Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Peter J. Kudenchuk is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Peter J. Kudenchuk.


Circulation | 2010

Part 8: Adult Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care

Robert W. Neumar; Charles W. Otto; Mark S. Link; Steven L. Kronick; Michael Shuster; Clifton W. Callaway; Peter J. Kudenchuk; Joseph P. Ornato; Bryan McNally; Scott M. Silvers; Rod Passman; Roger D. White; Erik P. Hess; Wanchun Tang; Daniel P. Davis; Elizabeth Sinz; Laurie J. Morrison

The goal of therapy for bradycardia or tachycardia is to rapidly identify and treat patients who are hemodynamically unstable or symptomatic due to the arrhythmia. Drugs or, when appropriate, pacing may be used to control unstable or symptomatic bradycardia. Cardioversion or drugs or both may be used to control unstable or symptomatic tachycardia. ACLS providers should closely monitor stable patients pending expert consultation and should be prepared to aggressively treat those with evidence of decompensation.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 1999

Amiodarone for resuscitation after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation.

Peter J. Kudenchuk; Leonard A. Cobb; Michael K. Copass; Richard O. Cummins; Alidene Doherty; Carol Fahrenbruch; Alfred P. Hallstrom; William A. Murray; Michele Olsufka; Thomas Walsh

Background Whether antiarrhythmic drugs improve the rate of successful resuscitation after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest has not been determined in randomized clinical trials. Methods We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of intravenous amiodarone in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Patients who had cardiac arrest with ventricular fibrillation (or pulseless ventricular tachycardia) and who had not been resuscitated after receiving three or more precordial shocks were randomly assigned to receive 300 mg of intravenous amiodarone (246 patients) or placebo (258 patients). Results The treatment groups had similar clinical profiles. There was no significant difference between the amiodarone and placebo groups in the mean (±SD) duration of the resuscitation attempt (42±16 and 43±16 minutes, respectively), the number of shocks delivered (4±3 and 6±5), or the proportion of patients who required additional antiarrhythmic drugs after the administration of the study drug (66...


Circulation | 2010

Part 1: Executive Summary 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care

John M. Field; Mary Fran Hazinski; Michael R. Sayre; Leon Chameides; Stephen M. Schexnayder; Robin Hemphill; Ricardo A. Samson; John Kattwinkel; Robert A. Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Diana M. Cave; Edward C. Jauch; Peter J. Kudenchuk; Robert W. Neumar; Mary Ann Peberdy; Jeffrey M. Perlman; Elizabeth Sinz; Andrew H. Travers; Marc D. Berg; John E. Billi; Brian Eigel; Robert W. Hickey; Monica E. Kleinman; Mark S. Link; Laurie J. Morrison; Robert E. O'Connor; Michael Shuster; Clifton W. Callaway; Brett Cucchiara; Jeffrey D. Ferguson

The goal of therapy for bradycardia or tachycardia is to rapidly identify and treat patients who are hemodynamically unstable or symptomatic due to the arrhythmia. Drugs or, when appropriate, pacing may be used to control unstable or symptomatic bradycardia. Cardioversion or drugs or both may be used to control unstable or symptomatic tachycardia. ACLS providers should closely monitor stable patients pending expert consultation and should be prepared to aggressively treat those with evidence of decompensation.


Circulation | 2009

Chest Compression Fraction Determines Survival in Patients With Out-of-Hospital Ventricular Fibrillation

Jim Christenson; Douglas L. Andrusiek; Siobhan Everson-Stewart; Peter J. Kudenchuk; David Hostler; Judy Powell; Clifton W. Callaway; Dan Bishop; Christian Vaillancourt; Daniel P. Davis; Tom P. Aufderheide; Ahamed H. Idris; John Stouffer; Ian G. Stiell; Robert A. Berg

Background— Quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation contributes to cardiac arrest survival. The proportion of time in which chest compressions are performed in each minute of cardiopulmonary resuscitation is an important modifiable aspect of quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation. We sought to estimate the effect of an increasing proportion of time spent performing chest compressions during cardiac arrest on survival to hospital discharge in patients with out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia. Methods and Results— This is a prospective observational cohort study of adult patients from the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Cardiac Arrest Epistry with confirmed ventricular fibrillation or ventricular tachycardia, no defibrillation before emergency medical services arrival, electronically recorded cardiopulmonary resuscitation before the first shock, and a confirmed outcome. Patients were followed up to discharge from the hospital or death. Of the 506 cases, the mean age was 64 years, 80% were male, 71% were witnessed by a bystander, 51% received bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 34% occurred in a public location, and 23% survived. After adjustment for age, gender, location, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, bystander witness status, and response time, the odds ratios of surviving to hospital discharge in the 2 highest categories of chest compression fraction compared with the reference category were 3.01 (95% confidence interval 1.37 to 6.58) and 2.33 (95% confidence interval 0.96 to 5.63). The estimated adjusted linear effect on odds ratio of survival for a 10% change in chest compression fraction was 1.11 (95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.21). Conclusions— An increased chest compression fraction is independently predictive of better survival in patients who experience a prehospital ventricular fibrillation/tachycardia cardiac arrest.


