Search

Background: Recent randomized controlled trials did not show benefit of early/immediate coronary angiography (CAG) over a delayed/selective strategy in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and no ST-segment elevation. However, whether selected subgroups, specifically those with a high pretest probability of coronary artery disease may benefit from early CAG remains unclear., Methods: We included all randomized controlled trials that compared a strategy of early/immediate versus delayed/selective CAG in OHCA patients and no ST elevation and had a follow-up of at least 30 days. The primary outcome of interest was all-cause death. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated and pooled across trials. Interaction testing was used to assess for heterogeneity of treatment effects., Results: In total, 1512 patients (67 years, 26% female, 23% prior myocardial infarction) were included from 5 randomized controlled trials. Early/immediate versus delayed/selective CAG was not associated with a statistically significant difference in odds of death (OR 1.12, 95%-CI 0.91-1.38), with similar findings for the composite outcome of all-cause death or neurological deficit (OR 1.10, 95%-CI 0.89-1.36). There was no effect modification for death by age, presence of a shockable initial cardiac rhythm, history of coronary artery disease, presence of an ischemic event as the presumed cause of arrest, or time to return of spontaneous circulation (all P-interaction > 0.10). However, early/immediate CAG tended to be associated with higher odds of death in women (OR 1.52, 95%-CI 1.00-2.31, P = 0.050) than in men (OR 1.04, 95%-CI 0.82-1.33, P = 0.74; P-interaction 0.097)., Conclusion: In OHCA patients without ST-segment elevation, a strategy of early/immediate versus delayed/selective CAG did not reduce all-cause mortality across major subgroups. However, women tended to have higher odds of death with early CAG., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

The critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest is burdened by a lack of high-quality clinical studies and the resultant lack of high-certainty evidence. This results in limited practice guideline recommendations, which may lead to uncertainty and variability in management. Critical care management is crucial in patients after cardiac arrest and affects outcome. Although guidelines address some relevant topics (including temperature control and neurological prognostication of comatose survivors, 2 topics for which there are more robust clinical studies), many important subject areas have limited or nonexistent clinical studies, leading to the absence of guidelines or low-certainty evidence. The American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee and the Neurocritical Care Society collaborated to address this gap by organizing an expert consensus panel and conference. Twenty-four experienced practitioners (including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and a respiratory therapist) from multiple medical specialties, levels, institutions, and countries made up the panel. Topics were identified and prioritized by the panel and arranged by organ system to facilitate discussion, debate, and consensus building. Statements related to postarrest management were generated, and 80% agreement was required to approve a statement. Voting was anonymous and web based. Topics addressed include neurological, cardiac, pulmonary, hematological, infectious, gastrointestinal, endocrine, and general critical care management. Areas of uncertainty, areas for which no consensus was reached, and future research directions are also included. Until high-quality studies that inform practice guidelines in these areas are available, the expert panel consensus statements that are provided can advise clinicians on the critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a leading cause of death, accounting for ≈50% of all cardiovascular deaths. The prognosis of such individuals is poor, with <10% surviving to hospital discharge. Survival with a favorable neurologic outcome is highest among individuals who present with a witnessed shockable rhythm, received bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, achieve return of spontaneous circulation within 15 minutes of arrest, and have evidence of ST-segment elevation on initial ECG after return of spontaneous circulation. The cardiac catheterization laboratory plays an important role in the coordinated Chain of Survival for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The catheterization laboratory can be used to provide diagnostic, therapeutic, and resuscitative support after sudden cardiac arrest from many different cardiac causes, but it has a unique importance in the treatment of cardiac arrest resulting from underlying coronary artery disease. Over the past few years, numerous trials have clarified the role of the cardiac catheterization laboratory in the management of resuscitated patients or those with ongoing cardiac arrest. This scientific statement provides an update on the contemporary approach to managing resuscitated patients or those with ongoing cardiac arrest.

The critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest is burdened by a lack of high-quality clinical studies and the resultant lack of high-certainty evidence. This results in limited practice guideline recommendations, which may lead to uncertainty and variability in management. Critical care management is crucial in patients after cardiac arrest and affects outcome. Although guidelines address some relevant topics (including temperature control and neurological prognostication of comatose survivors, 2 topics for which there are more robust clinical studies), many important subject areas have limited or nonexistent clinical studies, leading to the absence of guidelines or low-certainty evidence. The American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee and the Neurocritical Care Society collaborated to address this gap by organizing an expert consensus panel and conference. Twenty-four experienced practitioners (including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and a respiratory therapist) from multiple medical specialties, levels, institutions, and countries made up the panel. Topics were identified and prioritized by the panel and arranged by organ system to facilitate discussion, debate, and consensus building. Statements related to postarrest management were generated, and 80% agreement was required to approve a statement. Voting was anonymous and web based. Topics addressed include neurological, cardiac, pulmonary, hematological, infectious, gastrointestinal, endocrine, and general critical care management. Areas of uncertainty, areas for which no consensus was reached, and future research directions are also included. Until high-quality studies that inform practice guidelines in these areas are available, the expert panel consensus statements that are provided can advise clinicians on the critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest.