Establishment of an extracorporeal cardio-pulmonary resuscitation program in Berlin - outcomes of 254 patients with refractory circulatory arrest

[Open questions with respect to extracorporeal circulatory support 2024]

The use of extracorporeal circulatory support, both for cardiogenic shock and during resuscitation, still presents many unanswered questions. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for such a resource-intensive treatment must be clearly defined, considering that these criteria are directly associated with the type and location of treatment. For example, it is worth questioning the viability of an extracorporeal resuscitation program in areas where it is impossible to achieve low-flow times under 60 min due to local limitations. Additionally, the best approach for further treatment, including whether it is necessary to regularly relieve the left ventricle, must be explored. To find answers to some of these questions, large-scale, multicenter, randomized studies and registers must be performed. Until then this treatment must be carefully considered before use.

Ongoing CPR with an onboard physician

Introduction

Recent data are not available on ongoing CPR for emergency services with an onboard physician. The aim of the present study was to identify factors associated with the decision to transport patients to hospital with ongoing CPR and examine their survival to hospital discharge with good neurological status.

Methods

An observational study based on a registry of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests attended to by emergency services with an onboard physician. All OHCA cases occurring between the 1st of January and the 31st of December 2022 were included. Patients receiving ongoing CPR during transport to the hospital were compared with patients pronounced dead at the scene following arrival of the care team. The dependent variable was ongoing CPR during transport to the hospital. The main characteristics and the neurological status of patients surviving to discharge were described.

Results

A total of 9321 cases were included, of which 350 (3.7%) were transported to hospital with ongoing CPR. Such patients were young (59.9 ± 20.1 years vs 64.6 ± 16.9 years; p < 0.001; 95%CI: 0.98 [0.98; 0.99]) with arrest taking place outside of the home (151 [44.5%] vs 4045 [68.01%]; p < 0.001; 95%CI: 0.41 [0.31; 0.54]) and being witnessed by EMS (126 [36.0%] vs 667 [11.0%]; p < 0.001; 95%CI: 4.31 [3.19; 5.80]), whilst initial rhythm differed from asystole (164 [47.6%] vs 4325 [73.0%]; p < 0.01; 95%CI: 0.44 [0.33; 0.60]) and a mechanical device was more often employed during resuscitation and transport to hospital (199 [56.9%] vs 2050 [33.8%]; p < 0.001; 95%CI: 2.75 [2.10; 3.59]). Seven patients (2%) were discharged alive from hospital, five with ad integrum neurological recovery (CPC1) and two with minimally impaired neurological function (CPC2).

Conclusions

The strategy of ongoing CPR is uncommon in EMS with an onboard physician. Despite their limited efficacy, the availability of mechanical chest compression devices, together with the possibility of specific hospital treatments, mainly ICP and ECMO, opens up the possibility of this approach with determined patients.

Scrutinizing the Role of Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Has Clinical Practice Outpaced the Evidence?

The use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for temporary mechanical circulatory support in various clinical scenarios has been increasing consistently, despite the lack of sufficient evidence regarding its benefit and safety from adequately powered randomized controlled trials. Although the ARREST trial (Advanced Reperfusion Strategies for Patients with Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest and Refractory Ventricular Fibrillation) and a secondary analysis of the PRAGUE OHCA trial (Prague Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest) provided some evidence in favor of VA-ECMO in the setting of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the INCEPTION trial (Early Initiation of Extracorporeal Life Support in Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest) has not found a relevant improvement of short-term mortality with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. In addition, the results of the recently published ECLS-SHOCK trial (Extracorporeal Life Support in Cardiogenic Shock) and ECMO-CS trial (Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the Therapy of Cardiogenic Shock) discourage the routine use of VA-ECMO in patients with infarct-related cardiogenic shock. Ongoing clinical trials (ANCHOR [Assessment of ECMO in Acute Myocardial Infarction Cardiogenic Shock, NCT04184635], REVERSE [Impella CP With VA ECMO for Cardiogenic Shock, NCT03431467], UNLOAD ECMO [Left Ventricular Unloading to Improve Outcome in Cardiogenic Shock Patients on VA-ECMO, NCT05577195], PIONEER [Hemodynamic Support With ECMO and IABP in Elective Complex High-risk PCI, NCT04045873]) may clarify the usefulness of VA-ECMO in specific patient subpopulations and the efficacy of combined mechanical circulatory support strategies. Pending further data to refine patient selection and management recommendations for VA-ECMO, it remains uncertain whether the present usage of this device improves outcomes.

Hospital-administered ECPR for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: an observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is a treatment method for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) requiring a complex chain of care.

METHODS

All cases of OHCA between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2021 in the Helsinki University Hospital catchment area in which the ECPR protocol was activated were included in the study. The protocol involved patient transport from the emergency site with ongoing mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) directly to the cardiac catheterisation laboratory where the implementation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) was considered. Cases of hypothermic cardiac arrest were excluded. The main outcomes were the number of ECPR protocol activations, duration of prehospital and in-hospital time intervals, and whether the ECPR candidates were treated using ECMO or not.

RESULTS

The prehospital ECPR protocol was activated in 73 cases of normothermic OHCA. The mean patient age (SD) was 54 (±11) years and 67 (91.8%) of them were male. The arrest was witnessed in 67 (91.8%) and initial rhythm was shockable in 61 (83.6%) cases. The median ambulance response time (IQR) was 9 (7-11) min. All patients received mechanical CPR, epinephrine and/or amiodarone. Seventy (95.9%) patients were endotracheally intubated. The median (IQR) highest prehospital end-tidal CO2 was 5.5 (4.0-6.9) kPa.A total of 37 (50.7%) patients were treated with venoarterial ECMO within a median (IQR) of 84 (71-105) min after the arrest. Thirteen (35.1%) of them survived to discharge and 11 (29.7%) with a cerebral performance category (CPC) 1-2. In those ECPR candidates who did not receive ECMO, 8 (22.2%) received permanent return of spontaneuous circulation during transport or immediately after hospital arrival and 6 (16.7%) survived to discharge with a CPC 1-2.

