Characteristics and Outcomes of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Events During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Single-Center Experience From a New York City Public Hospital

The impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on in-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There is an emerging concern regarding the indirect effect the Covid-19 pandemic has had on the care provided to patients. New resuscitation guidance including the donning of Personal Protective Equipment before commencing resuscitation efforts, the avoidance of bag-mask ventilation, limiting the number of responders and stopping resuscitation efforts earlier could have led to worse outcomes following in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) when compared to the non-pandemic period. The primary objective was to understand the impact of the pandemic on patient outcomes following IHCA by comparing the pandemic and non-pandemic periods.

Methods

Our systematic search was conducted on the 13th of September 2022 in three databases: Medline, Embase and Central. Randomised or non-randomised clinical trials and observational studies were included. The search was repeated on 31st December 2023 and there were no new studies appropriate for inclusion which had been published in the interim. The patient population consisted of adult patients who suffered IHCA due to any cause. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge (SHD). The secondary outcomes were return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and length of resuscitation.

Results

We identified 1873 studies, 9 were included in our qualitative analysis. SHD was reported in 8 studies with no difference between the two periods (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.47-1.03) along with resuscitation (MD: 0.74; 95% CI: -0.67 to 2.14; p = 0.153. ROSC was included in all studies and showed significant difference between the two periods (OR 0.75; 95% 0.60-0.95).

Conclusion

Although SHD was similar between the two periods, ROSC was significantly lower during the pandemic with longer resuscitation times highlighting a substantial impact of the pandemic on patient outcomes.

Comparing characteristics and outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest during the early and late COVID-19 pandemic at an academic institution in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced major changes in the resuscitation practices of cardiac arrest victims.

AIM

We aimed to compare the characteristics and outcomes of patients who sustained in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) during the early COVID-19 pandemic period (2020) with those during the late COVID-19 pandemic period (2021).

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of adult patients sustaining IHCA at a single academic centre. We compared characteristics and outcomes of IHCA for 5 months in 2020 with those experiencing IHCA for 5 months in 2021.

RESULTS

Patients sustaining IHCA during the early COVID-19 pandemic period had higher rates of delayed epinephrine administration of more than 5 min (13.4% vs. 1.9%; p < 0.01), more frequent delays in the initiation of chest compressions (55.6% vs. 17.9%; p < 0.01), and were intubated less often (23.0% vs. 59.3%; p < 0.01). In terms of outcomes, both return of spontaneous circulation (35.8% vs. 51.2%; p < 0.01) and survival to hospital discharge rates (13.9% vs. 30.2%; p < 0.01) were lower during the early COVID-19 pandemic period.

CONCLUSIONS

The early COVID-19 pandemic period was associated with delays in epinephrine administration and chest compression initiation for IHCA. Moreover, both return of spontaneous circulation and survival to hospital discharge were lower during the early COVID-19 pandemic period.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the volume, cost, and outcomes of cardiac electrophysiology procedures in the United States

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, professional societies recommended deferral of elective procedures for optimal resource utilization.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess changes in procedural trends and outcomes of electrophysiology (EP) procedures during the pandemic.

METHODS

National Inpatient Sample databases were used to identify all EP procedures performed in the United States (2016-2020) by International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes. We evaluated trends in utilization, cost/revenue, and outcomes from EP procedures performed.

RESULTS

An estimated 1.35 million EP procedures (82% devices and 18% catheter ablations) were performed (2016-2020) with significant yearly uptrend. During the pandemic, there was a substantial decline in EP procedure utilization from a 5-year peak of 298 cases/million population in the second quarter of 2019 to a nadir of 220 cases in the second quarter of 2020. In 2020, the pandemic was associated with the loss of 50,233 projected EP procedures (39,337 devices and 10,896 ablations) with subsequent revenue loss of $7.06 billion. This deficit was driven by revenue deficit from dual-chamber permanent pacemaker (PPM) utilization ($2.88 billion, 49.3% of lost cases), ablation procedures ($1.84 billion, 21.7% of lost cases), and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation ($1.36 billion, 12.0% of lost cases). To the contrary, there was a 9.4% increase in the utilization of leadless PPM. EP device implantation during the pandemic was associated with higher adverse in-hospital events (9.4% vs 8.0%; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In the United States, the significant decline in EP procedures during the pandemic was primarily driven by the reduction in dual-chamber PPM utilization, followed by arrhythmia ablation and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation. There was a substantial increase in leadless PPM utilization during the pandemic.

Impact Of body Mass Index on Cardiopulmonary Outcomes of COVID-19 Hospitalizations Complicated by Severe Sepsis

Background

Body Mass Index (BMI) has a significant impact on Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patient outcomes; however, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular outcomes in patients with severe sepsis have been poorly understood. Our study aims to explore and provide insight into its association.

Methods

This is an observational study looking at the impact of BMI on COVID-19-severe sepsis hospitalizations. The primary outcomes are adjusted odds of all-cause in-hospital mortality, respiratory failure, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), which include acute myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, and acute ischemic stroke. The secondary outcome was healthcare resource utilization. Coexisting comorbidities and patient features were adjusted with multivariable regression analyses.

Results

Of 51,740 patients with severe COVID-19-sepsis admissions, 11.4% were overweight, 24.8% had Class I obesity (BMI 30-34.9), 19.8% had Class II obesity (BMI 35-39.9), and 43.9% had the categorization of Class III obesity (BMI >40) cohorts with age>18 years. The odds of MACCE in patients with class II obesity and class III obesity (OR 1.09 and 1.54; 95CI 0.93-1.29 and 1.33-1.79) were significantly higher than in overweight (p < 0.001). Class I, Class II, and Class III patients with obesity revealed lower odds of respiratory failure compared to overweight (OR 0.89, 0.82, and 0.82; 95CI 0.75-1.05, 0.69-0.97, and 0.70-0.97), but failed to achieve statistical significance (p = 0.079). On multivariable regression analysis, all-cause in-hospital mortality revealed significantly higher odds in patients with Class III obesity, Class II, and Class I (OR 1.56, 1.17, and 1.06; 95CI 1.34-1.81, 0.99-1.38, and 0.91-1.24) vs. overweight patients (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Patients with Class II and Class III obesity had significantly higher odds of MACCE and in-hospital mortality in COVID-19-severe sepsis admissions.

Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Cardiac Arrest and Emergency Care

The incidence of both out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest increased during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Patient survival and neurologic outcome after both out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest were reduced. Direct effects of the COVID-19 illness combined with indirect effects of the pandemic on patient's behavior and health care systems contributed to these changes. Understanding the potential factors offers the opportunity to improve future response and save lives.

A command centre implementation before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in a community hospital

INTRODUCTION

The objective of the study was to assess the effects of high-reliability system by implementing a command centre (CC) on clinical outcomes in a community hospital before and during COVID-19 pandemic from the year 2016 to 2021.

METHODS

A descriptive, retrospective study was conducted at an acute care community hospital. The administrative data included monthly average admissions, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, average length of stay, total ICU length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. In-hospital acquired events were recorded and defined as one of the following: cardiac arrest, cerebral infarction, respiratory arrest, or sepsis after hospital admissions. A subgroup statistical analysis of patients with in-hospital acquired events was performed. In addition, a subgroup statistical analysis was performed for the department of medicine.

RESULTS

The rates of in-hospital acquired events and in-hospital mortality among all admitted patients did not change significantly throughout the years 2016 to 2021. In the subgroup of patients with in-hospital acquired events, the in-hospital mortality rate also did not change during the years of the study, despite the increase in the ICU admissions during the COVID-19 pandemic.Although the in-hospital mortality rate did not increase for all admitted patients, the in-hospital mortality rate increased in the department of medicine.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of CC and centralized management systems has the potential to improve quality of care by supporting early identification and real-time management of patients at risk of harm and clinical deterioration, including COVID-19 patients.

Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Frequency of Bystander Intervention in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrests

AIM

Rapid administration of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can significantly increase patient survival following an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Through this study, we aimed to determine if the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected the likelihood of OHCA victims receiving bystander-initiated CPR prior to EMS arrival.

METHODS

We used data collected by the National Emergency Medical Services Information System (NEMSIS) for years 2019 and 2020. Data was filtered to include only cases of OHCA where the status of bystander CPR was listed. We used a chi-square analysis to compare frequencies of patients receiving both bystander CPR and standard EMS interventions versus patients receiving only standard EMS interventions for the years before and during the COVID-19 pandemic declaration (2019 and 2020, respectively).

RESULTS

Of the 577,011 cases that met our inclusion criteria, 228,259 occurred in 2019 and 348,752 occurred in 2020. The frequency of OHCA cases that reported bystander-initiated CPR prior to EMS arrival significantly decreased from 2019 to 2020 (53.7% vs. 52.5%, P<.001).

CONCLUSION

Bystanders are often the first to administer CPR following a cardiac arrest. It was found that the likelihood of an OHCA victim receiving bystander CPR decreased from 2019 to 2020.

Outcomes after cardiac arrest in Medical Intensive Care Unit: A propensity score matching analysis of COVID-19 MICU vs non COVID-19 MICU cardiac arrest

AIM

To assess whether there were differences in resuscitation efforts and outcomes for medical intensive care unit (MICU) in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) during the COVID-19 pandemic when compared to pre-pandemic.

METHODS

Comparing COVID-19 MICU-IHCA patients (03/2020 to 10/2020) to non-COVID-19 MICU IHCA (01/2014 to 12/2018) at Clevleand Clinic Health System (CCHS) of NE Ohio. Propensity score matching analysis (PSMA) was used to create comparable groups.

RESULTS

There werea total of 516 patients, 51 in COVID-19 MICU IHCA cohort and 465 in the non-COVID-19 MICU IHCA cohort. The mean (SD) age of the study population was 60.9 (16) years and 56% were males. In 92.1% (n=475) patients, initial arrest rhythm was non-shockable. At the time of ICU admission, compared to the non-COVID-19 MICU-IHCA cohort, the COVID-19 MICU IHCA cohort had a lower mean APACHE III score (70 [32.9] vs 101.3 [39.6], P=<0.01). The COVID-19 cohort had a higher rate of survival to hospital discharge (12 [23.5%] vs 59 [12.7%], P=0.03). Upon PSMA, the algorithm selected 40 COVID-19 patients and 200 non-COVID-19 patients. Imbalances in baseline characteristics, comorbidities, and APACHE III were well-balanced after matching. Survival rate after matching became non-significant; (10 [25%) vs 42 [21%], P=0.67). Further, there were no significant differences in ICU or hospital length-of-stay or neurological outcomes at discharge for survivors in the two matched cohorts.

CONCLUSION

It is imperative that COVID-19 patients receive unbiased and unrestricted resuscitation measures, without any discouragement.

Outcome of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest among Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Outcomes following in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) in patients with COVID-19 have been reported by several small single-institutional studies; however, there are no large studies contrasting COVID-19 IHCA with non-COVID-19 IHCA. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes following IHCA between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

We searched databases using predefined search terms and appropriate Boolean operators. All the relevant articles published till August 2022 were included in the analyses. The systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. An odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to measure effects.

RESULTS

Among 855 studies screened, 6 studies with 27,453 IHCA patients (63.84% male) with COVID-19 and 20,766 (59.7% male) without COVID-19 were included in the analysis. IHCA among patients with COVID-19 has lower odds of achieving return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) (OR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.62-0.70). Similarly, patients with COVID-19 have higher odds of 30-day mortality following IHCA (OR: 2.26, 95% CI: 2.08-2.45) and have 45% lower odds of cardiac arrest because of a shockable rhythm (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.50-0.60) (9.59% vs. 16.39%). COVID-19 patients less commonly underwent targeted temperature management (TTM) or coronary angiography; however, they were more commonly intubated and on vasopressor therapy as compared to patients who did not have a COVID-19 infection.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that IHCA with COVID-19 has a higher mortality and lower rates of ROSC compared with non-COVID-19 IHCA. COVID-19 is an independent risk factor for poor outcomes in IHCA patients.

Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Cardiac Arrest and Emergency Care

The incidence of both out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest increased during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Patient survival and neurologic outcome after both out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest were reduced. Direct effects of the COVID-19 illness combined with indirect effects of the pandemic on patient's behavior and health care systems contributed to these changes. Understanding the potential factors offers the opportunity to improve future response and save lives.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Pediatric Cardiac Arrest Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused a global pandemic, required the donning of personal protective equipment during clinical contact, and continues to be a significant worldwide public health concern. Pediatric cardiac arrest is a rare but critical condition with a high mortality rate, the outcomes of which may be negatively affected by donning personal protective equipment. The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pediatric cardiac arrest outcomes. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from their inception to 1 October 2022. We included studies published in English on pediatric patients with cardiac arrest, dichotomized by the pre- and during-COVID-19 periods and then stratified by COVID-19 positive or negative status, to evaluate clinical outcomes associated with cardiac arrest. Six studies were included in the meta-analysis. In witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients, there were no differences between the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods for witnessed cardiac arrest (28.5% vs. 28.7%; odds ratio (OR) = 0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.87 to 1.14; p = 0.93), administration of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (61.5 vs. 63.6%; OR = 1.11; 95%CI: 0.98 to 1.26; p = 0.11), bystander automated external defibrillator use (both 2.8%; OR = 1.00; 95%CI: 0.69 to 1.45; p = 0.99), return of spontaneous circulation(8.4 vs. 8.9%; OR = 0.93; 95%CI: 0.47 to 1.88; p = 0.85), survival to hospital admission (9.0 vs. 10.2%, OR = 0.81; 95%CI: 0.45 to 1.44; p = 0.47), or survival to hospital discharge (13.4 vs. 12.4%; OR = 0.62; 95%CI: 0.22 to 1.72; p = 0.35). COVID-19 did not change pediatric cardiac arrest bystander interventions or outcomes.

Guidance for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation of Children With Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19

This article aims to provide guidance to health care workers for the provision of basic and advanced life support to children and neonates with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It aligns with the 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiovascular care while providing strategies for reducing risk of transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 to health care providers. Patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 and cardiac arrest should receive chest compressions and defibrillation, when indicated, as soon as possible. Because of the importance of ventilation during pediatric and neonatal resuscitation, oxygenation and ventilation should be prioritized. All CPR events should therefore be considered aerosol-generating procedures. Thus, personal protective equipment (PPE) appropriate for aerosol-generating procedures (including N95 respirators or an equivalent) should be donned before resuscitation, and high-efficiency particulate air filters should be used. Any personnel without appropriate PPE should be immediately excused by providers wearing appropriate PPE. Neonatal resuscitation guidance is unchanged from standard algorithms, except for specific attention to infection prevention and control. In summary, health care personnel should continue to reduce the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission through vaccination and use of appropriate PPE during pediatric resuscitations. Health care organizations should ensure the availability and appropriate use of PPE. Because delays or withheld CPR increases the risk to patients for poor clinical outcomes, children and neonates with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 should receive prompt, high-quality CPR in accordance with evidence-based guidelines.

Effect of Wearing N95 Mask on the Quality of Chest Compressions in Prehospital Emergency Personnel: A Cross-over Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of wearing an N95 mask on the quality of chest compression and fatigue of prehospital emergency personnel during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).

METHODS

Twenty-four eligible participants were recruited. Participants' age, sex, height, and weight were recorded. After completing the CPR training and examination, participants were tested twice, wearing surgical mask or an N95 mask, while performing chest compressions for 2 minutes. The quality of chest compression (including compression frequency, depth, rebound, and position) was recorded by the simulator. Borg fatigue scores and physiological parameters (including heart rate, mean arterial pressure, pulse oxygen saturation, and respiratory rate) were recorded before and after chest compressions.

RESULTS

Compared to wearing surgical masks, participants wearing N95 masks had significantly lower quality of chest compression, including compression frequency (98.3 ± 4.9 bpm vs 104.0 ± 6.0 bpm, P < 0.001), depth (47.1 ± 4.5 mm vs 50.5 ± 5.4 mm, P < 0.001), and rebound (90.2 ± 2.7% vs 94.3 ± 2.1%, P < 0.001). The compression position was not affected. The period data showed that the difference in compression quality started after 1 minute of compressions. Participants wearing N95 masks had higher Borg fatigue scores [6.1(2) vs 5.1(2), P < 0.001], heart rates (121.2 ± 5.7 bpm vs 109.9 ± 6.0 bpm, P < 0.001), mean arterial pressures (106.3 ± 8.0 mmHg vs 99.0 ± 8.5 mmHg, P = 0.012), and respiratory rates (29.5 ± 2.7 bpm vs 24.7 ± 2.5 bpm, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study showed that the use of an N95 mask by prehospital emergency personnel during the performance of chest compressions resulted in a reduction of compression quality and increased clinician fatigue. There is a need for CPR training for medical personnel wearing personal protective equipment.

Non-COVID outcomes associated with the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic effects study (COPES): A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues, healthcare providers struggle to manage both COVID-19 and non-COVID patients while still providing high-quality care. We conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis to describe the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with non-COVID illness and on healthcare systems compared to non-pandemic epochs.

METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE/EMBASE/Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/CENTRAL/CINAHL (inception to December 31, 2020). All study types with COVID-pandemic time period (after December 31, 2019) with comparative non-pandemic time periods (prior to December 31, 2019). Data regarding study characteristics/case-mix/interventions/comparators/ outcomes (primary: mortality; secondary: morbidity/hospitalizations/disruptions-to-care. Paired reviewers conducted screening and abstraction, with conflicts resolved by discussion. Effect sizes for specific therapies were pooled using random-effects models. Risk of bias was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, with evidence rating using GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Of 11,581 citations, 167 studies met eligibility. Our meta-analysis showed an increased mortality of 16% during the COVID pandemic for non-COVID illness compared with 11% mortality during the pre-pandemic period (RR 1.38, 95% CI: 1.28-1.50; absolute risk difference: 5% [95% CI: 4-6%], p<0.00001, very low certainty evidence). Twenty-eight studies (17%) reported significant changes in morbidity (where 93% reported increases), while 30 studies (18%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). Thirty-nine studies (23%) reported significant changes in hospitalizations (97% reporting decreases), while 111 studies (66%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). Sixty-two studies (37%) reported significant disruptions in standards-to-care (73% reporting increases), while 62 studies (37%) reported no significant change (very low certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

There was a significant increase in mortality during the COVID pandemic compared to pre-pandemic times for non-COVID illnesses. When significant changes were reported, there was increased morbidity, decreased hospitalizations and increased disruptions in standards-of-care.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020201256 (Sept 2, 2020).

Exploring the Changes in Code Status During the COVID-19 Pandemic and the Implications for Future Pandemic Care

Objective: We aim to explore patterns of inpatient code status during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with a similar timeframe the previous year, as well as utilization of palliative care services.

Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study using data from the Montefiore Health system of all inpatient admissions between March 15-May 31, 2019 and March 15-May 31, 2020. Univariate logistic regression was performed with full code status as the outcome. All statistically significant variables were included in the multivariable logistic regression.

Results: The total number of admissions declined during the pandemic (16844 vs 11637). A lower proportion of patients had full code status during the pandemic (85.1% vs 94%, P < .001) at the time of discharge/death. There was a 20% relative increase in the number of palliative care consultations during the pandemic (12.2% vs 10.5%, P < .001). Intubated patients were less often full code (66.5% vs 82.2%, P < .001) during the pandemic. Although a lower portion of COVID-19 positive patients had a full code status compared with non-COVID patients (77.6% vs 92.4%, P<.001), there was no statistically significant difference in code status at death (38.3% vs 38.3%, P = .96).

Conclusions: The proportion of full code patients was significantly lower during the pandemic. Age and COVID status were the key determinants of code status during the pandemic. There was a higher demand for palliative care services during the pandemic.

Out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic: changes in demographics, outcomes and management

During the COVID-19 pandemic, prehospital and hospital services were put under great stress because of limited resources and increased workloads. One expected effect was the increased number of out-of-hospital (OHCA) and in-hospital (IHCA) cardiac arrests that occurred during 2020 compared to previous years. Both direct and indirect mechanisms were involved. In the former case, although the exact mechanisms by which Sars-Cov-2 causes cardiac arrest (CA) are still unknown, severe hypoxia, a dysregulated immune host response and sepsis are probably implicated and are often seen in COVID-19 patients with poor outcomes. In the latter case, the strain on hospitals, changes in treatment protocols, governments' actions to limit the spread of the disease and fear of the contagion naturally affected treatment efficacy and disrupted the CA chain of survival; as expected in OHCA, only a small proportion of patients were positive to COVID-19, and yet reported outcomes were worse during the pandemic. CA patient characteristics were reported, along with modifications in patient management. In this review, we summarise the evidence to date regarding OHCA and IHCA epidemiology and management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Clinical update on COVID-19 for the emergency clinician: Cardiac arrest in the out-of-hospital and in-hospital settings

Introduction

Coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in millions of cases worldwide. As the pandemic has progressed, the understanding of this disease has evolved. Its impact on the health and welfare of the human population is significant; its impact on the delivery of healthcare is also considerable.

Objective

This article is another paper in a series addressing COVID-19-related updates to emergency clinicians on the management of COVID-19 patients with cardiac arrest.

Discussion

COVID-19 has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. From a global perspective, as of February 23, 2022, 435 million infections have been noted with 5.9 million deaths (1.4%). Current data suggest an increase in the occurrence of cardiac arrest, both in the outpatient and inpatient settings, with corresponding reductions in most survival metrics. The frequency of out-of-hospital lay provider initial care has decreased while non-shockable initial cardiac arrest rhythms have increased. While many interventions, including chest compressions, are aerosol-generating procedures, the risk of contagion to healthcare personnel is low, assuming appropriate personal protective equipment is used; vaccination with boosting provides further protection against contagion for the healthcare personnel involved in cardiac arrest resuscitation. The burden of the COVID-19 pandemic on the delivery of cardiac arrest care is considerable and, despite multiple efforts, has adversely impacted the chain of survival.

Conclusion

This review provides a focused update of cardiac arrest in the setting of COVID-19 for emergency clinicians.

Outcomes of pediatric patients with COVID-19 and in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation

BACKGROUND

Early studies found low survival rates for adults with COVID-19 infection and in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). We evaluated the association of COVID-19 infection on survival outcomes in pediatric patients undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).

METHODS

Within Get-With-The-Guidelines®-Resuscitation, we identified pediatric patients who underwent CPR for an IHCA or bradycardia with poor perfusion between March and December, 2020. We compared survival outcomes (survival to discharge and return of spontaneous circulation for ≥20 minutes [ROSC]) between patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 infection and non-COVID-19 patients using multivariable hierarchical regression, with hospital site as a random effect and patient and cardiac arrest variables with a significant (p < 0.05) bivariate association as fixed effects.

RESULTS

Overall, 1328 pediatric in-hospital CPR events were identified (590 IHCA, 738 bradycardia with poor perfusion), of which 46 (32 IHCA, 14 bradycardia) had suspected/confirmed COVID-19 infection. Rates of survival to discharge were similar between those with and without COVID-19 infection (39.1% vs. 44.9%; adjusted RR, 1.14 [95% CI: 0.55-2.36]), and these estimates were similar for those with IHCA and bradycardia with poor perfusion (adjusted RRs of 1.03 and 1.05; interaction p = 0.96). Rates of ROSC were also similar between pediatric patients with and without COVID-19 overall (67.4% vs. 76.9%; adjusted RR, 0.87 [0.43, 1.77]), and for the subgroups with IHCA or bradycardia requiring CPR (adjusted RRs of 0.95 and 0.86, interaction p = 0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large multicenter national registry of CPR events, COVID-19 infection was not associated with lower rates of ROSC or survival to hospital discharge in pediatric patients undergoing CPR.

Association of COVID-19 Infection With Survival After In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Among US Adults

This cohort study examines the association of COVID-19 infection with survival outcomes of US adults after in-hospital cardiac arrest.

In COVID-19 Patients Who Suffer In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest, Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Outcomes May Be Impacted by Arrest Etiology and Local Pandemic Conditions

OBJECTIVES:

The utility and risks to providers of performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation after in-hospital cardiac arrest in COVID-19 patients have been questioned. Additionally, there are discrepancies in reported COVID-19 in-hospital cardiac arrest survival rates. We describe outcomes after cardiopulmonary resuscitation for in-hospital cardiac arrest in two COVID-19 patient cohorts.

DESIGN:

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING:

New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York, NY.

PATIENTS:

Those admitted with COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2020, as well as between March 1, 2021, and May 31, 2021, who received resuscitation after in-hospital cardiac arrest.

INTERVENTIONS:

None.

MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS:

Among 103 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 who were resuscitated after in-hospital cardiac arrest in spring 2020, most self-identified as Hispanic/Latino or African American, 35 (34.0%) had return of spontaneous circulation for at least 20 minutes, and 15 (14.6%) survived to 30 days post-arrest. Compared with nonsurvivors, 30-day survivors experienced in-hospital cardiac arrest later (day 22 vs day 7; p = 0.008) and were more likely to have had an acute respiratory event preceding in-hospital cardiac arrest (93.3% vs 27.3%; p < 0.001). Among 30-day survivors, 11 (73.3%) survived to hospital discharge, at which point 8 (72.7%) had Cerebral Performance Category scores of 1 or 2. Among 26 COVID-19 patients resuscitated after in-hospital cardiac arrest in spring 2021, 15 (57.7%) had return of spontaneous circulation for at least 20 minutes, 3 (11.5%) survived to 30 days post in-hospital cardiac arrest, and 2 (7.7%) survived to hospital discharge, both with Cerebral Performance Category scores of 2 or less. Those who survived to 30 days post in-hospital cardiac arrest were younger (46.3 vs 67.8; p = 0.03), but otherwise there were no significant differences between groups.

CONCLUSIONS:

Patients with COVID-19 who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation after in-hospital cardiac arrest had low survival rates. Our findings additionally show return of spontaneous circulation rates in these patients may be impacted by hospital strain and that patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest preceded by acute respiratory events might be more likely to survive to 30 days, suggesting Advanced Cardiac Life Support efforts may be more successful in this subpopulation.

In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Survival in the United States During and After the Initial Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic Surge

BACKGROUND

Recent reports on challenges in resuscitation care at hospitals severely affected by the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic raise questions about how the pandemic affected outcomes for in-hospital cardiac arrest throughout the United States.

METHODS

Within Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation, we conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare in-hospital cardiac arrest survival during the presurge (January 1-February 29), surge (March 1-May 15) and immediate postsurge (May 16-June 30) periods in 2020 compared to 2015 to 2019. Monthly COVID-19 mortality rates for each hospital's county were categorized, per 1 000 000 residents, as low (0-10), moderate (11-50), high (51-100), or very high (>100). Using hierarchical regression models, we compared rates of survival to discharge in 2020 versus 2015 to 2019 for each period.

RESULTS

Of 61 586 in-hospital cardiac arrests, 21 208 (4309 in 2020), 26 459 (5949 in 2020), and 13 919 (2686 in 2020) occurred in the presurge, surge, and postsurge periods, respectively. During the presurge period, 24.2% survived to discharge in 2020 versus 24.7% in 2015 to 2019 (adjusted odds ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.02-1.22]). In contrast, during the surge period, 19.6% survived to discharge in 2020 versus 26.0% in 2015 to 2019 (adjusted odds ratio, 0.81 [0.75-0.88]). Lower survival was most pronounced in communities with high (28% lower survival) and very high (42% lower survival) monthly COVID-19 mortality rates (interaction P<0.001). Resuscitation times were shorter (median: 22 versus 25 minutes; P<0.001), and delayed epinephrine treatment was more prevalent (11.3% versus 9.9%; P=0.004) during the surge period. Survival was lower even when patients with confirmed/suspected COVID-19 infection were excluded from analyses. During the postsurge period, survival rates were similar in 2020 versus 2015 to 2019 (22.3% versus 25.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.93 [0.83-1.04]), including communities with high COVID-19 mortality (interaction P=0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Early during the pandemic, rates of survival to discharge for IHCA decreased, even among patients without COVID-19 infection, highlighting the early impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on in-hospital resuscitation.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on in-hospital cardiac arrests in the UK

Aims

To compare in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) rates and patient outcomes during the first COVID-19 wave in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2020 with the same period in previous years.

Methods

A retrospective, multicentre cohort study of 154 UK hospitals that participate in the National Cardiac Arrest Audit and have intensive care units participating in the Case Mix Programme national audit of intensive care. Hospital burden of COVID-19 was defined by the number of patients with confirmed SARS-CoV2 infection admitted to critical care per 10,000 hospital admissions.

Results

16,474 patients with IHCA where a resuscitation team attended were included. Patients admitted to hospital during 2020 were younger, more often male, and of non-white ethnicity compared with 2016–2019. A decreasing trend in IHCA rates between 2016 and 2019 was reversed in 2020. Hospitals with higher burden of COVID-19 had the greatest difference in IHCA rates (21.8 per 10,000 admissions in April 2020 vs 14.9 per 10,000 in April 2019). The proportions of patients achieving ROSC ≥ 20 min and surviving to hospital discharge were lower in 2020 compared with 2016–19 (46.2% vs 51.2%; and 21.9% vs 22.9%, respectively). Among patients with IHCA, higher hospital burden of COVID-19 was associated with reduced survival to hospital discharge (OR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.93 to 0.98; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

In comparison with 2016–2019, the first COVID-19 wave in 2020 was associated with a higher rate of IHCA and decreased survival among patients attended by resuscitation teams. These changes were greatest in hospitals with the highest COVID-19 burden.

Evaluation and Treatment of Seizures and Epilepsy During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Purpose of Review

Seizures, including status epilepticus, have been reported in association with acute COVID-19 infection. People with epilepsy (PWE) have suffered from seizure exacerbations during the pandemic. This article reviews the data for clinical and electrographic seizures associated with COVID-19, technical EEG considerations for reducing risk of transmission, and factors contributing to seizure exacerbations in PWE as well as strategies to address this issue.

Recent Findings

An increasing number of studies of larger cohorts, accounting for a variety of variables and often utilizing EEG with standardized terminology, are assessing the prevalence of seizures in hospitalized patients with acute COVID-19 infections, and gaining insight into the prevalence of seizures and their effect on outcomes. Additionally, recent studies are evaluating the effect of the pandemic on PWE, barriers faced, and the usefulness of telehealth.

Summary

Although there is still much to learn regarding COVID-19, current studies help in assessing the risk of seizures, guiding EEG utilization, and optimizing the use of telehealth during the pandemic.

Impact of COVID-19 on in-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes: An updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The main purposes of this meta-analysis are to update the information about the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and to investigate the impact of being infected by by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on IHCA outcomes.

METHODS

The current meta-analysis is an update and follows the recommendations of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

RESULTS

In analyses, pre- and intra-COVID-19 periods were observed for: shockable rhythms in 17.6% vs. 16.2% (odds ratio [OR]: 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-1.72; p = 0.65), return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in 47.4% vs. 44.0% (OR: 1.36; 95% CI: 0.90-2.07; p = 0.15), 30-day mortality in 59.8% vs. 60.9% (OR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.75-1.22; p = 0.69) and overall mortality 75.8% vs. 74.7% (OR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.49-1.28; p = 0.35), respectively. In analyses, SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative patients were observed for: shockable rhythms in 9.6% vs. 19.8% (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.35-0.73; p < 0.001), ROSC in 33.9% vs. 52.1% (OR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.30-0.73; p < 0.001), 30-day mortality in 77.2% vs. 59.7% (OR: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.28-3.38; p = 0.003) and overall mortality in 94.9% vs. 76.7% (OR: 3.20; 95% CI: 0.98-10.49; p = 0.05), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite ROSC, 30-day and overall mortality rate were not statistically different in pre- vs. intra-COVID-19 periods, a lower incidence of ROSC and higher 20-day mortality rate were observed in SARS-CoV-2 (+) compared to SARS-CoV-2 (-) patients.

How to Maintain Safety and Maximize the Efficacy of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in COVID-19 Patients: Insights from the Recent Guidelines

Since December 2019, the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has remained a challenge for governments and healthcare systems all around the globe. SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with increased rates of hospital admissions and significant mortality. The pandemic increased the rate of cardiac arrest and the need for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). COVID-19, with its pathophysiology and detrimental effects on healthcare, influenced the profile of patients suffering from cardiac arrest, as well as the conditions of performing CPR. To ensure both the safety of medical personnel and the CPR efficacy for patients, resuscitation societies have published modified guidelines addressing the specific reality of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this review, we briefly describe the transmission and pathophysiology of COVID-19, present the challenges of CPR in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, summarize the current recommendations regarding the algorithms of basic life support (BLS), advanced life support (ALS) and pediatric life support, and discuss other aspects of CPR in COVID-19 patients, which potentially affect the risk-to-benefit ratio of medical procedures and therefore should be considered while formulating further recommendations.

Impact of the three COVID-19 surges in 2020 on in-hospital cardiac arrest survival in the United States

Background

Studies have reported lower survival for in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) during the initial COVID-19 surge. Whether the pandemic reduced IHCA survival during subsequent surges and in areas with lower COVID-19 rates is unknown.

Methods

Within Get-With-The-Guidelines®-Resuscitation, we identified 22,899 and 79,736 IHCAs during March to December in 2020 and 2015–2019, respectively. Using hierarchical regression, we compared risk-adjusted rates of survival to discharge in 2020 vs. 2015–19 during five COVID-19 periods: Surge 1 (March to mid-May), post-Surge 1 (mid-May to June), Surge 2 (July to mid-August), post-Surge 2 (mid-August to mid-October), and Surge 3 (mid-October to December). Monthly COVID-19 mortality rates for each hospital’s county were categorized, per 1,000,000 residents, as very low (0–10), low (11–50), moderate (51–100), or high (>100).

Results

During each COVID-19 surge period in 2020, rates of survival to discharge for IHCA were lower, as compared with the same period in 2015–2019: Surge 1: adjusted OR: 0.81 (0.75–0.88); Surge 2: adjusted OR: 0.88 (0.79–0.97), Surge 3: adjusted OR: 0.79 (0.73–0.86). Lower survival was most pronounced at hospitals located in counties with moderate to high monthly COVID-19 mortality rates. In contrast, during the two post-surge periods, survival rates were similar in 2020 vs. 2015–2019: post-Surge 1: adjusted OR 0.93 (0.83–1.04) and post-Surge 2: adjusted OR 0.94 (0.86–1.03), even at hospitals with the highest county-level COVID-19 mortality rates.

Conclusions

During the three COVID-19 surges in the U.S. during 2020, rates of survival to discharge for IHCA dropped substantially, especially in communities with moderate to high COVID-19 mortality rates.

Survival of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in COVID-19 Infected Patients

Background: There are limited data regarding the outcome of in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in COVID-19 patients. In this study, we compared the outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrests (IHCA) before and at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic at Montefiore Medical Center in the Bronx, New York, United States. We also identified the most common comorbidities associated with poor outcomes in our community. Methods: This was a multi-site, single-center, retrospective, observational study. Inclusion criteria for COVID patients were all confirmed positive cases who had in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) between 1 March 2020 and 30 June 2020. The non-COVID cohort included all cardiac arrest cases who had IHCA in 2019. We excluded all out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We compared actual survival to that predicted by the GO-FAR score, a validated prediction model for determining survival following IHCA. Results: There were 334 cases in 2019 compared to 450 cases during the specified period in 2020. Patients who initially survived cardiac arrest but then had their code statuses changed to do not resuscitate (DNR) were excluded. Groups were similar in terms of sex distribution, and both had an average age of about 66 years. Seventy percent of COVID patients were of Black or Hispanic ethnicity. A shockable rhythm was present in 7% of COVID patients and 17% of non-COVID patients (p < 0.05). COVID patients had higher BMI (30.7 vs. 28.4, p < 0.05), higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus (58% vs. 38%, p < 0.05), and lower incidence of coronary artery disease (22% vs. 35%, p < 0.05). Both groups had almost similar predicted average survival rates based on the GO-FAR score, but only 1.5% of COVID patients survived to discharge compared to 7% of non-COVID patients (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The rate of survival to hospital discharge in COVID-19 patients who suffer IHCA is worse than in non-COVID patients, and lower than that predicted by the GO-FAR score. This finding may help inform our patient population about risk factors associated with high mortality in COVID-19 infection, as well as educate hospitalized patients and healthcare proxies in the setting of code status designation.

Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac arrest resuscitation practices and outcomes in non-COVID-19 patients

The effect of changes to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) procedures in response to Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) management and outcomes are unreported. In this multicenter retrospective study, we showed that median time to arrival of resuscitation team has increased and proportion of patients receiving first-responder CPR has lowered during this pandemic. IHCA during the pandemic was independently associated with lower return of spontaneous circulation OR 0.63 (95% CI 0.43–0.91), despite adjustment for lowered patient comorbidity and increased time to resuscitation team arrival. Changes to resuscitation practice in this pandemic had effects on IHCA outcomes, even in patients without COVID-19.

A Systematic Review of the Incidence and Outcomes of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrests in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 and to describe the characteristics and outcomes for patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest within the ICU, compared with non-ICU patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest. Finally, we evaluated outcomes stratified by age.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, and preprint websites was conducted between January 1, 2020, and December 10, 2020. Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews identification: CRD42020203369.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies reporting on consecutive in-hospital cardiac arrest with a resuscitation attempt among patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently performed study selection and data extraction. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were synthesized according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus or through an independent third reviewer.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Eight studies reporting on 847 in-hospital cardiac arrest were included. In-hospital cardiac arrest incidence varied between 1.5% and 5.8% among hospitalized patients and 8.0-11.4% among patients in ICU. In-hospital cardiac arrest occurred more commonly in older male patients. Most initial rhythms were nonshockable (83.9%, [asystole = 36.4% and pulseless electrical activity = 47.6%]). Return of spontaneous circulation occurred in 33.3%, with a 91.7% in-hospital mortality. In-hospital cardiac arrest events in ICU had higher incidence of return of spontaneous circulation (36.6% vs 18.7%; p < 0.001) and relatively lower mortality (88.7% vs 98.1%; p < 0.001) compared with in-hospital cardiac arrest in non-ICU locations. Patients greater than or equal to 60 years old had significantly higher in-hospital mortality than those less than 60 years (93.1% vs 87.9%; p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately, one in 20 patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 received resuscitation for an in-hospital cardiac arrest. Hospital survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest within the ICU was higher than non-ICU locations and seems comparable with prepandemic survival for nonshockable rhythms. Although the data provide guidance surrounding prognosis after in-hospital cardiac arrest, it should be interpreted cautiously given the paucity of information surrounding treatment limitations and resource constraints during the pandemic. Further research is into actual causative mechanisms is needed.

In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (IHCA) and Outcomes in Patients Admitted With COVID-19 Infection

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients are hospitalized, and those suffering from in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) have been previously reported to have poor outcomes. This is a single-center, retrospective, observational study conducted at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA. The inclusion criteria were: patients admitted to the hospital with a diagnosis of COVID-19 who underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for IHCA. Patients were labeled as COVID-19 positive based on a laboratory-confirmed positive polymerase chain reaction test. Patients with do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders, those who were made comfort care, or enrolled in hospice were excluded. The study was approved by the hospital’s institutional review board. A total of 155 patients with COVID-19 infection were admitted; 145/155 (93.5%) admitted to the medical floor and 10/155 (6.5%) to the medical intensive care unit (MICU). 36/145 (24.8%) floor patients were upgraded to MICU. Of the 46 patients treated in MICU, 17/46 (36.9%) were excluded for DNR status. From the remaining 29/46 (63.1%) patients, 19/29 (65.5%) patients survived, and 10/29 (34.5%) patients had IHCA. All 10/10 (100%) died after CPR without return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). The initial rhythm was non-shockable in all patients, with pulseless electrical activity (PEA) in 7/10 (70%) and asystole in 3/10 (30%) patients. Patients with COVID-19 infection who had an IHCA and underwent CPR had a 0% survival at our hospital. Discussions on advanced care options, especially CPR, with COVID-19 patients and their families, are important as the overall prognosis after CPR for IHCA is poor.

In-hospital cardiac arrest incidence and outcomes in the era of COVID-19: an observational study in a Singapore hospital

Background

COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant strain on healthcare resources and this requires diligent resource re-allocation. We aim to describe the incidence and outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) during this period as compared to non-pandemic period.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study in a tertiary care hospital in Singapore. The study compared the incidence and outcomes of code blue activations over a 3-month period from March to May 2020 (COVID-19 period) with the same months in 2019 (pre-COVID-19 period). The primary outcome of the study was the rate of survival to hospital discharge for IHCA. The secondary outcomes included incidence of all code blue activation per 1000 hospital admissions, incidence of IHCA per 1000 hospital admissions.

Outcomes

The rate of survival to hospital discharge for IHCA was 5.88% in the COVID-19 period as compared to 10.0% in the pre-COVID-19 period [odds ratio (OR), 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.26-1.95]. Compared to pre-COVID-19 period, there were more IHCA incidences per 1000 hospital admissions in the COVID-19 period (1.86 vs 1.03; OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 0.78-4.41).

Conclusions

The study observed a trend towards higher incidence of IHCA and lower rate of survival to hospital discharge during COVID-19 pandemic compared to pre-COVID-19 period.

A Multicenter Evaluation of Survival After In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients

IMPORTANCE:

In-hospital cardiac arrest survival among coronavirus disease 2019 patients has been reported to range from 0% to 12%. These numbers are significantly lower than reported prepandemic in-hospital cardiac arrest survival rates of approximately 20–25% in the United States for non–coronavirus disease 2019 patients.

OBJECTIVE:

To assess the incidence of in-hospital cardiac arrest survival of coronavirus disease 2019 patients.

DESIGN:

A retrospective cohort study of adult patients with coronavirus disease 2019 subsequently found to have in-hospital cardiac arrest and underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation (cardiopulmonary resuscitation).

SETTING:

Multiple hospitals of the Cleveland Clinic Health System.

PATIENTS:

All adult patients (age ≥ 18 yr) admitted to Cleveland Clinic Health System with a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 who experienced in-hospital cardiac arrest requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:

From March 01, 2020 to October 15, 2020, 3,555 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 were hospitalized; 1,372 were admitted to the ICU; 58 patients had in-hospital cardiac arrest. Median age of this cohort was 66.5 years (interquartile range, 55.0–76.0 yr). Patients were predominantly male (62.5%), White (53.4%), with a median body mass index of 29.7 (interquartile range, 25.8–34.6). Most in-hospital cardiac arrests were in critical care environments (ICU), 51 of 58 (87.9%); seven of 58 (12.1%) were on ward locations. Thirty-four of 58 patients (58.6%) were on mechanical ventilation prior to in-hospital cardiac arrest with a median duration of mechanical ventilation of 9 days (interquartile range, 2–18 d). Twenty-four of 58 patients (44%) were on vasopressors prior to arrest. Initial arrest rhythm was pulseless electrical activity at (63.8%), asystole (29.3%), and pulseless ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation (6.9%). Of the 58 patients, 35 (60.3%) attained return of spontaneous circulation, and 13 of 58 (22.4%) were discharged alive.

CONCLUSIONS:

We report a 22% survival to discharge after in-hospital cardiac arrest in coronavirus disease 2019 patients, a survival rate similar to before the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Mortality after in-hospital cardiac arrest in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To estimate the mortality rate, the rate of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival with favorable neurological outcome in patients with COVID-19 after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and attempted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, bioRxiv and medRxiv were surveyed up to 8th February 2021 for studies reporting data on mortality of patients with COVID-19 after IHCA. The primary outcome sought was mortality (in-hospital or at 30 days) after IHCA with attempted CPR. Additional outcomes were the overall rate of IHCA, the rate of non-shockable presenting rhythms, the rate of ROSC and the rate of survival with favorable neurological status.

