Currently, cardiac arrest has become a major public health problem, which has a high incidence rate and a high mortality rate in humans. With the continuous advancement of cardiopulmonary resuscitation techniques, the overall prognosis of cardiac arrest victims is gradually improved. However, cardiac arrest events under special circumstances are still serious threats to human health. This article reviews the progress of epidemiology, pathogenesis, treatment characteristics, and key points of cardiopulmonary resuscitation in those special cardiac arrest events associated with trauma, poisoning, drowning and pregnancy.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the early clinical prediction value of machine learning (ML) for cardiac arrest (CA).MethodsPubMed, EMbase, WanFang Data and CNKI databases were electronically searched to retrieve all ML studies on predicting CA from January 2015 to February 2021. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. The value of each model was evaluated based on the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and accuracy.ResultsA total of 38 studies were included. In terms of data sources, 13 studies were based on public database, and other studies retrospectively collected clinical data, in which 21 directly predicted CA, 3 predicted CA-related arrhythmias, and 9 predicted sudden cardiac death. A total of 51 models had been adopted, among which the most popular ML methods included artificial neural network (n=11), followed by random forest (n=9) and support vector machine (n=5). The most frequently used input feature was electrocardiogram parameters (n=20), followed by age (n=12) and heart rate variability (n=10). Six studies compared the ML models with other traditional statistical models and the results showed that the AUC value of ML was generally higher than that in traditional statistical models.ConclusionsThe available evidence suggests that ML can accurately predict the occurrence of CA, and the performance is significantly superior to traditional statistical model in certain cases.
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a very important treatment after cardiac arrest. The optimal treatment strategy of CPR is uncertain. With the accumulation of clinical medical evidence, the CPR treatment recommendations have been changed. This article will review the current hot issues and progress, including the pathophysiological mechanisms of CPR, how to achieve high-quality chest compression, how to achieve CPR quality monitoring, how to achieve optimal CPR for different individuals and how to use antiarrhythmic drugs.
American Heart Association (AHA) updated the advanced cardiovascular life support use of antiarrhythmic drugs during and immediately after cardiac arrest in the AHA guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care in November 2018. Based on the latest progress of relative evidence-based clinical evidence and 2015 AHA guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and cardiovascular emergency cardiovascular care. This update gave recommends on the use of antiarrhythmic drugs during resuscitation from adult shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation (VF) and pulseless ventricular tachycardia (pVT) cardiac arrest and immediately after restoration of spontaneous circulation following shock-refractory VF/pVT cardiac arrest, respectively. This review aims to interpret this update by reviewing the literature and comparing the recommends in this update with other guidelines.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of intravascular cooling versus surface cooling for induced mild hypothermia on the prognosis of patients with cardiac arrest (CA) after resuscitation.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about the efficacy and safety of intravascular cooling versus surface cooling for CA patients after resuscitation from inception to July 2019. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then, meta-analysis was performed by using Stata 13.0 software.ResultsA total of 9 cohort studies and 3 RCTs involving 2 104 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: the rate of good neurological function was significantly higher (OR=1.45, 95%CI 1.18 to 1.78, P<0.001) and the induction time was significantly shorter (SMD=−1.35, 95%CI −2.34 to −0.36, P=0.008) in the intravascular cooling group, but there was no statistical difference in mortality between two groups (OR=0.84, 95%CI 0.70 to 1.00, P=0.053). In terms of complications related to mild hypothermia, the rate of excessive hypothermia (OR=0.27, 95%CI 0.18 to 0.41, P<0.001) and arrhythmia (OR=0.60, 95%CI 0.40 to 0.89, P=0.012) was significantly lower in the patients treated with intravascular cooling, but the incidence of coagulopathy was higher (OR=1.61, 95%CI 1.05 to 2.49, P=0.03). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of pneumonia between two groups (OR=1.20, 95%CI 0.94 to 1.53, P=0.147).ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that intravascular cooling has significant neurological protection for patients with CA compared with surface cooling since it can decrease the induction time and the rate of excessive hypothermia and arrhythmia, but it may have a negative effect on the coagulation function. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
Although the survival rate reported in each center is different, according to the present studies, compared to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR), extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) can improve the survival rate of cardiac arrest patient, no matter out-of-hospital or in-hospital. The obvious advantage of ECPR is that it can reduce the nervous system complications in the cardiac arrest patients and improve survival rate to hospital discharge. However, ECPR is expensive and without the uniformed indications for implantation. The prognosis for patients with ECPR support is also variant due to the different etiology. If we want to achieve better result, the ECPR technology itself needs to be further improved.
