Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of Aorta: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The data on resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) use continue to grow with its increasing use in trauma centers. The data in her last 5 years have not been systematically reviewed. We aim to assess current literature related to REBOA use and outcomes among civilian trauma populations. METHODS: A literature search using PubMed, EMBASE, and JAMA Network for studies regarding REBOA usage in civilian trauma from 2016 to 2020 is carried out. This review followed preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. RESULTS: Our search yielded 35 studies for inclusion in our systematic review, involving 4073 patients. The most common indication for REBOA was patient presentation in hemorrhagic shock secondary to traumatic injury. REBOA was associated with significant systolic blood pressure improvement. Of 4 studies comparing REBOA to non-REBOA controls, 2 found significant mortality benefit with REBOA. Significant mortality improvement with REBOA compared to open aortic occlusion was seen in 4 studies. In the few studies investigating zone placement, highest survival rate was seen in patients undergoing zone 3. Overall, reports of complications directly related to overall REBOA use were relatively low. CONCLUSION: REBOA has been shown to be effective in promoting hemodynamic stability in civilian trauma. Mortality data on REBOA use are conflicting, but most studies investigating REBOA vs. open occlusion methods suggest a significant survival advantage. Recent data on the REBOA technique (zone placement and partial REBOA) are sparse and currently insufficient to determine advantage with any particular variation. Overall, larger prospective civilian trauma studies are needed to better understand the benefits of REBOA in high-mortality civilian trauma populations. STUDY TYPE: Systematic Review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III- Therapeutic.

Pediatric In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest International Registry (PACHIN): protocol for a prospective international multicenter register of cardiac arrest in children.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cardiac arrest (CA) in children is a major public health problem. Thanks to advances in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) guidelines and teaching skills, results in children have improved. However, pediatric CA has a very high mortality. In the treatment of in-hospital CA there are still multiple controversies. The objective of this study is to develop a multicenter and international registry of in-hospital pediatric cardiac arrest including the diversity of management in different clinical and social contexts. Participation in this register will enable the evaluation of the diagnosis of CA, CPR and post-resuscitation care and its influence in survival and neurological prognosis. METHODS: An intrahospital CA data recording protocol has been designed following the Utstein model. Database is hosted according to European legislation regarding patient data protection. It is drafted in English and Spanish. Invitation to participate has been sent to Spanish, European and Latinamerican hospitals. Variables included, asses hospital characteristics, the resuscitation team, patient's demographics and background, CPR, post-resuscitation care, mortality, survival and long-term evolution. Survival at hospital discharge will be evaluated as a primary outcome and survival with good neurological status as a secondary outcome, analyzing the different factors involved in them. The study design is prospective, observational registry of a cohort of pediatric CA. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the development of a registry of in-hospital CA in childhood. Its development will provide access to CPR data in different hospital settings and will allow the analysis of current controversies in the treatment of pediatric CA and post-resuscitation care. The results may contribute to the development of further international recommendations. Trial register: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04675918. Registered 19 December 2020 - Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT04675918?cond=pediatric+cardiac+arrest&draw=2&rank=10.

