Do Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients Have Increased Chances of Survival When Transported to a Cardiac Resuscitation Center?

Cardiac arrest centres for patients with non-traumatic cardiac arrest: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Regionalisation and organised pathways of care using specialist centre hospitals can improve outcomes for critically ill patients. Cardiac arrest centre hospitals (CAC) may optimise the delivery of post-resuscitation care. The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) has called for a review of the current evidence base.

AIM

This systematic review aimed to assess the effect of cardiac arrest centres for patients with non-traumatic cardiac arrest.

METHODS

Articles were included if they met the prospectively registered (PROSPERO) inclusion criteria. These followed the PICOST framework for ILCOR systematic reviews. A strict definition for a CAC was used, reflecting current position statements and clinical practice. MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched using pre-determined criteria from inception to 31 December 2023. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool and ROBINS-I. The certainty of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the GRADE approach. Substantial heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis and a narrative synthesis with visualisation of effect estimates in forest plots was performed.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies met eligibility criteria, including data on over 145,000 patients. One was a randomised controlled trial (RCT) at low risk of bias and the remainder were observational studies, all at moderate or serious risk of bias. All studies included adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. One study used initial shockable rhythm as an inclusion criterion and most studies (n = 12) included patients regardless of prehospital ROSC status. Two studies, including the RCT, excluded patients with ST elevation. Survival to hospital discharge with a favourable neurological outcome was reported by 11 studies and favoured CAC care in all observational studies, but the RCT showed no difference. Survival to 30 days with a favourable neurological outcome was reported by two observational studies and favoured CAC care in both. Survival to hospital discharge was reported by 13 observational studies and generally favoured CAC care. Survival to 30 days was reported by two studies, where the observational study favoured CAC care, but the RCT showed no difference.

CONCLUSION

This review supports a weak recommendation that adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest are cared for at CACs based on very low certainty of evidence. Randomised evidence has not confirmed the benefits of CACs found in observational studies, however this RCT was a single trial in a very specific setting and a population without ST elevation on post-ROSC ECG. The role of CACs in shockable and non-shockable subgroups, direct versus secondary transfer, as well as the impact of increased transport time and bypassing local hospitals remains unclear.

Association between direct transport to a cardiac arrest centre and survival following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A propensity-matched Aotearoa New Zealand study

Background and Objectives

Direct transport to a cardiac arrest centre following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest may be associated with higher survival. However, there is limited evidence available to support this within the New Zealand context. This study used a propensity score-matched cohort to investigate whether direct transport to a cardiac arrest centre improved survival in New Zealand.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Aotearoa New Zealand Paramedic Care Collection (ANZPaCC) database for adults treated for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac aetiology between 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2023. Propensity score-matched analysis was used to investigate survival at 30-days post-event according to the receiving hospital being a cardiac arrest centre versus a non-cardiac arrest centre.

Results

There were 2,297 OHCA patients included. Propensity matching resulted in 554 matched pairs (n = 1108). Thirty-day survival in propensity score-matched patients transported directly to a cardiac arrest centre (56%) versus a non-cardiac arrest centre (45%) was not significantly different (adjusted Odds Ratio 0.78 95%CI 0.54, 1.13, p = 0.19). Shockable presenting rhythm, bystander CPR, and presence of STEMI were associated with a higher odds of 30 day survival (p < 0.05). Māori or Pacific Peoples ethnicity and older age were associated with lower survival (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

This study found no statistically significant difference in outcomes for OHCA patients transferred to a cardiac arrest compared to a non-cardiac arrest centre. However, the odds ratio of 0.78, equivalent to a 22% decrease in 30-day mortality, is consistent with benefit associated with management by a cardiac arrest centre. Further research in larger cohorts with detailed information on known outcome predictors, or large randomised clinical trials are needed.

Cardiac arrest centres: what do they add?

