[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Indications for immediate cardiac catheterization in cardiac arrest survivors without ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are uncertain as electrocardiographic and clinical criteria may be challenging to interpret in this population. We sought to evaluate rates of early catheterization after in-hospital ventricular fibrillation (VF) arrest and the association with survival.
Using a billing database we retrospectively identified cases with an ICD-9 code of cardiac arrest (427.5) or VF (427.41). Discharge summaries were reviewed to identify in-hospital VF arrests. Rates of catheterization on the day of arrest were determined by identifying billing charges. Unadjusted analyses were performed using Chi-square, and adjusted analyses were performed using logistic regression.
One hundred and ten in-hospital VF arrest survivors were included in the analysis. Cardiac catheterization was performed immediately or within 1 day of arrest in 27% (30/110) of patients and of these patients, 57% (17/30) successfully received percutaneous coronary intervention. Of those who received cardiac catheterization the indication for the procedure was STEMI or new left bundle branch block (LBBB) in 43% (13/30). Therefore, in the absence of standard ECG data suggesting acute myocardial infarction, 57% (17/30) received angiography. Patients receiving cardiac catheterization were more likely to survive than those who did not receive catheterization (80% vs. 54%, p<.05).
In patients receiving cardiac catheterization, more than half received this procedure for indications other than STEMI or new LBBB. Cardiac catheterization was associated with improved survival. Future recommendations need to be established to guide clinicians on which arrest survivors might benefit from immediate catheterization.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: We sought to evaluate current physician use of therapeutic hypothermia after cardiac arrest, to ascertain reasons for nonadoption of this treatment, and to determine current cooling techniques employed.
International physician cohort in the United States, UK, and Finland.
Physicians (MD or DO) caring for resuscitated cardiac arrest patients.
An anonymous Web-based survey was distributed to physicians identified through United States-based critical care, cardiology, and emergency medicine directories and critical care networks in the UK and Finland. Recipients were queried regarding use of postresuscitation therapeutic hypothermia.
Of the final 13,272 surveys actually distributed to physicians, 2,248 (17%) were completed. Most respondents were attending physicians (82%) at teaching hospitals (76%) who practiced critical care (35%), cardiology (20%), or emergency medicine (22%). Of all replies, 74% of United States respondents and 64% of non-United States respondents had never used therapeutic hypothermia. United States emergency medicine physician adoption of cooling was significantly less than that of United States intensivists (16% vs. 34%, p < .05). The most often cited reasons for nonuse by respondents were "not enough data," "not part of Advanced Cardiac Life Support guidelines," and "too technically difficult to use." Factors associated with increased use included non-United States residence, critical care specialty, and larger hospital size.
Physician utilization of cooling after cardiac arrest remains low. For improved adoption of therapeutic hypothermia, our data suggest that development of better cooling methodology and recent incorporation into resuscitation guidelines may improve use.
Full-text · Article · Aug 2006 · Critical Care Medicine