American Heart Association issued American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care in October 2020. A sixth link, recovery, has been added to both the adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest chain and in-hospital cardiac arrest chain in this version of the guidelines to emphasize the importance of recovery and survivorship for resuscitation outcomes. Analogous chains of survival have also been developed for adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and in-hospital cardiac arrest. The major new and updated recommendations involve the early initiation of cardiopulmonary resuscitation by lay rescuers, early administration of epinephrine, real-time audiovisual feedback, physiologic monitoring of cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality, double sequential defibrillation not supported, intravenous access preferred over intraosseous, post-cardiac arrest care and neuroprognostication, care and support during recovery, debriefings for rescuers, and cardiac arrest in pregnancy. This present review aims to interpret these updates by reviewing the literature and comparing the recommendations in these guidelines with previous ones.
Since the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019, the incidence and mortality of cardiac arrest have increased significantly worldwide, and the management of cardiac arrest is facing new challenges. The European Resuscitation Council issued the 2021 European Resuscitation Council Guidelines in March 2021 to update the important parts of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and added recommendations for the management of cardiopulmonary resuscitation during the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic. This article will compare the difference between this guideline and the 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care and integrate some key points, review literature and then summarize the latest research progress in cardiopulmonary resuscitation since the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic. The content mainly involves cardiopulmonary resuscitation during the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic, early prevention, early recognition, application of new technologies, airway management, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation and post-resuscitation treatment.
American Heart Association updated the guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and emergency cardiovascular care in November 2019. This focused update incorporates the systematic review conducted by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, an expert group consisting of hundreds of international resuscitation scientists, to identify the new evidence supporting the basic and advanced life support and first aid in emergency medical care. This focused update involves the life chain of CPR (dispatcher-assisted CPR and cardiac arrest centers), advanced cardiovascular life support (advanced airways, vasopressors, and extracorporeal CPR), and first aid for presyncope. This present review aims to interpret these updates by reviewing the literature and comparing the recommendations in this update with previous guidelines.
ObjectiveTo compare the effects of different airway management strategies on outcomes of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and WanFang Data for relevant studies comparing the influence of different airway management strategies on outcomes of OHCA patients. The deadline was up to 31st May, 2019. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system 3.6 was used for quality assessment, and RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to conduct the comparison. Results A total of 20 studies were finally enrolled, including 880 567 OHCA patients. Compared with supraglottic airway (SGA), bag-valve mask (BVM) improved the rate of survival to discharge of OHCA patients [OR=1.45, 95%CI (1.01, 2.08), P=0.04], while the rate of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) was not improved (P>0.05); in the subgroup analysis, BVM and SGA had similar effect on the rate of ROSC and the rate of survival to discharge in Asian countries (P>0.05), while BVM performed better than SGA in the two rates in European and American countries. BVM and endotracheal intubation (ETI) had similar effect on the two rates (P>0.05). In Asian countries, ETI performed better than BVM in the rate of ROSC [OR=0.63, 95%CI (0.49, 0.81), P=0.000 3], and there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of survival to discharge between ETI and BVM (P>0.05); while in European andAmerican countries, BVM performed better than ETI in the rate of survival to discharge [OR=3.10, 95%CI (2.69, 3.56), P<0.000 01], and there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of ROSC between ETI and BVM (P>0.05). Compared with SGA, ETI improved the rate of ROSC [OR=0.68, 95%CI (0.62, 0.76), P<0.000 01] and the rate of survival to discharge [OR=0.89, 95%CI (0.81, 0.98), P=0.02]. In Asian countries, ETI performed better than SGA in the two rates (P<0.05); while in European and American countries and New Zealand, ETI performed better than SGA in the rate of ROSC (P<0.05), but there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of survival to discharge (P>0.05). Conclusions Different airway management strategies have differente effects on OHCA patients. The optimal airway management strategy when rescuing OHCA patients might be selected based on local emergency medical service system conditions.