Long-Term Outcomes of Patients Who Had Cardiac Arrest After Cardiac Operations

Temporary mechanical circulatory support devices: practical considerations for all stakeholders

Originally intended for life-saving salvage therapy, the use of temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices has become increasingly widespread in a variety of clinical settings in the contemporary era. Their use as a short-term, prophylactic support vehicle has expanded to include procedures in the catheterization laboratory, electrophysiology suite, operating room and intensive care unit. Accordingly, MCS device design and technology continue to develop at a rapid pace. In this Review, we describe the functionality, indications, management and complications associated with temporary MCS, together with scenario-specific utilization, goal-directed development and bioengineering of future devices. We address various considerations for the use of temporary MCS devices in both prophylactic and rescue scenarios, with input from stakeholders from various cardiovascular specialties, including interventional and heart failure cardiology, electrophysiology, cardiothoracic anaesthesiology, critical care and cardiac surgery.

Perioperative changes in left ventricular systolic function following surgical revascularization

Background

Nearly 1/3^rd of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) have left ventricular systolic dysfunction. However, the extent, direction and implications of perioperative changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) have not been well characterized in these patients.

Methods

We studied the changes in LVEF among 549 patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVEF <50%) who underwent CABG as part of the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial. Patients had pre- and post-CABG (4 month) LVEF assessments using identical cardiac imaging modality, interpreted at a core laboratory. An absolute change of >10% in LVEF was considered clinically significant.

Results

Of the 549 patients (mean age 61.4±9.55 years, and 72 [13.1%] women), 145 (26.4%) had a >10% improvement in LVEF, 369 (67.2%) had no change and 35 (6.4%) had >10% worsening of LVEF following CABG. Patients with lower preoperative LVEF were more likely to experience an improvement after CABG (odds ratio 1.36; 95% CI 1.21–1.53; per 5% lower preoperative LVEF; p <0.001). Notably, incidence of postoperative improvement in LVEF was not influenced by presence, nor absence, of myocardial viability (25.5% vs. 28.3% respectively, p = 0.67). After adjusting for age, sex, baseline LVEF, and NYHA Class, a >10% improvement in LVEF after CABG was associated with a 57% lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.26–0.71).

Conclusions

Among patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy undergoing CABG, 26.4% had >10% improvement in LVEF. An improvement in LVEF was more likely in patients with lower preoperative LVEF and was associated with improved long-term survival.

Improvement of left ventricular function with surgical revascularization in patients eligible for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

INTRODUCTION

Left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) ≤ 35% is the cornerstone criterion for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) eligibility. Improvement in EF may occur in ICD-eligible patients after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). However, the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of this process are unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We studied 427 patients with EF ≤ 35% who underwent CABG in the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial and had a systematic pre- and postoperative (4 months) EF assessment using the identical cardiac imaging modality. All imaging studies were interpreted at a core laboratory. Improvement in EF was defined as postoperative EF > 35% and >5% absolute improvement from baseline. Of the 427 patients (mean age 61.8 ± 9.5 and 50 women), 125 (29.2%) had EF improvement. Their mean EF increased from 26.8% (±5.8%) to 43.3% (±6.5%) (p < .0001). EF improvement occurred in only 20% of patients with a preoperative EF < 25%. The odds of EF improvement were 1.96 times higher (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91-4.23, p = .09) in patients with myocardial viability. In adjusted analyses, EF improvement was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.35-0.96; p = .03) and heart failure mortality (HR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.11-0.87; p = .027).

CONCLUSION

Nearly 1/3rd of ICD-eligible patients undergoing CABG had significant improvement in EF, obviating the need for primary prevention ICD implantation. These results provide patients and clinicians data on the likelihood of ICD eligibility after CABG and support the practice of reassessment of EF after revascularization.

[Cardiac arrest under special circumstances]

These guidelines of the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) Cardiac Arrest under Special Circumstances are based on the 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Science with Treatment Recommendations. This section provides guidelines on the modifications required for basic and advanced life support for the prevention and treatment of cardiac arrest under special circumstances; in particular, specific causes (hypoxia, trauma, anaphylaxis, sepsis, hypo-/hyperkalaemia and other electrolyte disorders, hypothermia, avalanche, hyperthermia and malignant hyperthermia, pulmonary embolism, coronary thrombosis, cardiac tamponade, tension pneumothorax, toxic agents), specific settings (operating room, cardiac surgery, cardiac catheterization laboratory, dialysis unit, dental clinics, transportation [in-flight, cruise ships], sport, drowning, mass casualty incidents), and specific patient groups (asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, neurological disease, morbid obesity, pregnancy).

European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Cardiac arrest in special circumstances

These European Resuscitation Council (ERC) Cardiac Arrest in Special Circumstances guidelines are based on the 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Science with Treatment Recommendations. This section provides guidelines on the modifications required to basic and advanced life support for the prevention and treatment of cardiac arrest in special circumstances; specifically special causes (hypoxia, trauma, anaphylaxis, sepsis, hypo/hyperkalaemia and other electrolyte disorders, hypothermia, avalanche, hyperthermia and malignant hyperthermia, pulmonary embolism, coronary thrombosis, cardiac tamponade, tension pneumothorax, toxic agents), special settings (operating room, cardiac surgery, catheter laboratory, dialysis unit, dental clinics, transportation (in-flight, cruise ships), sport, drowning, mass casualty incidents), and special patient groups (asthma and COPD, neurological disease, obesity, pregnancy).

Cardiopulmonary arrest after cardiac surgery: A retrospective cohort of 142 patients with nine year follow up

BACKGROUND

Although the techniques and perioperative management in modern cardiac surgeries has improved, and mortality and morbidity have decreased dramatically, postoperative cardiac arrest after heart surgery (POCHS) is a life-threatening condition that should be assessed and managed precisely.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the mortality rate and causes of death in postoperative cardiac arrest after heart surgery (POCHS).

METHODS

A total of 3342 patients underwent cardiac surgery from 2010 to 2018 in Isfahan, Iran .142 of them experienced POCHS . POCHS patients were investigated for characteristics, causes of cardiopulmonary arrest, first-line treatment, and mortality. These items were compared between survived and deceased patients to find possible prognostic factors.

RESULTS

The incidence rate of cardiac arrest was 4.2% (142 ones from total of 3342). Success rate of cardiac arrest is 28.8% (41 from 142). Bradycardia was the most common cause of cardiorespiratory arrest (37.3%), followed by cardiogenic shock (30.3%) and ventricular fibrillation (23.2%). Younger patients (58±11.5 versus 62.9±11.3) and those who developed cardiopulmonary arrest due to ventricular fibrillation (42.4% versus 22.2%), bradycardia (21.2% versus 8.8%), and apnea (15.1% versus 6.6%) were more likely to survive, while, those with shock had the worst prognosis (P<0.05). The best response to resuscitation was found among those treated with defibrillator plus ECM (External Cardiac Massage) as compared to the other approaches (P-value=0.003).

CONCLUSION

Based on the current report, CPR success was found in 28.6% among whom respiratory etiology led to better outcomes than cardiac etiology. The second cause of cardiac arrest is ventricular fibrillation which immediate defibrillation has the best outcome. The highest numerical success in POCHS is combination of ECM with defibrillator.