Circulation | 2007

Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial of Prehospital Induction of Mild Hypothermia in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients With a Rapid Infusion of 4°C Normal Saline

Francis Kim; Michele Olsufka; W. T. Longstreth; Charles Maynard; David Carlbom; Steven Deem; Peter J. Kudenchuk; Michael K. Copass; Leonard A. Cobb

Background— Although delayed hospital cooling has been demonstrated to improve outcome after cardiac arrest, in-field cooling started immediately after the return of spontaneous circulation may be more beneficial. The aims of the present pilot study were to assess the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of in-field cooling. Methods and Results— We determined the effect on esophageal temperature, before hospital arrival, of infusing up to 2 L of 4°C normal saline as soon as possible after resuscitation from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. A total of 125 such patients were randomized to receive standard care with or without intravenous cooling. Of the 63 patients randomized to cooling, 49 (78%) received an infusion of 500 to 2000 mL of 4°C normal saline before hospital arrival. These 63 patients experienced a mean temperature decrease of 1.24±1°C with a hospital arrival temperature of 34.7°C, whereas the 62 patients not randomized to cooling experienced a mean temperature increase of 0.10±0.94°C (P<0.0001) with a hospital arrival temperature of 35.7°C. In-field cooling was not associated with adverse consequences in terms of blood pressure, heart rate, arterial oxygenation, evidence for pulmonary edema on initial chest x-ray, or rearrest. Secondary end points of awakening and discharged alive from hospital trended toward improvement in ventricular fibrillation patients randomized to in-field cooling. Conclusions— These pilot data suggest that infusion of up to 2 L of 4°C normal saline in the field is feasible, safe, and effective in lowering temperature. We propose that the effect of this cooling method on neurological outcome after cardiac arrest be studied in larger numbers of patients, especially those whose initial rhythm is ventricular fibrillation.


JAMA | 2014

Effect of prehospital induction of mild hypothermia on survival and neurological status among adults with cardiac arrest: a randomized clinical trial.

Francis Kim; Graham Nichol; Charles Maynard; Al Hallstrom; Peter J. Kudenchuk; Thomas D. Rea; Michael K. Copass; David Carlbom; Steven Deem; W. T. Longstreth; Michele Olsufka; Leonard A. Cobb

IMPORTANCE Hospital cooling improves outcome after cardiac arrest, but prehospital cooling immediately after return of spontaneous circulation may result in better outcomes. OBJECTIVE To determine whether prehospital cooling improves outcomes after resuscitation from cardiac arrest in patients with ventricular fibrillation (VF) and without VF. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A randomized clinical trial that assigned adults with prehospital cardiac arrest to standard care with or without prehospital cooling, accomplished by infusing up to 2 L of 4°C normal saline as soon as possible following return of spontaneous circulation. Adults in King County, Washington, with prehospital cardiac arrest and resuscitated by paramedics were eligible and 1359 patients (583 with VF and 776 without VF) were randomized between December 15, 2007, and December 7, 2012. Patient follow-up was completed by May 1, 2013. Nearly all of the patients resuscitated from VF and admitted to the hospital received hospital cooling regardless of their randomization. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomes were survival to hospital discharge and neurological status at discharge. RESULTS The intervention decreased mean core temperature by 1.20°C (95% CI, -1.33°C to -1.07°C) in patients with VF and by 1.30°C (95% CI, -1.40°C to -1.20°C) in patients without VF by hospital arrival and reduced the time to achieve a temperature of less than 34°C by about 1 hour compared with the control group. However, survival to hospital discharge was similar among the intervention and control groups among patients with VF (62.7% [95% CI, 57.0%-68.0%] vs 64.3% [95% CI, 58.6%-69.5%], respectively; P = .69) and among patients without VF (19.2% [95% CI, 15.6%-23.4%] vs 16.3% [95% CI, 12.9%-20.4%], respectively; P = .30). The intervention was also not associated with improved neurological status of full recovery or mild impairment at discharge for either patients with VF (57.5% [95% CI, 51.8%-63.1%] of cases had full recovery or mild impairment vs 61.9% [95% CI, 56.2%-67.2%] of controls; P = .69) or those without VF (14.4% [95% CI, 11.3%-18.2%] of cases vs 13.4% [95% CI,10.4%-17.2%] of controls; P = .30). Overall, the intervention group experienced rearrest in the field more than the control group (26% [95% CI, 22%-29%] vs 21% [95% CI, 18%-24%], respectively; P = .008), as well as increased diuretic use and pulmonary edema on first chest x-ray, which resolved within 24 hours after admission. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE Although use of prehospital cooling reduced core temperature by hospital arrival and reduced the time to reach a temperature of 34°C, it did not improve survival or neurological status among patients resuscitated from prehospital VF or those without VF. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00391469.


Circulation | 2015

Part 7: Adult Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care

Mark S. Link; Lauren C. Berkow; Peter J. Kudenchuk; Henry R. Halperin; Erik P. Hess; Vivek K. Moitra; Robert W. Neumar; Brian J. O'Neil; James H. Paxton; Scott M. Silvers; Roger D. White; Demetris Yannopoulos; Michael W. Donnino

Basic life support (BLS), advanced cardiovascular life support (ACLS), and post–cardiac arrest care are labels of convenience that each describe a set of skills and knowledge that are applied sequentially during the treatment of patients who have a cardiac arrest. There is overlap as each stage of care progresses to the next, but generally ACLS comprises the level of care between BLS and post–cardiac arrest care. ACLS training is recommended for advanced providers of both prehospital and in-hospital medical care. In the past, much of the data regarding resuscitation was gathered from out-of-hospital arrests, but in recent years, data have also been collected from in-hospital arrests, allowing for a comparison of cardiac arrest and resuscitation in these 2 settings. While there are many similarities, there are also some differences between in- and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest etiology, which may lead to changes in recommended resuscitation treatment or in sequencing of care. The consideration of steroid administration for in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) versus out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is one such example discussed in this Part. The recommendations in this 2015 American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiovascular Care (ECC) are based on an extensive evidence review process that was begun by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) after the publication of the ILCOR 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations 1 and was completed in February 2015.2 In this in-depth evidence review process, the ILCOR task forces examined topics and then generated prioritized lists of questions for systematic review. Questions were first formulated in PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) format,3 and then a search strategy and inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined and a search for relevant articles was performed. The evidence was evaluated by using …


Circulation | 2010

Part 1: Executive Summary

John M. Field; Mary Fran Hazinski; Michael R. Sayre; Leon Chameides; Stephen M. Schexnayder; Robin Hemphill; Ricardo A. Samson; John Kattwinkel; Robert A. Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Diana M. Cave; Edward C. Jauch; Peter J. Kudenchuk; Robert W. Neumar; Mary Ann Peberdy; Jeffrey M. Perlman; Elizabeth Sinz; Andrew H. Travers; Marc D. Berg; John E. Billi; Brian Eigel; Robert W. Hickey; Monica E. Kleinman; Mark S. Link; Laurie J. Morrison; Robert E. O'Connor; Michael Shuster; Clifton W. Callaway; Brett Cucchiara; Jeffrey D. Ferguson

Mary Fran Hazinski, Co-Chair*; Jerry P. Nolan, Co-Chair*; John E. Billi; Bernd W. Böttiger; Leo Bossaert; Allan R. de Caen; Charles D. Deakin; Saul Drajer; Brian Eigel; Robert W. Hickey; Ian Jacobs; Monica E. Kleinman; Walter Kloeck; Rudolph W. Koster; Swee Han Lim; Mary E. Mancini; William H. Montgomery; Peter T. Morley; Laurie J. Morrison; Vinay M. Nadkarni; Robert E. O’Connor; Kazuo Okada; Jeffrey M. Perlman; Michael R. Sayre; Michael Shuster; Jasmeet Soar; Kjetil Sunde; Andrew H. Travers; Jonathan Wyllie; David Zideman


Circulation | 1993

Implantable transvenous cardioverter-defibrillators.

Gust H. Bardy; B Hofer; George Johnson; Peter J. Kudenchuk; Jeanne E. Poole; G. L. Dolack; Marye J. Gleva; R Mitchell; D Kelso

BACKGROUND Implantable transvenous cardioverter-defibrillators offer a significant opportunity to decrease procedural morbidity and medical costs in the care of patients with life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias who otherwise would have required a sternotomy or thoracotomy for device insertion. The purpose of this study was to examine prospectively the safety, efficacy, and limitations associated with the use of a transvenously implanted, tiered-therapy cardioverter-defibrillator with antitachycardia pacing function in a consecutive population of 84 ventricular fibrillation (VF) and sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) survivors. METHODS AND RESULTS The index arrhythmia promoting transvenous cardioverter-defibrillator implantation was VF in 41 patients, VT in 27, and both VF and VT in 16. In each patient, transvenous defibrillation via a coronary sinus, a right ventricular, a superior vena caval, and/or a subcutaneous chest patch lead system was attempted. The pulsing methods used include two-electrode single-pathway pulsing or three-electrode dual-pathway simultaneous or sequential pulsing. A transvenous cardioverter-defibrillator was inserted if the defibrillation threshold (DFT) was < or = 20 J. Successful implantation of a transvenous cardioverter-defibrillator was possible in 80 of 84 (95%) patients. The mean implant DFT was 10.9 +/- 4.8 J. After cardioverter-defibrillator implantation, all patients were extubated in the operating room and sent to a standard telemetry ward for monitoring. No patient suffered a postoperative pulmonary complication or perioperative flurry of cardiac arrhythmias. Postoperative complications included lead dislodgments in eight, transient long thoracic nerve injury in one, asymptomatic left subclavian vein occlusion in two, asymptomatic small pericardial effusion in one, subcutaneous patch pocket hematomas in four, pulse generator pocket infection in one, and lead fracture in one. As experience was gained with the procedure, it was routine to discharge patients 3 days after surgery. The mean hospital stay was 6.0 +/- 2.4 days. Upon discharge, all patients returned to their prehospital activities including those with complications except for the patient with a pocket infection, who required intravenous antibiotic therapy. Patient survival using an intention-to-treat analysis was 98% over an 11 +/- 7-month follow-up period. During this time period, 31 of the 80 patients (39%) with transvenous lead systems were successfully treated by their device for sustained VT or VF. Antitachycardia pacing was used in 424 episodes of monomorphic VT and was successful in 371 (88%). All episodes of VF were aborted by the device. Antiarrhythmic drugs were used after device implantation in only eight of 80 patients (10%). CONCLUSIONS Transvenous cardioverter-defibrillator implantation is practical in most candidates. Implant DFTs are usually low, surgical morbidity and postoperative complications are modest, therapy of VT and VF is efficient, and survival is excellent.


Journal of the American College of Cardiology | 1990

Myocardial infarction triage and intervention project—Phase I: Patient characteristics and feasibility of prehospital initiation of thrombolytic therapy☆

W. Douglas Weaver; Mickey S. Eisenberg; Jenny S. Martin; Paul E. Litwin; Sharon M. Shaeffer; Mary T. Ho; Peter J. Kudenchuk; Alfred P. Hallstrom; Manuel D. Cerqueira; Michael K. Copass; J. Ward Kennedy; Leonard A. Cobb; James L. Ritchie

Prehospital initiation of thrombolytic therapy by paramedics, if both feasible and safe, could considerably reduce the time to treatment and possibly decrease the extent of myocardial necrosis in patients with acute coronary thrombosis. Preliminary to a trial of such a treatment strategy, paramedics evaluated the characteristics of 2,472 patients with chest pain of presumed cardiac origin; 677 (27%) had suitable clinical findings consistent with possible acute myocardial infarction and no apparent risk of complication for potential thrombolytic drug treatment. Electrocardiograms (ECGs) of 522 of the 677 patients were transmitted by cellular telephone to a base station physician; 107 (21%) of the tracings showed evidence of ST segment elevation. Of the total 2,472 patients, 453 developed evidence of acute myocardial infarction in the hospital; 163 (36%) of the 453 had met the strict prehospital screening history and examination criteria and 105 (23.9%) showed ST elevation on the ECG and, thus, would have been suitable candidates for prehospital thrombolytic treatment if it had been available. The average time from the onset of chest pain to prehospital diagnosis was 72 +/- 52 min (median 52); this was 73 +/- 44 min (median 62) earlier than the time when thrombolytic treatment was later started in the hospital. Paramedic selection of appropriate patients for potential prehospital initiation of thrombolytic treatment is feasible with use of a directed checklist and cellular-transmitted ECG and saves time. This strategy may reduce the extent and complications of infarction compared with results that can be achieved in a hospital setting.

Collaboration


Dive into the Peter J. Kudenchuk's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Thomas D. Rea

University of Washington

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Gust H. Bardy

University of Washington

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Tom P. Aufderheide

Medical College of Wisconsin

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Graham Nichol

University of Washington

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Clifton W. Callaway

Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ahamed H. Idris

University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge