The relationship of large city out-of-hospital cardiac arrests and the prevalence of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Though variable, many major metropolitan cities reported profound and unprecedented increases in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in early 2020. This study examined the relative magnitude of those increases and their relationship to COVID-19 prevalence. METHODS: EMS (9-1-1 system) medical directors for 50 of the largest U.S. cities agreed to provide the aggregate, de-identified, pre-existing monthly tallies of OHCA among adults (age >18 years) occurring between January and June 2020 within their respective jurisdictions. Identical comparison data were also provided for corresponding time periods in 2018 and 2019.  Equivalent data were obtained from the largest cities in Italy, United Kingdom and France, as well as Perth, Australia and Auckland, New Zealand. FINDINGS: Significant OHCA escalations generally paralleled local prevalence of COVID-19. During April, most U.S. cities (34/50) had >20% increases in OHCA versus 2018-2019 which reflected high local COVID-19 prevalence. Thirteen observed 1·5-fold increases in OHCA and three COVID-19 epicenters had >100% increases (2·5-fold in New York City). Conversely, cities with lesser COVID-19 impact observed unchanged (or even diminished) OHCA numbers. Altogether (n = 50), on average, OHCA cases/city rose 59% during April (p = 0·03). By June, however, after mitigating COVID-19 spread, cities with the highest OHCA escalations returned to (or approached) pre-COVID OHCA numbers while cities minimally affected by COVID-19 during April (and not experiencing OHCA increases), then had marked OHCA escalations when COVID-19 began to surge locally. European, Australian, and New Zealand cities mirrored the U.S. experience. INTERPRETATION: Most metropolitan cities experienced profound escalations of OHCA generally paralleling local prevalence of COVID-19.  Most of these patients were pronounced dead without COVID-19 testing. FUNDING: No funding was involved. Cities provided de-identified aggregate data collected routinely for standard quality assurance functions.

Integral Use of Thromboelastography With Platelet Mapping to Guide Appropriate Treatment, Avoid Complications, and Improve Survival of Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019-Related Coagulopathy.

OBJECTIVES: Coagulopathy of coronavirus disease 2019 is largely described as hypercoagulability, yet both thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications occur. Although therapeutic and prophylactic anticoagulant interventions have been recommended, empiric use of antifactor medications (heparin/enoxaparin) may result in hemorrhagic complications, including death. Furthermore, traditional (antifactor) anticoagulation does not address the impact of overactive platelets in coronavirus disease 2019. The primary aim was to evaluate if algorithm-guided thromboelastography with platelet mapping could better characterize an individual's coronavirus disease 2019-relatedcoagulopathic state and, secondarily, improve outcomes. DESIGN SETTING AND PATIENTS: Coronavirus disease 2019 patients (n = 100), receiving thromboelastography with platelet mapping assay upon admission to an 800-bed tertiary-care hospital, were followed prospectively by a hospital-based thromboelastography team. Treating clinicians were provided with the option of using a pre-established algorithm for anticoagulation, including follow-up thromboelastography with platelet mapping assays. Two groups evolved: 1) patients managed by thromboelastography with platelet mapping algorithm (algorithm-guided-thromboelastography); 2) those treated without thromboelastography with platelet mapping protocols (non-algorithm-guided). Outcomes included thrombotic/hemorrhagic complications, pulmonary failure, need for mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, dialysis requirement, and nonsurvival. INTERVENTIONS: Standard-of-care therapy with or without algorithm-guided-thromboelastography support. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Although d-dimer, C-reactive protein, and ferritin were elevated significantly in critically ill (nonsurvivors, acute kidney injury, pulmonary failure), they did not distinguish between coagulopathic and noncoagulopathic patients. Platelet hyperactivity (maximum amplitude-arachidonic acid/adenosine diphosphate > 50 min), with or without thrombocytosis, was associated with thrombotic/ischemic complications, whereas severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 100,000/µL) was uniformly fatal. Hemorrhagic complications were observed with decreased factor activity (reaction time > 8 min). Non-algorithm-guided patients had increased risk for subsequent mechanical ventilation (relative risk = 10.9; p < 0.0001), acute kidney injury (relative risk = 2.3; p = 0.0017), dialysis (relative risk = 7.8; p < 0.0001), and death (relative risk = 7.7; p < 0.0001), with 17 of 28 non-algorithm-guided patients (60.7%) dying versus four algorithm-guided-thromboelastography patients (5.6%) (p < 0.0001). Thromboelastography with platelet mapping-guided antiplatelet treatment decreased mortality 82% (p = 0.0002), whereas non-algorithm-guided (compared with algorithm-guided-thromboelastography) use of antifactor therapy (heparin/enoxaparin) resulted in 10.3-fold increased mortality risk (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Thromboelastography with platelet mapping better characterizes the spectrum of coronavirus disease 2019 coagulation-related abnormalities and may guide more tailored, patient-specific therapies in those infected with coronavirus disease 2019.

Rapid reorganization of the Milan metropolitan public safety answering point operations during the initial phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy.

Objective: To quantify how the first public announcement of confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Italy affected a metropolitan region's emergency medical services (EMS) call volume and how rapid introduction of alternative procedures at the public safety answering point (PSAP) managed system resources. Methods: PSAP processes were modified over several days including (1) referral of non-ill callers to public health information call centers; (2) algorithms for detection, isolation, or hospitalization of suspected COVID-19 patients; and (3) specialized medical teams sent to the PSAP for triage and case management, including ambulance dispatches or alternative dispositions. Call volumes, ambulance dispatches, and response intervals for the 2 weeks after announcement were compared to 2017-2019 data and the week before. Results: For 2 weeks following outbreak announcement, the primary-level PSAP (police/fire/EMS) averaged 56% more daily calls compared to prior years and recorded 9281 (106% increase) on Day 4, averaging ∼400/hour. The secondary-level (EMS) PSAP recorded an analogous 63% increase with 3863 calls (∼161/hour; 264% increase) on Day 3. The COVID-19 response team processed the more complex cases (n = 5361), averaging 432 ± 110 daily (∼one-fifth of EMS calls). Although community COVID-19 cases increased exponentially, ambulance response intervals and dispatches (averaging 1120 ± 46 daily) were successfully contained, particularly compared with the week before (1174 ± 40; P = 0.02). Conclusion: With sudden escalating EMS call volumes, rapid reorganization of dispatch operations using tailored algorithms and specially assigned personnel can protect EMS system resources by optimizing patient dispositions, controlling ambulance allocations and mitigating hospital impact. Prudent population-based disaster planning should strongly consider pre-establishing similar highly coordinated medical taskforce contingencies.