RESUMO
Objective: Blood-based biomarkers play a central role in the diagnosis and treatment of critically ill patients, yet none are routinely measured during the intra-arrest phase of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Our objective was to describe methodological aspects, sources of evidence, and gaps in research surrounding intra-arrest blood-based biomarkers for OHCA. Methods: We used scoping review methodology to summarize existing literature. The protocol was designed a priori following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews. Inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed scientific studies on OHCA patients with at least one blood draw intra-arrest. We excluded in-hospital cardiac arrest and animal studies. There were no language, date, or study design exclusions. We conducted an electronic literature search using PubMed and Embase and hand-searched secondary literature. Data charting/synthesis were performed in duplicate using standardized data extraction templates. Results: The search strategy identified 11,834 records, with 118 studies evaluating 105 blood-based biomarkers included. Only eight studies (7%) had complete reporting. The median number of studies per biomarker was 2 (interquartile range 1-4). Most studies were conducted in Asia (63 studies, 53%). Only 22 studies (19%) had blood samples collected in the prehospital setting, and only six studies (5%) had samples collected by paramedics. Pediatric patients were included in only three studies (3%). Out of eight predefined biomarker categories of use, only two were routinely assessed: prognostic (97/105, 92%) and diagnostic (61/105, 58%). Conclusions: Despite a large body of literature on intra-arrest blood-based biomarkers for OHCA, gaps in methodology and knowledge are widespread.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Placement of percutaneous ventricular support devices such as an intraaortic balloon pump (IABP) or Abiomed Impella device can treat severe cardiogenic shock. Critical care transport medicine (CCTM) providers frequently manage patients supported by these devices during interfacility transfers, often using a helicopter air ambulance (HAA). An understanding of patient needs and management during transport is essential to informing crew configuration and training, and this study adds to the limited existing data on the HAA transport of this complex patient population. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all HAA transports of patients with an IABP (n = 38) or Impella (n = 11) device at a single CCTM program from 2016 to 2020. We evaluated transport times and composite variables for the frequency of adverse events, condition changes requiring critical care evaluation, and critical care interventions. RESULTS: In this observational cohort, patients with an Impella device more frequently had an advanced airway and at least 1 vasopressor or inotrope active prior to transport. While flight times were similar, CCTM teams remained at referring facilities longer for patients with an Impella device (99 vs 68 minutes; p = 0.0097). Compared to patients with an IABP, patients with an Impella device more frequently had a condition change requiring critical care evaluation (100% vs 42%; p = 0.0005) and more frequently received critical care interventions (100% vs 53%; p = 0.0037). Adverse events were uncommon and did not differ for patients with an Impella device compared to an IABP (27% vs 11%; p = 0.178). CONCLUSION: Patients requiring mechanical circulatory support with IABP and Impella devices frequently require critical care management during transport. Clinicians should ensure the CCTM team has appropriate staffing, training, and resources to meet the critical care needs of these high acuity patients.