CONCLUSIONS

Half of the ECPR protocol activations did not lead to ECMO treatment. However, every fourth ECPR candidate and every third patient who received ECMO-facilitated resuscitation at the hospital survived with a good neurological outcome.

Mechanical chest compression and extracorporeal life support for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. A 30-month observational study in the metropolitan area of Milan, Italy

BACKGROUND

Return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) is achieved in 25% of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients. Mechanical chest compression (mechCPR) may maintain better perfusion during transport, allowing hospital treatments like extracorporeal circulation life support (ECLS). We aim to assess the effectiveness of a pre-hospital protocol introduction.

METHODS

Observational, retrospective study assessing all OHCA patients aged 12-75, with no-flow time <20 min in a metropolitan area (Milan, Italy, 2013-2016).

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

ROSC and Cerebral Performance Category score (CPC) ≤2 at hospital discharge. Logistic regressions with multiple comparison adjustments balanced with propensity scores calculated with inverse probability of treatment weighting were performed.

RESULTS

1366 OHCA were analysed; 305 received mechCPR, 1061 manual chest compressions (manCPR), and 108 ECLS. ROSC and CPC ≤2 were associated with low-flow minutes (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.90 [0.88-0.91] and 0.90 [0.87-0.93]), shockable rhythm (2.52 [1.71-3.72] and 10.68 [5.63-20.28]), defibrillations number (1.15 [1.07-1.23] and 1.15 [1.04-1.26]), and mechCPR (1.86 [1.17-2.96] and 2.06 [1.11-3.81]). With resuscitation times >13 min, mechCPR achieved more frequently ROSC compared to manCPR. Among ECLS patients, 70% had time exceeding protocol: 8 (7.5%) had CPC ≤2 (half of them with low-flow times between 45 and 90 min), 2 (1.9%) survived with severe neurological disabilities, and 13 brain-dead (12.0%) became organ donors.

CONCLUSIONS

MechCPR patients achieved ROSC more frequently than manual CPR patients; mechCPR was a crucial factor in an ECLS protocol for refractory OHCA. ECLS offered a chance of survival to patients who would otherwise die.

Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Narrative Review and Establishment of a Sustainable Program

The rates of survival with functional recovery for out of hospital cardiac arrest remain unacceptably low. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) quickly resolves the low-flow state of conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR) providing valuable perfusion to end organs. Observational studies have shown an association with the use of ECPR and improved survivability. Two recent randomized controlled studies have demonstrated improved survival with functional neurologic recovery when compared to CCPR. Substantial resources and coordination amongst different specialties and departments are crucial for the successful implementation of ECPR. Standardized protocols, simulation based training, and constant communication are invaluable to the sustainability of a program. Currently there is no standardized protocol for the post-cannulation management of these ECPR patients and, ideally, upcoming studies should aim to evaluate these protocols.

Optimal cardiopulmonary resuscitation duration for favorable neurological outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Background

A favorable neurological outcome is closely related to patient characteristics and total cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) duration. The total CPR duration consists of pre-hospital and in-hospital durations. To date, consensus is lacking on the optimal total CPR duration. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the upper limit of total CPR duration, the optimal cut-off time at the pre-hospital level, and the time to switch from conventional CPR to alternative CPR such as extracorporeal CPR.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective observational study using prospective, multi-center registry of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients between October 2015 and June 2019. Emergency medical service–assessed adult patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with non-traumatic OHCA were included. The primary endpoint was a favorable neurological outcome at hospital discharge.

Results

Among 7914 patients with OHCA, 577 had favorable neurological outcomes. The optimal cut-off for pre-hospital CPR duration in patients with OHCA was 12 min regardless of the initial rhythm. The optimal cut-offs for total CPR duration that transitioned from conventional CPR to an alternative CPR method were 25 and 21 min in patients with initial shockable and non-shockable rhythms, respectively. In the two groups, the upper limits of total CPR duration for achieving a probability of favorable neurological outcomes < 1% were 55–62 and 24–34 min, respectively, while those for a cumulative proportion of favorable neurological outcome > 99% were 43–53 and 45–71 min, respectively.

Conclusions

Herein, we identified the optimal cut-off time for transitioning from pre-hospital to in-hospital settings and from conventional CPR to alternative resuscitation. Although there is an upper limit of CPR duration, favorable neurological outcomes can be expected according to each patient’s resuscitation-related factors, despite prolonged CPR duration.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13049-022-00993-8.

How effective is extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) has gained increasing as a promising but resource-intensive intervention for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). There is little data to quantify the impact of this intervention and the patients likely to benefit from its use. We conducted a meta-analysis of the literature to assess the survival benefit associated with ECPR for OHCA.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases to identify relevant observational studies and randomized control trials. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane risk-of-bias tool to assess studies' quality. We performed random-effects meta-analysis for the primary outcome of survival to hospital discharge and used meta-regressions to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

We identified 1287 articles, reviewed the full text of 209 and included 44 in our meta-analysis. Our analysis included 3097 patients with OHCA. Patients' mean age was 52, 79% were male, and 60% had primary ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia arrest. We identified a survival-to-discharge rate of 24%; 18% survived with favorable neurologic function. 30- and 90-days survival rates were both around 18%. The majority of included articles were high quality studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a promising but resource-intensive intervention that may increase rates of survival to hospital discharge among patients who experience OHCA.