Literature DB >> 27888672

Incidence of coronary intervention in cardiac arrest survivors with non-shockable initial rhythms and no evidence of ST-elevation MI (STEMI).

Matthew Wilson1, Anne V Grossestreuer2, David F Gaieski3, Benjamin S Abella2, William Frohna4, Munish Goyal4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: With the demonstrated benefit of an early-invasive strategy for STEMI and VF/VT arrest patients, there is interest in assessing the potential benefit of early angiography for non-shockable (PEA/Asystole) arrest patients. We hypothesized that in cardiac arrest patients who obtain return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after a non-shockable initial rhythm and do not have STEMI the incidence of coronary intervention would be clinically insignificant (<5%).
METHODS: Retrospective multicenter US clinical registry study of post-cardiac arrest patients at 18 hospitals between 1/00 and 5/14. The incidence of significant coronary artery disease (CAD) as defined by documented coronary intervention (i.e. PCI, angioplasty, stent or CABG) was assessed.
RESULTS: There were 1396 arrest patients with ROSC and known initial rhythms (517/1396=37% shockable; 879/1396=63% nonshockable). 440 (299/440=58% shockable; 141/440=32% nonshockable) of these patients received angiography. In the 141 non-shockable patients that received angiography, 97 patients did not have STEMI listed as an indication for catheterization and 24 (25%) of those had a coronary intervention documented yielding an observed incidence of coronary intervention in non-shockable post-arrest patients without STEMI who received angiography of 24.7% (24/97). Of note, the overall incidence of coronary intervention in all ROSC patients with non-shockable initial rhythms was 5.5% (48/879).
CONCLUSIONS: In this large multi-center retrospective analysis there is a high incidence of coronary intervention in post-arrest patients with initially non-shockable rhythms and without STEMI on ECG who are taken for angiography.
Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arrest; Asystole; CAD; Catheterization; PEA; Shockable

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27888672     DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.10.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Resuscitation        ISSN: 0300-9572            Impact factor:   5.262


  4 in total

1.  Selection bias, interventions and outcomes for survivors of cardiac arrest.

Authors:  David J Wallace; Patrick Coppler; Clifton Callaway; Jon C Rittenberger; Cameron Dezfulian; Deepika Mohan; Catalin Toma; Jonathan Elmer
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2018-02-20       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 2.  The Role of Coronary Catheterization Laboratory in Post-Resuscitation Care of Patients Without ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

Authors:  Kris Kumar; Kapil Lotun
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rev       Date:  2018

3.  Factors determining level of hospital care and its association with outcome after resuscitation from pre-hospital pulseless electrical activity.

Authors:  Sini Saarinen; Ari Salo; James Boyd; Päivi Laukkanen-Nevala; Catharina Silfvast; Ilkka Virkkunen; Tom Silfvast
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 4.  Contemporary Management of Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest in the Cardiac Catheterisation Laboratory: Current Status and Future Directions.

Authors:  Nilesh Pareek; Peter Kordis; Ian Webb; Marko Noc; Philip MacCarthy; Jonathan Byrne
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2019-11-18
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.