Tibial Intraosseous Administration of Epinephrine Is Effective in Restoring Return of Spontaneous Circulation in a Pediatric Normovolemic But Not Hypovolemic Cardiac Arrest Model

2024 RECOVER Guidelines: Advanced Life Support. Evidence and knowledge gap analysis with treatment recommendations for small animal CPR

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the evidence and devise clinical recommendations on advanced life support (ALS) in dogs and cats and to identify critical knowledge gaps.

DESIGN

Standardized, systematic evaluation of literature pertinent to ALS following Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Prioritized questions were each reviewed by Evidence Evaluators, and findings were reconciled by ALS Domain Chairs and Reassessment Campaign on Veterinary Resuscitation (RECOVER) Co-Chairs to arrive at treatment recommendations commensurate to quality of evidence, risk:benefit relationship, and clinical feasibility. This process was implemented using an Evidence Profile Worksheet for each question that included an introduction, consensus on science, treatment recommendations, justification for these recommendations, and important knowledge gaps. A draft of these worksheets was distributed to veterinary professionals for comment for 4 weeks prior to finalization.

SETTING

Transdisciplinary, international collaboration in university, specialty, and emergency practice.

RESULTS

Seventeen questions pertaining to vascular access, vasopressors in shockable and nonshockable rhythms, anticholinergics, defibrillation, antiarrhythmics, and adjunct drug therapy as well as open-chest CPR were reviewed. Of the 33 treatment recommendations formulated, 6 recommendations addressed the management of patients with nonshockable arrest rhythms, 10 addressed shockable rhythms, and 6 provided guidance on open-chest CPR. We recommend against high-dose epinephrine even after prolonged CPR and suggest that atropine, when indicated, is used only once. In animals with a shockable rhythm in which initial defibrillation was unsuccessful, we recommend doubling the defibrillator dose once and suggest vasopressin (or epinephrine if vasopressin is not available), esmolol, lidocaine in dogs, and/or amiodarone in cats.

CONCLUSIONS

These updated RECOVER ALS guidelines clarify the approach to refractory shockable rhythms and prolonged CPR. Very low quality of evidence due to absence of clinical data in dogs and cats continues to compromise the certainty with which recommendations can be made.

Outcomes with Tibial and Humeral Intraosseous Access Compared to Peripheral Intravenous Access in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

BACKGROUND

The optimal initial vascular access strategy for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains unknown. Our objective was to evaluate the association between peripheral intravenous (PIV), tibial intraosseous (TIO), or humeral intraosseous (HIO) as first vascular attempt strategies and outcomes for patients suffering OHCA.

METHOD

This was a secondary analysis of the Portland Cardiac Arrest Epidemiologic Registry, which included adult patients (≥18 years-old) with EMS-treated, non-traumatic OHCA from 2018-2021. The primary independent variable in our analysis was the initial vascular access strategy, defined as PIV, TIO, or HIO based on the first access attempt. The primary outcome for this study was the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) at emergency department (ED) arrival (a palpable pulse on arrival to the hospital). Secondary outcomes included survival to: admission, discharge, and discharge with a favorable outcome (Cerebral Perfusion Category score of ≤2). We conducted multivariable logistic regressions, adjusting for confounding variables and for clustering using a mixed-effects approach, with prespecified subgroup analyses by initial rhythm.

RESULTS

We included 2,993 patients with initial vascular access strategies of PIV (822 [27.5%]), TIO (1,171 [39.1%]), and HIO (1,000 [33.4%]). Multivariable analysis showed lower odds of ROSC at ED arrival (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI]) with TIO (0.79 [0.64-0.98]) or HIO (0.75 [0.60-0.93]) compared to a PIV-first strategy. These associations remained in stratified analyses for those with shockable initial rhythms (0.60 [0.41-0.88] and 0.53 [0.36-0.79]) but not in patients with asystole or pulseless electrical activity for TIO and HIO compared to PIV, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in adjusted odds for survival to admission, discharge, or discharge with a favorable outcome for TIO or HIO compared to the PIV-first group in the overall analysis. Patients with shockable initial rhythms had lower adjusted odds of survival to discharge (0.63 [0.41-0.96] and 0.64 [0.41-0.99]) and to discharge with a favorable outcome (0.60 [0.39-0.93] and 0.64 [0.40-1.00]) for TIO and HIO compared to PIV, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

TIO or HIO as first access strategies in OHCA were associated with lower odds of ROSC at ED arrival compared to PIV.

Drug routes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A summary of current evidence

Recent evidence showing the clinical effectiveness of drug therapy in cardiac arrest has led to renewed interest in the optimal route for drug administration in adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Current resuscitation guidelines support use of the intravenous route for intra-arrest drug delivery, with the intraosseous route reserved for patients in whom intravenous access cannot be established. We sought to evaluate current evidence on drug route for administration of cardiac arrest drugs, with a specific focus on the intravenous and intraosseous route. We identified relevant animal, manikin, and human studies through targeted searches of MEDLINE in June 2022. Across pre-hospital systems, there is wide variation in use of the intraosseous route. Early administration of cardiac arrest drugs is associated with improved patient outcomes. Challenges in obtaining intravenous access mean that the intraosseous access may facilitate earlier drug administration. However, time from administration to the central circulation is unclear with pharmacokinetic data limited mainly to animal studies. Observational studies comparing the effect of intravenous and intraosseous drug administration on patient outcomes are challenging to interpret because of resuscitation time bias and other confounders. To date, no randomised controlled trial has directly compared the effect on patient outcomes of intraosseous compared with intravenous drug administration in cardiac arrest. The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation has described the urgent need for randomised controlled trials comparing the intravenous and intraosseous route in adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Ongoing clinical trials will directly address this knowledge gap.