There are wide regional variations in outcome following resuscitated out of hospital cardiac arrest. These geographical differences appear to be due to hospital infrastructure and provider experience rather than baseline characteristics. It is proposed that post-arrest care be delivered in a systematic fashion by concentrating services in Cardiac Arrest Centres, with greater provider experience, 24-hour access to diagnostics, and specialist treatment to minimise the impact of ischaemia-reperfusion injury and treat the causative pathology. These cardiac arrest centres would provide access to targeted critical care, acute cardiac care, radiology services and appropriate neuro-prognostication. However implementation of cardiac arrest networks with specialist receiving hospitals is complex and requires alignment of pre-hospital care services with those delivered in hospital. Furthermore there are no randomised trial data currently supporting pre-hospital delivery to a Cardiac Arrest Centre and definitions are heterogeneous. In this review article, we propose a universal definition of a Cardiac Arrest Centre and review the current observational data evidence and the potential impact of the ARREST trial.

Interhospital variability in Out-of-Hospital cardiac arrest survival in a large metropolitan area

Background

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survival varies widely across the United States. The impact of hospital OHCA volume and ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) Receiving Center (SRC) designation on survival is not fully understood.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of adult OHCA who survived to hospital admission reported to the Chicago Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival (CARES) database from May 1, 2013 to December 31, 2019. Hierarchical logistic regression models were generated and adjusted by hospital characteristics. Survival to hospital discharge (SHD) and cerebral performance category (CPC) 1-2 at each hospital were calculated after adjusting for arrest characteristics. Hospitals were assigned quartiles (Q1-Q4) based on total arrest volume to allow for comparison of SHD and CPC 1-2 between quartiles.

Results

4,020 patients met inclusion criteria. 21 of the 33 Chicago hospitals included in this study were designated SRCs. Adjusted SHD and CPC 1-2 rates ranged from 27.3% to 37.0% and from 8.9% to 25.1%, respectively, by hospital. SRC designation did not significantly affect SHD (OR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.71-1.30) nor CPC 1-2 (OR 1.17; 95% CI, 0.74-1.84). OHCA volume quartiles did not significantly affect SHD (Q2: OR 0.94; 95% CI, 0.54-1.60; Q3: OR 1.30; 95% CI, 0.78-2.16; Q4: OR 1.25; 95% CI, 0.74-2.10) nor CPC 1-2 (Q2: OR 0.75; 95% CI, 0.36-1.54; Q3: OR 0.94; 95% CI, 0.48-1.87; Q4: OR 0.97; 95% CI, 0.48-1.97).

Conclusion

Interhospital variability in both SHD and CPC 1-2 cannot be explained by hospital arrest volume nor SRC status. Further research is warranted to explore reasons for interhospital variability.

Direct Transport to Cardiac Arrest Center and Survival Outcomes after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest by Urbanization Level

Current guidelines for post-resuscitation care recommend regionalized care at a cardiac arrest center (CAC). Our objectives were to evaluate the effect of direct transport to a CAC on survival outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs), and to assess interaction effects between CAC and urbanization levels. Adult EMS-treated OHCAs with presumed cardiac etiology between 2015 and 2019 were enrolled. The main exposure was the hospital where OHCA patients were transported by EMS (CAC or non-CAC). The outcomes were good neurological recovery and survival to discharge. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted. Interaction analysis between the urbanization level of the location of arrest (metropolitan or urban/rural area) and the exposure variable was performed. Among the 95,931 study population, 23,292 (24.3%) OHCA patients were transported directly to CACs. Patients in the CAC group had significantly higher likelihood of good neurological recovery and survival to discharge than the non-CAC group (both p < 0.01, aORs (95% CIs): 1.75 (1.63–1.89) and 1.70 (1.60–1.80), respectively). There were interaction effects between CAC and the urbanization level for good neurological recovery and survival to discharge. Direct transport to CAC was associated with significantly better clinical outcomes compared to non-CAC, and the findings were strengthened in OHCAs occurring in nonmetropolitan areas.