Efficacy of past, present, and future fluid strategies in an improved large animal model of non-compressible intra-abdominal hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Noncompressible hemorrhage is a leading cause of potentially survivable combat death, with the vast majority of such deaths occurring in the out-of-hospital environment. While large animal models of this process are important for device and therapeutic development, clinical practice has changed over time and past models must follow suit. Developed in conjunction with regulatory feedback, this study presents a modernized, out-of-hospital, noncompressible hemorrhage model, in conjunction with a randomized study of past, present, and future fluid options following a hypotensive resuscitation protocol consistent with current clinical practice. METHODS: We performed a randomized controlled experiment comparing three fluid resuscitation options in Yorkshire swine. Baseline data from animals of same size from previous experiments were analyzed (n = 70), and mean systolic blood pressure was determined, with a permissive hypotension resuscitation target defined as a 25% decrease from normal (67 mm Hg). After animal preparation, a grade IV to V liver laceration was induced. Animals bled freely for a 10-minute "time-to-responder" period, after which resuscitation occurred with randomized fluid in boluses to the goal target: 6% hetastarch in lactated electrolyte injection (HEX), normal saline (NS), or fresh whole blood (FWB). Animals were monitored for a total simulated "delay to definitive care" period of 2 hours postinjury. RESULTS: At the end of the 2-hour study period, 8.3% (1 of 12 swine) of the HEX group, 50% (6 of 12 swine) of the NS group, and 75% (9 of 12 swine) of the FWB had survived (p = 0.006), with Holm-Sidak pairwise comparisons showing a significant difference between HEX and FWB and (p = 0.005). Fresh whole blood had significantly higher systemic vascular resistance and hemoglobin levels compared with other groups (p = 0.003 and p = 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Survival data support the movement away from HEX toward NS and, preferably, FWB in clinical practice and translational animal modeling. The presented model allows for future research including basic science, as well as translational studies of novel diagnostics, therapeutics, and devices.

Increased mortality with resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta only mitigated by strong unmeasured confounding: An expanded analysis using the National Trauma Data Bank.

BACKGROUND: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is being increasingly adopted to manage noncompressible torso hemorrhage, but a recent analysis of the 2015 to 2016 Trauma Quality Improvement Project (TQIP) data set showed that placement of REBOA was associated with higher rates of death, lower extremity amputation, and acute kidney injury (AKI). We expand this analysis by including the 2017 data set, quantifying the potential role of residual confounding, and distinguishing between traumatic and ischemic lower extremity amputation. METHODS: This retrospective study used the 2015 to 2017 TQIP database and included patients older than 18 years, with signs of life on arrival, who had no aortic injury and were not transferred. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusions of the aorta placed after 2 hours were excluded. We adjusted for baseline variables using propensity scores with inverse probability of treatment weighting. A sensitivity analysis was then conducted to determine the strength of an unmeasured confounder (e.g., unmeasured shock severity/response to resuscitation) that could explain the effect on mortality. Finally, lower extremity injury patterns of patients undergoing REBOA were inspected to distinguish amputation indicated for traumatic injury from complications of REBOA placement. RESULTS: Of 1,392,482 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, 187 underwent REBOA. After inverse probability of treatment weighting, all covariates were balanced. The risk difference for mortality was 0.21 (0.14-0.29) and for AKI was 0.041 (-0.007 to 0.089). For the mortality effect to be explained by an unmeasured confounder, it would need to be stronger than any observed in terms of its relationship with mortality and with REBOA placement. Eleven REBOA patients underwent lower extremity amputation; however, they all suffered severe traumatic injury to the lower extremity. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence in the TQIP data set to suggest that REBOA causes amputation, and the evidence for its effect on AKI is considerably weaker than previously reported. The increased mortality effect of REBOA is confirmed and could only be nullified by a potent confounder. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management, level IV.

Is there a role for REBOA? A system assessment.

INTRODUCTION: To analyze our experience to quantify potential need for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA). METHODS: Retrospective review of patients over a three-year period who presented as a trauma with hemorrhagic shock. Patients were divided into two groups: REBOA Candidate vs. Non-candidates. Injuries, outcomes, and interventions were compared. RESULTS: Of 7643 trauma activations, only 37 (0.44%) fit inclusion criteria, of which 16 met criteria for candidacy for potential REBOA placement. The groups did not differ in terms of injury severity, physiology, age, timing of intervention, nor massive transfusion. Survival was linked to TRISS (p = 0.01) and Emergency Room Thoracotomy (p = 0.002). Of Candidates, 8 (50%) had injuries that could have benefited from REBOA, while 7 (44%) had injuries that could be associated with potential harm. DISCUSSION: The volume of patients who would potentially benefit from REBOA appears to be small and does not appear to support system wide adoption in the studied region. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Is restrictive fluid resuscitation beneficial not only for hemorrhagic shock but also for septic shock?: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Whether to use limited fluid resuscitation (LFR) in patients with hemorrhagic shock or septic shock remains controversial. This research was aimed to assess the pros and cons of utilizing LFR in hemorrhagic shock or septic shock patients. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of science, CNKI, VIP, and Wan Fang database searches included for articles published before December 15, 2020. Randomized controlled trials of LFR or adequate fluid resuscitation in hemorrhagic shock or septic shock patients were selected. RESULT: This meta-analysis including 28 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and registered 3288 patients. The 7 of 27 RCTs were the patients with septic shock. Others were traumatic hemorrhagic shock patients. Comparing LFR or adequate fluid resuscitation in hemorrhagic shock or septic shock patients, the summary odds ratio (OR) was 0.50 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-0.60, P < .00001) for mortality, 0.46 (95% CI 0.31-0.70, P = .0002) for multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), 0.35 (95% CI 0.25-0.47) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and 0.33 (95% CI 0.20-0.56) for disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC). CONCLUSION: Limited fluid resuscitation is the benefit of both traumatic hemorrhagic shock patients and septic shock patients.

The majority of major amputations after resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta are associated with preadmission trauma.

OBJECTIVE: Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is a potentially life-saving intervention. However, recent reports of associations with limb loss and mortality have called its safety into question. We aimed to evaluate patient and hospital characteristics associated with major amputation and in-hospital mortality among patients undergoing REBOA for trauma. METHODS: The National Trauma Data Bank (2015-2017) was queried for patients presenting to trauma centers and treated with REBOA. We included REBOA performed on hospital day 1 in patients who survived 6 or more hours from presentation. Univariable and multivariable analyses evaluated associations with major amputation and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 316 patients underwent REBOA and survived in the acute period after presentation. Overall, mean age was 45 ± 20 years and the majority were male (73%) and White (56%). Most patients presented to level I trauma centers (72%) after blunt injuries (79%) with an average Injury Severity Score (ISS) of 31 ± 15, indicating major trauma. In 15 patients (5%), there were 18 major amputations-7 above knee and 11 below knee. A subgroup of 11 amputations were either traumatic amputations (73%) or mangled limbs requiring amputation within 24 hours (27%). Of the remaining amputations, 71% were associated with ipsilateral vascular or orthopedic lower extremity injuries of serious to severe Abbreviated Injury Scale severity. Comparing patients with amputations with those without amputations, there were no significant differences in patient demographics, comorbidities, or hospital characteristics. During hospitalization, patients requiring amputation more frequently received open peripheral vascular interventions (40% vs 10%; P = .002), underwent similar numbers of endovascular interventions (6.7% vs 4.7%; P = .5), and more often developed compartment syndrome (13% vs 2%; P = .04). Overall, there were 110 deaths (35%). The major amputation prevalence was similar between patients who died vs those who survived (3.6% vs 5.3%; P = .5). In multivariable analysis, prehospital cardiac arrest (odds ratio [OR], 8.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.47-48.66; P = .02), penetrating vs blunt trauma (OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 1.05-28.82; P = .04), decreased Glasgow Coma Scale score (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.32; P = .01), older age (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.10; P < .001), and increased Injury Severity Score (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1; P = .03) were associated with higher mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of major amputations in patients undergoing REBOA were secondary to the initial traumatic mechanism. Injury type and severity, as well as initial hemodynamic derangements, are associated with mortality after REBOA. Despite concerns about prohibitive limb complications of REBOA, baseline injuries seem to be the primary cause of limb loss, but further prospective analysis is needed.

Ethical Cultures in Perinatal Care: Do They Exist? Correlation of Provider Attitudes with Periviability Practices at Six Centers.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare attitudes of providers regarding perinatal management and outcomes for periviable newborns of caregivers at centers with higher resuscitation (HR) and lower resuscitation (LR) rates in the delivery room. STUDY DESIGN: All obstetric and neonatal clinical providers at six U.S. sites were invited to complete an anonymous online survey. Survey responses were compared with clinical data collected from a previous retrospective study comparing centers' rates of planned resuscitation. Responses were analyzed by multivariable logistic and linear regression to assess how HR versus LR center respondents differed in management preferences and outcome predictions. RESULTS: Paradoxically, HR versus LR respondents, when adjusting for other variables, were less likely to respond that interventions such as antenatal steroids (odds ratio: 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42-0.88, p < 0.009) and resuscitation (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.44-0.78, p < 0.001) should be given at 22 weeks. HR versus LR respondents also reported lower likelihood of survival and acceptable quality of life (OR: 0.7, 95% CI: 0.53-0.93, p = 0.012) at 23 weeks. CONCLUSION: Despite higher rates of planned resuscitation at 22 and 23 weeks, steroid usage and survival rates did not differ between HR and LR sites. In this subsequent survey, respondents from HR centers had a less favorable outlook on interventions for these newborns than those at LR centers, suggesting that instead of driving practices, attitudes may be more closely associated with experiences of clinical outcomes.

Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta vs Pre-Peritoneal Packing in Patients with Pelvic Fracture.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic hemorrhage is potentially lethal despite homeostatic interventions such as pre-peritoneal packing (PP), resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA), surgery, and/or angioembolization. REBOA may be used as an alternative/adjunct to PP for temporizing bleeding in patients with pelvic fractures. Our study aimed to compare the outcomes of REBOA and/or PP, as temporizing measures, in blunt pelvic fracture patients. We hypothesized that REBOA is associated with worsened outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a 2017 review of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (ACS-TQIP) and identified trauma patients with blunt pelvic fractures who underwent REBOA placement and/or PP before laparotomy and/or angioembolization. Propensity score matching was performed, adjusting for demographics, vitals, mechanism of injury, ISS, each body region-AIS, and pelvic fracture type. Outcomes were complication rates and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 156 patients (PP: 52; REBOA: 52; REBOA+PP: 52) were matched and included. Mean age was 43 ± 18 years, Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 28 (range 17-32), and 74% were males. Overall mortality was 42%. The 24-hour mortality (25% vs 14% vs 35%; p = 0.042), in-hospital mortality (44% vs 29% vs 54%; p = 0.034), and 4-hour pRBC units transfused (15 [9-23] vs 10 [4-19] vs 16 [9-27]; p = 0.017) were lower in the REBOA group. The REBOA group had faster times to both laparotomy (p = 0.040) and/or angioembolization (p = 0.012). There was no difference between the groups in acute kidney injury, lower limb amputations, or hospital and ICU length of stay among survivors. CONCLUSIONS: REBOA is a less invasive procedure compared with PP and is associated with improved outcomes. Further clinical trials are needed to define the optimal patient who will benefit from REBOA.

Effects of 5% Albumin Plus Saline Versus Saline Alone on Outcomes From Large-Volume Resuscitation in Critically Ill Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To compare 5% albumin with 0.9% saline for large-volume resuscitation (> 60 mL/Kg within 24 hr), on mortality and development of acute kidney injury. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Patients admitted to ICUs in 13 hospitals across Western Pennsylvania. We analyzed two independent cohorts, the High-Density Intensive Care databases: High-Density Intensive Care-08 (July 2000 to October 2008, H08) and High-Density Intensive Care-15 (October 2008 to December 2014, H15). PATIENTS: Total of 18,629 critically ill patients requiring large-volume resuscitation. INTERVENTIONS: Five percent of albumin in addition to saline versus 0.9% saline. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After excluding patients with acute kidney injury prior to large-volume resuscitation, 673 of 2,428 patients (27.7%) and 1,814 of 16,201 patients (11.2%) received 5% albumin in H08 and H15, respectively. Use of 5% albumin was associated with decreased 30-day mortality by multivariate regression in H08 (odds ratio 0.65; 95% CI 0.49-0.85; p = 0.002) and in H15 (0.52; 95% CI 0.44-0.62; p < 0.0001) but was associated with increased acute kidney injury in H08 (odds ratio 1.98; 95% CI 1.56-2.51; p < 0.001) and in H15 (odds ratio 1.75; 95% CI 1.58-1.95; p < 0.001). However, 5% albumin was not associated with persistent acute kidney injury and resulted in decreased major adverse kidney event at 30, 90, and 365 days. Propensity matched analysis confirmed similar associations with mortality and acute kidney injury. CONCLUSIONS: During large-volume resuscitation, 5% albumin was associated with reduced mortality and major adverse kidney event at 30, 90, and 365 days. However, a higher rate of acute kidney injury of any stage was observed that did not translate into persistent renal dysfunction.

Association Between Hospital Debriefing Practices With Adherence to Resuscitation Process Measures and Outcomes for In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

Background Identifying actionable resuscitation practices that vary across hospitals could improve adherence to process measures or outcomes after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). We sought to examine whether hospital debriefing frequency after IHCA varies across hospitals and whether hospitals which routinely perform debriefing have higher rates of process-of-care compliance or survival. Methods We conducted a nationwide survey of hospital resuscitation practices in April of 2018, which were then linked to data from the Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation national registry for IHCA. Hospitals were categorized according to their reported frequency of debriefing immediately after IHCA; rarely (0%-20% of all IHCA cases), occasionally (21%-80%), and frequently (81%-100%). Hospital-level rates of timely defibrillation (≤2 minutes), epinephrine administration (≤5 minutes), survival to discharge, return of spontaneous circulation, and neurologically intact survival were comparted for patients with IHCA from 2015 to 2017. Results Overall, there were 193 hospitals comprising 44 477 IHCA events. Mean patient age was 65±16, 41% were females, and 68% were of White race. Across hospitals, 84 (43.5%) rarely performed debriefings immediately after an IHCA, 82 (42.5%) performed debriefing sessions occasionally, and 27 (14.0%) performed debriefing frequently. There was no association between higher reported debriefing frequency and hospital rates of timely defibrillation and epinephrine administration. Mean hospital rates of risk-standardized survival to discharge were similar across debriefing frequency groups (rarely 25.6%; occasionally 26.0%; frequently 25.2%, P=0.72), as were hospital rates of risk-adjusted return of spontaneous circulation (rarely 72.2%; occasionally 73.0%; frequently 70.0%, P=0.06) and neurologically intact survival (rarely 21.9%, occasionally 22.2%, frequently 21.1%, P=0.75). Conclusions In a large contemporary nationwide quality improvement registry, hospitals varied widely in how often they conducted debriefings immediately after IHCA. However, hospital debriefing frequency was not associated with better adherence to timely delivery of epinephrine or defibrillation or higher rates of IHCA survival.

Increased perinatal survival and improved ventilation skills over a five-year period: An observational study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The Helping Babies Breathe program gave major reductions in perinatal mortality in Tanzania from 2009 to 2012. We aimed to study whether this effect was sustained, and whether resuscitation skills changed with continued frequent training. METHODS: We analysed prospective data covering all births (n = 19,571) at Haydom Lutheran Hospital in Tanzania from July 2013 -June 2018. Resuscitation training was continued during this period. All deliveries were monitored by an observer recording the timing of events and resuscitation interventions. Heart rate was recorded by dry-electrode ECG and bag-mask-ventilation by sensors attached to the resuscitator device. We analyzed changes over time in outcomes, use of resuscitation interventions and performance of resuscitation using binary regression models with the log-link function to obtain adjusted relative risks. RESULTS: With introduction of user fees for deliveries since 2014, the number of deliveries decreased by 30% from start to the end of the five-year period. An increase in low heart rate at birth and need for bag-mask-ventilation indicate a gradual selection of more vulnerable newborns delivered in the hospital over time. Despite this selection, newborn deaths <24 hours did not change significantly and was maintained at an average of 8.8/1000 live births. The annual reductions in relative risk for perinatal death adjusted for vulnerability factors was 0.84 (95%CI 0.76-0.94). During the five-year period, longer duration of bag-mask ventilation sequences without interruption was observed. Delivered tidal volumes were increased and mask leak was decreased during ventilation. The time to initiation or total duration of ventilation did not change significantly. CONCLUSION: The reduction in 24-hour newborn mortality after introduction of Helping Babies Breathe was maintained, and a further decrease over the five-year period was evident when analyses were adjusted for vulnerability of the newborns. Perinatal survival and performance of ventilation were significantly improved.

Effects of Fluid Resuscitation on the Occurrence of Organ Failure and Mortality in Patients With Acute Pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVES: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a serious gastroenterological condition requiring urgent fluid resuscitation and emergent intensive care. However, the benefit of fluid resuscitation is inconsistent. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the effects of fluid resuscitation on the occurrence of organ failure and mortality in patients with AP. METHODS: The data were retrospectively extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III 2002-2012 database. The fluid resuscitation and fluid balance were calculated at 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours after intensive care unit admission. Multivariate analysis models were used. RESULTS: A total of 317 patients with AP were included. Odds of organ failure increased significantly with increased fluid input at 0 to 12 hours [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 1.124; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.015-1.244] and with increased fluid balance at 36 to 48 hours (aOR, 1.184; 95% CI, 1.009-1.389). Odds of in-hospital mortality increased significantly with increased fluid balance at 24 to 36 hours (aOR, 1.201; 95% CI, 1.052-1.371). Odds of 30-day mortality increased significantly with increased fluid balance at 24 to 36 hours (aOR, 1.189; 95% CI, 1.039-1.361). CONCLUSIONS: Increased fluid balance was associated with increased risk of organ failure and mortality. Increased fluid output may decrease mortality.

Does Clamshell Thoracotomy Better Facilitate Thoracic Life-Saving Procedures Without Increased Complication Compared with an Anterolateral Approach to Resuscitative Thoracotomy? Results from the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery Registry.

BACKGROUND: Resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) is life-saving in select patients and can be accomplished through a left anterolateral (AT) or clamshell thoracotomy (CT). CT may provide additional exposure, facilitating certain operative procedures, but the added blood and heat loss and time to perform it may increase complications. No prospective multicenter comparison of techniques has yet been reported. STUDY DESIGN: The observational AAST Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute care surgery (AORTA) registry was used to compare AT and CT in RT. RESULTS: AORTA recorded 1,218 RTs at 46 trauma centers from June 2014 to January 2020. Overall survival after RT was 6.0% (AT 6.6%; [59 of 900]; CT 4.2% [13 of 296], p = 0.132). Among all RTs, 11.1% (142 of 1,278) surviving at least 24 hours were used tocompare AT (112) and CT (30). There was no difference between the 2 groups withregard to age, sex, Injury Severity Score, or mechanism of injury (Table 1). CT was significantly more likely to be used in patients needing resection of the lung or cardiac repair. CT was not associated with increased local thoracic/systemic complications, higher transfusion requirement, or greater ventilator, ICU, or hospital days compared with AT. CONCLUSIONS: Clamshell thoracotomy facilitates thoracic life-saving procedures withoutincreased systemic or thoracic complications compared with AT in patients undergoing RT.

Trajectory of Risk-Standardized Survival Rates for In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: A hospital's risk-standardized survival rate (RSSR) for in-hospital cardiac arrest has emerged as an important metric to benchmark and incentivize hospital resuscitation quality. We examined whether hospital performance on the RSSR metric was stable or dynamic year-over-year and whether low-performing hospitals were able to improve survival outcomes over time. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used data from 84 089 adult patients with an in-hospital cardiac arrest from 166 hospitals with continuous participation in Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation from 2012 to 2017. A 2-level hierarchical regression model was used to compute RSSRs during a baseline (2012-2013) and two follow-up periods (2014-2015 and 2016-2017). At baseline, hospitals were classified as top-, middle-, and bottom-performing if they ranked in the top 25%, middle 50%, and bottom 25%, respectively, on their RSSR metric during 2012 to 2013. We compared hospital performance on RSSR during follow-up between top, middle, and bottom-performing hospitals' at baseline. During 2012 to 2013, 42 hospitals were identified as top-performing (median RSSR, 31.7%), 82 as middle-performing (median RSSR, 24.6%), and 42 as bottom-performing (median RSSR, 18.7%). During both follow-up periods, >70% of top-performing hospitals ranked in the top 50%, a substantial proportion remained in the top 25% of RSSR during 2014 to 2015 (54.6%) and 2016 to 2017 (40.4%) follow-up periods. Likewise, nearly 75% of bottom-performing hospitals remained in the bottom 50% during both follow-up periods, with 50.0% in the bottom 25% of RSSR during 2014 to 2015 and 40.5% in the bottom 25% during 2016 to 2017. While percentile rankings were generally consistent over time at ≈45% of study hospitals, ≈1 in 5 (21.4%) bottom-performing hospitals showed large improvement in percentile rankings over time and a similar proportion (23.7%) of top-performing hospitals showed large decline in percentile rankings compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital performance on RSSR during baseline period was generally consistent over 4 years of follow-up. However, 1 in 5 bottom-performing hospitals had large improvement in survival over time. Identifying care and quality improvement innovations at these sites may provide opportunities to improve in-hospital cardiac arrest care at other hospitals.

In-Depth Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Adult Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

The use of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (E-CPR) for the treatment of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who do not respond to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation CPR) has increased significantly in the past 10 years, in response to case reports and observational studies reporting encouraging results. However, no randomized controlled trials comparing E-CPR with conventional CPR have been published to date. The evidence from systematic reviews of the available observational studies is conflicting. The inclusion criteria for published E-CPR studies are variable, but most commonly include witnessed arrest, immediate bystander CPR, an initial shockable rhythm, and an estimated time from CPR start to establishment of E-CPR (low-flow time) of <60 minutes. A shorter low-flow time has been consistently associated with improved survival. In an effort to reduce low-flow times, commencement of E-CPR in the prehospital setting has been reported and is currently under investigation. The provision of an E-CPR service, whether hospital based or prehospital, carries considerable cost and technical challenges. Despite increased adoption, many questions remain as to which patients will derive the most benefit from E-CPR, when and where to implement E-CPR, optimal post-arrest E-CPR care, and whether this complex invasive intervention is cost-effective. Results of ongoing trials are awaited to determine whether E-CPR improves survival when compared with conventional CPR.

Cost-effectiveness evaluation of the PROPPR trial transfusion protocols.

BACKGROUND: There have been no prior investigations of the cost effectiveness of transfusion strategies for trauma resuscitation. The Pragmatic, Randomized, Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios (PROPPR) study was a Phase III multisite, randomized trial in 680 subjects comparing the efficacy of 1:1:1 transfusion ratios of plasma and platelets to red blood cells with the 1:1:2 ratio. We hypothesized that 1:1:1 transfusion results in an acceptable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, when estimated using patients' age-specific life expectancy and cost of care during the 30-day PROPPR trial period. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes were prospectively collected, and subjects were matched 1:2 to subjects in the Healthcare Utilization Program State Inpatient Data to estimate cost weights. We used a decision tree analysis, combined with standard costs and estimated years of expected survival to determine the cost effectiveness of the two treatments. RESULTS: The 1:1:1 group had higher overall costs for the blood products but were more likely to achieve hemostasis and decreased hemorrhagic death by 24 hours (p = 0.006). For every 100 patients treated in the 1:1:1 group, eight more achieved hemostasis than in the 1:1:2 group. At 30 days, the total hospital cost per 100 patients was $5.6 million in the 1:1:1 group compared with $5.0 million in the 1:1:2 group. For each 100 patients, the 1:1:1 group had 218.5 more years of life expectancy. This was at a cost of $2994 per year gained. CONCLUSION: The 1:1:1 transfusion ratio in severely injured hemorrhaging trauma patients is a very cost-effective strategy for increasing hemostasis and decreasing trauma deaths.

Intraosseous Versus Peripheral Intravenous Access During Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: a Comparison of 30-Day Survival and Neurological Outcome in the French National Registry.

PURPOSE: To compare intraosseous access with peripheral venous access on adults out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients' clinical outcomes. METHODS: A national retrospective multicentre study was conducted based on the French National Cardiac Arrest Registry. Comparison of patients (intraosseous vs. peripheral venous access) was conducted before and after a matching using a propensity score. The propensity score included confounding factors: age, time between the call (T0) to epinephrine (to take account of how quickly vascular access was achieved), the aetiology of OHCA, the shock and the patient initial rhythm at MMT arrival. RESULTS: A total of 1576 patients received intraosseous access, and 27,280 received peripheral intravenous access. Before matching, OHCA patients with intraosseous access were less likely to survive at all stages (return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), 0-day survival and 30-day survival). No significant difference in neurological outcome was observed. After propensity score matching, no significant differences in 30-day survival rates (OR = 0.763 [0.473;1.231]) and neurological outcome (OR = 1.296 [0.973;1.726]) were observed. However, intraosseous patients still showed lower likelihood of short-term survival (ROSC and 0-day survival) even after propensity score matching was implemented. CONCLUSION: The populations we investigated were similar to those of other studies suggesting that intraosseous access is associated with reduced survival and poorer neurological outcome. Our findings suggest that intraosseous access is a comparably effective alternative to peripheral intravenous access for treating OHCA patients on matched populations.

Risk-Standardizing Rates of Return of Spontaneous Circulation for In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest to Facilitate Hospital Comparisons.

Background Sustained return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) is the most proximal and direct assessment of acute resuscitation quality in hospitals. However, validated tools to benchmark hospital rates for ROSC after in-hospital cardiac arrest currently do not exist. Methods and Results Within the national Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry, we identified 83 206 patients admitted from 335 hospitals from 2014 to 2017 with in-hospital cardiac arrest. Using hierarchical logistic regression, we derived and validated a model for ROSC, defined as spontaneous and sustained ROSC for ≥20 consecutive minutes, from 24 pre-arrest variables and calculated rates of risk-standardized ROSC for in-hospital cardiac arrest for each hospital. Overall, rates of ROSC were 72.0% and 72.7% for the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. The model in the derivation cohort had moderate discrimination (C-statistic 0.643) and excellent calibration (R2 of 0.996). Seventeen variables were associated with ROSC, and a parsimonious model retained 10 variables. Before risk-adjustment, the median hospital ROSC rate was 70.5% (interquartile range: 64.7-76.9%; range: 33.3-89.6%). After adjustment, the distribution of risk-standardized ROSC rates was narrower: median of 71.9% (interquartile range: 68.2-76.4%; range: 42.2-84.6%). Overall, 56 (16.7%) of 335 hospitals had at least a 10% absolute change in percentile rank after risk standardization: 27 (8.0%) with a ≥10% negative percentile change and 29 (8.7%) with a ≥10% positive percentile change. Conclusions We have derived and validated a model to risk-standardize hospital rates of ROSC for in-hospital cardiac arrest. Use of this model can support efforts to compare acute resuscitation survival across hospitals to facilitate quality improvement.