RESULTS

Ten articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, for a total of 1179 COVID-19 patients after IHCA with attempted CPR. The estimated overall mortality rate (in-hospital or at 30 days) was 89.9% (95% Predicted Interval [P.I.] 83.1%-94.2%; 1060/1179 patients; I² = 82%). The estimated rate of non-shockable presenting rhythms was 89% (95% P.I. 82.8%-93.1%; 1022/1205 patients; I² = 85%), and the estimated rate of ROSC was 32.9% (95% P.I. 26%-40.6%; 365/1205 patients; I² = 82%). The estimated overall rate of survival with favorable neurological status at 30 days was 6.3% (95% P.I. 4%-9.7%; 50/851 patients; I² = 48%). Sensitivity analysis showed that COVID-19 patients had higher risk of death after IHCA than non COVID-19 patients (OR 2.34; 95% C.I. 1.37-3.99; number of studies = 3; 1215 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Although one of three COVID-19 patients undergoing IHCA may achieve ROSC, almost 90% may not survive at 30 days or to hospital discharge.

Characteristics and outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest in COVID-19. A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose herein, was to perform a systematic review of interventional outcome studies in patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic period.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed of publications meeting the following PICOS criteria: (1) participants, patients > 18 years of age with cardiac arrest due to any causes; (2) intervention, cardiac arrest in COVID-19 period; (3) comparison, cardiac arrest in pre-COVID-19 period; (4) outcomes, detailed information for survival; (5) study design, randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized or observational studies comparing cardiac arrest in COVID-19 and pre-COVID-19 period for their effects in patients with cardiac arrest.

RESULTS

Survival to hospital discharge for the pre-pandemic and pandemic period was reported in 3 studies (n =1432 patients) and was similar in the pre-pandemic vs. the pandemic period, 35.6% vs. 32.1%, respectively (odds ratio [OR] 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-3.65; p = 0.16; I2 = 72%). Return of spontaneous circulation was reported by all 4 studies and were also similar in the pre and during COVID-19 periods, 51.9% vs. 48.7% (OR 1.27; 95% CI 0.78-2.07; p = 0.33; I2 = 71%), respectively. Pooled analysis of cardiac arrest recurrence was also similar, 24.9% and 17.9% (OR 1.60; 95% CI 0.99-2.57; p = 0.06; I2 = 32%) in the pre and during COVID-19 cohorts. Survival with Cerebral Performance Category 1 or 2 was higher in pre vs. during pandemic groups (27.3 vs. 9.1%; OR 3.75; 95% CI 1.26-11.20; p = 0.02). Finally, overall mortality was similar in the pre vs. pandemic groups, 65.9% and 67.2%, respectively (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.33-1.34; p = 0.25; I2 = 76%).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to the pre-pandemic period, in hospital cardiac arrest in COVID-19 patients was numerically higher but had statistically similar outcomes.

Difficult Airway Management in Adult COVID-19 Patients: Statement by the Society of Airway Management

The COVID-19 disease, caused by Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, often results in severe hypoxemia requiring airway management. Because SARS CoV-2 virus is spread via respiratory droplets, bag-mask ventilation, intubation, and extubation may place health care workers (HCW) at risk. While existing recommendations address airway management in patients with COVID-19, no guidance exists specifically for difficult airway management. Some strategies normally recommended for difficult airway management may not be ideal in the setting of COVID-19 infection. To address this issue the Society for Airway Management (SAM) created a task force to review existing literature and current Practice Guidelines for management of the difficult airway by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. SAM task force created recommendations for management of known or suspected difficult airway in the setting of known or suspected COVID-19 infection. The goal of the task force was to optimize successful airway management while minimizing exposure risk. Each member conducted a literature review on specific clinical practice section utilizing standard search engines (PubMed, Ovid, Google Scholar). Existing recommendations and evidence for difficult airway management in COVID-19 context were developed. Each specific recommendation was discussed among task force members and modified until unanimously approved by all task force members. Elements of AGREE Reporting Checklist for dissemination of clinical practice guidelines were utilized to develop this statement. Airway management in the COVID-19 patient increases HCW exposure risk. and difficult airway management often takes longer, may involve multiple procedures with aerosolization potential, strict adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) protocols is mandatory to reduce risk to providers. When patient's airway risk assessment suggests awake tracheal intubation is an appropriate choice of technique, procedures that may cause increased aerosolization of secretions should be avoided. Optimal preoxygenation before induction with tight seal facemask may be performed to reduce risk of hypoxemia. Unless the patient is experiencing oxygen desaturation, positive pressure bag-mask ventilation after induction may be avoided to reduce aerosolization. For optimal intubating conditions, patients should be anesthetized with full muscle relaxation. Videolaryngoscopy is recommended as first-line strategy for airway management. If emergent invasive airway access is indicated, we recommend a surgical technique such as scalpel-bougie-tube, rather than an aerosolizing generating procedure, such as transtracheal jet ventilation. This statement represents recommendations by SAM task force for the difficult airway management of adults with COVID-19 with the goal to optimize successful airway management while minimizing the risk of clinician exposure.

In-hospital cardiac arrest in patients with coronavirus 2019

Background

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused over 1 200 000 deaths worldwide as of November 2020. However, little is known about the clinical outcomes among hospitalized patients with active COVID-19 after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA).

Aim

We aimed to characterize outcomes from IHCA in patients with COVID-19 and to identify patient- and hospital-level variables associated with 30-day survival.

Methods

We conducted a multicentre retrospective cohort study across 11 academic medical centres in the U.S. Adult patients who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation and/or defibrillation for IHCA between March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020 who had a documented positive test for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 were included. The primary outcome was 30-day survival after IHCA.

Results

There were 260 IHCAs among COVID-19 patients during the study period. The median age was 69 years (interquartile range 60–77), 71.5% were male, 49.6% were White, 16.9% were Black, and 16.2% were Hispanic. The most common presenting rhythms were pulseless electrical activity (45.0%) and asystole (44.6%). ROSC occurred in 58 patients (22.3%), 31 (11.9%) survived to hospital discharge, and 32 (12.3%) survived to 30 days. Rates of ROSC and 30-day survival in the two hospitals with the highest volume of IHCA over the study period compared to the remaining hospitals were considerably lower (10.8% vs. 64.3% and 5.9% vs. 35.7% respectively, p < 0.001 for both).

Conclusions

We found rates of ROSC and 30-day survival of 22.3% and 12.3% respectively. There were large variations in centre-level outcomes, which may explain the poor survival in prior studies.