An Overview of Therapy Guidelines for Cardiac Arrest and the Potential Benefits of Hemoglobin-Based Oxygen Carriers

Currently, there is an unmet therapeutic need for the medical management of cardiac arrest, as is evident from the high mortality rate associated with this condition. These dire outcomes can be attributed to the severe nature and poor prognosis of this disorder. However, the current treatment modalities, while helping to augment survival, are limited and do not offer adequate improvements to outcomes. Treatment modalities are particularly lacking when considering the underlying pathophysiology of the metabolic phase of cardiac arrest. In this study, we explore the three phases of cardiac arrest and assess the factors related to positive clinical outcomes and survival for these events. Furthermore, we evaluate the present guidelines for resuscitation and recovery, the issues related to ischemia and tissue reperfusion, and the benefit of oxygen-delivery therapeutic methods including blood transfusion therapy and synthetic hemoglobins (HBOCs). The current therapy protocols are limited specifically by the lack of an efficient method of oxygen delivery to address the metabolic phase of cardiac arrest. In this article, we investigate the next generation of HBOCs and review their properties that make them attractive for their potential application in the treatment of cardiac arrest. These products may be a viable solution to address complications associated with ischemia, reperfusion injury, and organ damage.

Impact of Cardiac Arrest Centers on the Survival of Patients With Nontraumatic Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The role of cardiac arrest centers (CACs) in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest care systems is continuously evolving. Interpretation of existing literature is limited by heterogeneity in CAC characteristics and types of patients transported to CACs. This study assesses the impact of CACs on survival in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest according to varying definitions of CAC and prespecified subgroups.

Methods and Results

Electronic databases were searched from inception to March 9, 2021 for relevant studies. Centers were considered CACs if self‐declared by study authors and capable of relevant interventions. Main outcomes were survival and neurologically favorable survival at hospital discharge or 30 days. Meta‐analyses were performed for adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and crude odds ratios. Thirty‐six studies were analyzed. Survival with favorable neurological outcome significantly improved with treatment at CACs (aOR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.52–2.26]), even when including high‐volume centers (aOR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.18–1.91]) or including improved‐care centers (aOR, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.75–2.59]) as CACs. Survival significantly increased with treatment at CACs (aOR, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.59–2.32]), even when including high‐volume centers (aOR, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.38–2.18]) or when including improved‐care centers (aOR, 1.97 [95% CI, 1.71–2.26]) as CACs. The treatment effect was more pronounced among patients with shockable rhythm (P=0.006) and without prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (P=0.005). Conclusions were robust to sensitivity analyses, with no publication bias detected.

Conclusions

Care at CACs was associated with improved survival and neurological outcomes for patients with nontraumatic out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest regardless of varying CAC definitions. Patients with shockable rhythms and those without prehospital return of spontaneous circulation benefited more from CACs. Evidence for bypassing hospitals or interhospital transfer remains inconclusive.

Effects of pre-hospital re-arrest on outcomes based on transfer to a heart attack centre in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

AIM

We aimed to investigate the interaction effects between transfer to a heart attack centre [HAC] and prehospital re-arrest on the clinical outcomes of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest [OHCA].

METHODS

We included adult patients with OHCA of presumed cardiac aetiology from January 2012 to December 2018. The main exposure variable was prehospital re-arrest, defined as recurrence of cardiac arrest with a loss of palpable pulse upon hospital arrival. The other exposure variable was the resuscitation capacity of the receiving hospital [HAC or Non-HAC]. The outcome variable was neurological recovery. A multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine the interaction effects.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 6935 patients. Of these, 21.9% (n = 1521) experienced prehospital re-arrest, whereas 41.3% (n = 2866) were transferred to a non-HAC. The prehospital re-arrest group associated with poor neurological recovery (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-0.29;). Transfer to an HAC had beneficial effects on neurological recovery (AOR, 3.40 [95% CI, 3.04-3.85]. In the interaction model, wherein prehospital re-arrest patients who were transferred to a non-HAC were used as reference, the AOR of prehospital re-arrest patients who were transferred to an HAC, non-re-arrest patients who were transferred to a non-HAC, and non-re-arrest patients who were transferred to a non-HAC was 2.41 (95% CI, 1.73-3.35), 3.09 (95% CI, 2.33-4.10), and 11.07 (95% CI, 8.40-14.59) respectively (interaction p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Transport to a heart attack centre was beneficial to the clinical outcomes of patients who achieved prehospital ROSC after OHCA. The magnitude of that benefit was significantly modified by whether prehospital re-arrest had occurred.

Epidemiology of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Critically Ill Children Admitted to Pediatric Intensive Care Units Across England: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Background Cardiopulmonary arrests are a major contributor to mortality and morbidity in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). Understanding the epidemiology and risk factors for CPR may inform national quality improvement initiatives. Methods and Results A retrospective cohort analysis using prospectively collected data from the Paediatric Intensive Care Audit Network database. The Paediatric Intensive Care Audit Network contains data on all PICU admissions in the United Kingdom. We identified children who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in 23 PICUs in England (2013-2017). Incidence rates of CPR and associated factors were analyzed. Logistic regression was used to estimate the size and precision of associations. Cumulative incidence of CPR was 2.2% for 68 114 admissions over 5 years with an incidence rate of 4.9 episodes/1000 bed days. Cardiovascular diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 2.30; 95% CI, 2.02-2.61), age <1 year (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.65-2.04), the Paediatric Index of Mortality 2 score on admission (OR, 1.045; 95% CI, 1.042-1.047) and longer length of stay (OR, 1.013; 95% CI, 1.012-1.014) were associated with increased odds of receiving CPR. We also found a higher risk of CPR associated with a history of preadmission cardiac arrest (OR, 20.69; [95% CI, 18.16-23.58) and for children with a cardiac condition admitted to a noncardiac PICU (OR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.91-3.98). Children from Black (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.36-2.07) and Asian (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.28-1.74) racial/ethnic backgrounds were at higher risk of receiving CPR in PICU than White children. Conclusions Data from this first multicenter study from England provides a foundation for further research and evidence for benchmarking and quality improvement for prevention of cardiac arrests in PICU.

Bypassing out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients to a regional cardiac center: Impact on hemodynamic parameters and outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Current guidelines recommend systematic care for patients who experience out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and the development of cardiac arrest centers (CACs). However, data regarding prolonged transport time of these often hemodynamically unstable patients are limited.

METHODS

Data from a prospective OHCA registry of a regional CAC collected between 2013 and 2017, when all OHCA patients from the district were required to be transferred directly to the CAC, were analyzed. Patients were divided into two subgroups: CAC, when the CAC was the nearest hospital; and bypass, when OHCA occurred in a region of another local hospital but the subject was transferred directly to the CAC (7 hospitals in the district). Data included transport time, baseline characteristics, hemodynamic and laboratory parameters on admission (systolic blood pressure, lactate, pH, oxygen saturation, body temperature, and initial doses of vasopressors and inotropes), and final outcomes (30-day in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit stay, days on artificial ventilation, and cerebral performance capacity at 1 year).

RESULTS

A total of 258 subjects experienced OHCA in the study period; however, 27 were excluded due to insufficient data and 17 for secondary transfer to CAC. As such, 214 patients were analyzed, 111 in the CAC group and 103 in the bypass group. The median transport time was significantly longer for the bypass group than the CAC group (40.5 min [IQR 28.3-55.0 min] versus 20.0 min [IQR 13.0-34.0], respectively; p˂0.0001). There were no differences in 30-day in-hospital mortality, 1-year neurological outcome, or median length of mechanical ventilation. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, initial hemodynamic parameters on admission, catecholamine dosage(s).

CONCLUSION

Individuals who experienced OHCA and taken to a CAC incurred significantly prolonged transport times; however, hemodynamic parameters and/or outcomes were not affected. These findings shows the safety of bypassing local hospitals for a CAC.

Postarrest Interventions that Save Lives

Patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest require complex management. An organized approach to early postarrest care can improve patient outcomes. Priorities include completing a focused diagnostic work-up to identify and reverse the inciting cause of arrest, stabilizing cardiorespiratory instability to prevent rearrest, minimizing secondary brain injury, evaluating the risk and benefits of transfer to a specialty care center, and avoiding early neurologic prognostication.

Impact of Transport Time and Cardiac Arrest Centers on the Neurological Outcome After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Should all out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients be directly transported to cardiac arrest centers (CACs) remains under debate. Our study evaluated the impacts of different transport time and destination hospital on the outcomes of OHCA patients.

Methods and Results

Data were collected from 6655 OHCA patients recorded in the regional prospective OHCA registry database of Taoyuan City, Taiwan, between January 2012 and December 2016. Patients were matched on propensity score, which left 5156 patients, 2578 each in the CAC and non‐CAC groups. Transport time was dichotomized into <8 and ≥8 minutes. The relations between the transport time to CACs and good neurological outcome at discharge and survival to discharge were investigated. Of the 5156 patients, 4215 (81.7%) presented with nonshockable rhythms and 941 (18.3%) presented with shockable rhythms. Regardless of transport time, transportation to a CAC increased the likelihoods of survival to discharge (<8 minutes: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.95; 95% CI, 1.11–3.41; ≥8 minutes: aOR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.25–2.94) and good neurological outcome at discharge (<8 minutes: aOR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.40–5.22; ≥8 minutes: aOR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.29–3.75) in OHCA patients with shockable rhythms but not in patients with nonshockable rhythms.

Conclusions

OHCA patients with shockable rhythms transported to CACs demonstrated higher probabilities of survival to discharge and a good neurological outcome at discharge. Direct ambulance delivery to CACs should thus be considered, particularly when OHCA patients present with shockable rhythms.

Cardiac arrest: An interdisciplinary review of the literature from 2018

OBJECTIVES

The Interdisciplinary Cardiac Arrest Research Review (ICARE) group was formed in 2018 to conduct a systematic annual search of peer-reviewed literature relevant to cardiac arrest (CA). The goals of the review are to illustrate best practices and help reduce knowledge silos by disseminating clinically relevant advances in the field of CA across disciplines.

METHODS

An electronic search of PubMed using keywords related to CA was conducted. Title and abstracts retrieved by these searches were screened for relevancy, separated by article type (original research or review), and sorted into 7 categories. Screened manuscripts underwent standardized scoring of overall methodological quality and importance. Articles scoring higher than 99 percentiles by category-type were selected for full critique. Systematic differences between editors and reviewer scores were assessed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

RESULTS

A total of 9119 articles were identified on initial search; of these, 1214 were scored after screening for relevance and deduplication, and 80 underwent full critique. Prognostication & Outcomes category comprised 25% and Epidemiology & Public Health 17.5% of fully reviewed articles. There were no differences between editor and reviewer scoring.

CONCLUSIONS

The total number of articles demonstrates the need for an accessible source summarizing high-quality research findings to serve as a high-yield reference for clinicians and scientists seeking to absorb the ever-growing body of CA-related literature. This may promote further development of the unique and interdisciplinary field of CA medicine.

Do Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients Have Increased Chances of Survival When Transported to a Cardiac Resuscitation Center?

Background

Patients suffering from an out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest are often transported to the closest hospital. Although it has been suggested that these patients be transported to cardiac resuscitation centers, few jurisdictions have acted on this recommendation. To better evaluate the evidence on this subject, a systematic review and meta‐analysis of the currently available literature evaluating the association between the destination hospital's capability (cardiac resuscitation center or not) and resuscitation outcomes for adult patients suffering from an out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest was performed.

Methods and Results

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were first searched using a specifically designed search strategy. Both original randomized controlled trials and observational studies were considered for inclusion. Cardiac resuscitation centers were defined as having on‐site percutaneous coronary intervention and targeted temperature management capability at all times. The primary outcome measure was survival. Twelve nonrandomized observational studies were retained in this review. A total of 61 240 patients were included in the 10 studies that could be included in the meta‐analysis regarding the survival outcome. Being transported to a cardiac resuscitation center was associated with an increase in survival (odds ratio=1.95 [95% confidence interval 1.47‐2.59], P<0.001).

Conclusions

Adult patients suffering from an out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest transported to cardiac resuscitation centers have better outcomes than their counterparts. When possible, it is reasonable to transport these patients directly to cardiac resuscitation centers (class IIa, level of evidence B, nonrandomized).

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/. Unique identifier: CRD42018086608.