are needed to inform policy decisions regarding best destination post-cardiac arrest.

Aminophylline in bradyasystolic cardiac arrest: a randomised placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUNDnEndogenous adenosine might cause or perpetuate bradyasystole. Our aim was to determine whether aminophylline, an adenosine antagonist, increases the rate of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.nnnMETHODSnIn a double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 971 patients older than 16 years with asystole or pulseless electrical activity at fewer than 60 beats per minute, and who were unresponsive to initial treatment with epinephrine and atropine, to receive intravenous aminophylline (250 mg, and an additional 250 mg if necessary) (n=486) or placebo (n=485). The patients were enrolled between January, 2001 and September, 2003, from 1886 people who had had cardiac arrests. Standard resuscitation measures were used for at least 10 mins after the study drug was administered. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with the ClinicalTrials.gov registry with the number NCT00312273.nnnFINDINGSnBaseline characteristics and survival predictors were similar in both groups. The median time from the arrival of the advanced life-support paramedic team to study drug administration was 13 min. The proportion of patients who had an ROSC was 24.5% in the aminophylline group and 23.7% in the placebo group (difference 0.8%; 95% CI -4.6% to 6.2%; p=0.778). The proportion of patients with non-sinus tachyarrhythmias after study drug administration was 34.6% in the aminophylline group and 26.2% in the placebo group (p=0.004). Survival to hospital admission and survival to hospital discharge were not significantly different between the groups. A multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no evidence of a significant subgroup or interactive effect from aminophylline.nnnINTERPRETATIONnAlthough aminophylline increases non-sinus tachyarrhythmias, we noted no evidence that it significantly increases the proportion of patients who achieve ROSC after bradyasystolic cardiac arrest.