In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Survival in the United States During and After the Initial Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic Surge.

BACKGROUND: Recent reports on challenges in resuscitation care at hospitals severely affected by the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic raise questions about how the pandemic affected outcomes for in-hospital cardiac arrest throughout the United States. METHODS: Within Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation, we conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare in-hospital cardiac arrest survival during the presurge (January 1-February 29), surge (March 1-May 15) and immediate postsurge (May 16-June 30) periods in 2020 compared to 2015 to 2019. Monthly COVID-19 mortality rates for each hospital's county were categorized, per 1 000 000 residents, as low (0-10), moderate (11-50), high (51-100), or very high (>100). Using hierarchical regression models, we compared rates of survival to discharge in 2020 versus 2015 to 2019 for each period. RESULTS: Of 61 586 in-hospital cardiac arrests, 21 208 (4309 in 2020), 26 459 (5949 in 2020), and 13 919 (2686 in 2020) occurred in the presurge, surge, and postsurge periods, respectively. During the presurge period, 24.2% survived to discharge in 2020 versus 24.7% in 2015 to 2019 (adjusted odds ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.02-1.22]). In contrast, during the surge period, 19.6% survived to discharge in 2020 versus 26.0% in 2015 to 2019 (adjusted odds ratio, 0.81 [0.75-0.88]). Lower survival was most pronounced in communities with high (28% lower survival) and very high (42% lower survival) monthly COVID-19 mortality rates (interaction P<0.001). Resuscitation times were shorter (median: 22 versus 25 minutes; P<0.001), and delayed epinephrine treatment was more prevalent (11.3% versus 9.9%; P=0.004) during the surge period. Survival was lower even when patients with confirmed/suspected COVID-19 infection were excluded from analyses. During the postsurge period, survival rates were similar in 2020 versus 2015 to 2019 (22.3% versus 25.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.93 [0.83-1.04]), including communities with high COVID-19 mortality (interaction P=0.16). CONCLUSIONS: Early during the pandemic, rates of survival to discharge for IHCA decreased, even among patients without COVID-19 infection, highlighting the early impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on in-hospital resuscitation.

Incidence, Predictors, and Outcomes of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in COVID-19 Patients Admitted to Intensive and Non-Intensive Care Units: Insights From the AHA COVID-19 CVD Registry.

Background Limited information is available regarding in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) in patients with COVID-19. Methods and Results We leveraged the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease (AHA COVID-19 CVD) Registry to conduct a cohort study of adults hospitalized for COVID-19. IHCA was defined as those with documentation of cardiac arrest requiring medication or electrical shock for resuscitation. Mixed effects models with random intercepts were used to identify independent predictors of IHCA and mortality while accounting for clustering at the hospital level. The study cohort included 8518 patients (6080 not in the intensive care unit [ICU]) with mean age of 61.5 years (SD 17.5). IHCA occurred in 509 (5.9%) patients overall with 375 (73.7%) in the ICU and 134 (26.3%) patients not in the ICU. The majority of patients at the time of ICHA were not in a shockable rhythm (76.5%). Independent predictors of IHCA included older age, Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio [OR], 1.9; CI, 1.4-2.4; P<0.001), and non-Hispanic Black race (OR, 1.5; CI, 1.1-1.9; P=0.004). Other predictors included oxygen use on admission, quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score on admission, and hypertension. Overall, 35 (6.9%) patients with IHCA survived to discharge, with 9.1% for ICU and 0.7% for non-ICU patients. Conclusions Older age, Black race, and Hispanic ethnicity are independent predictors of IHCA in patients with COVID-19. Although the incidence is much lower than in ICU patients, approximately one-quarter of IHCA events in patients with COVID-19 occur in non-ICU settings, with the latter having a substantially lower survival to discharge rate.

[Novel aspects on causes of in-hospital cardiac arrest]. / Neue Erkenntnisse zur Ursache von Herzkreislaufstillständen im Krankenhaus.

Cardiac arrest is one of the most dramatic medical emergencies. The occurence of cardiac arrest in hospitalized patients, the so called in-hospital cardiac arrest, is common and associated with high mortality. However, in-hospital cardiac arrest has received quite little attention compared to cardiac arrest occuring outside the hospital. The present article reviews the recent literature of in-hospital cardiac arrest and outlines differences in characteristics and outcome compared to out of hospital cardiac arrest. Moreover, current literature regarding occurence and outcome of in-hospital cardiac arrest in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is concisely summarized.

Characteristics and outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest in COVID-19. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose herein, was to perform a systematic review of interventional outcome studies in patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic period. METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed of publications meeting the following PICOS criteria: (1) participants, patients > 18 years of age with cardiac arrest due to any causes; (2) intervention, cardiac arrest in COVID-19 period; (3) comparison, cardiac arrest in pre-COVID-19 period; (4) outcomes, detailed information for survival; (5) study design, randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized or observational studies comparing cardiac arrest in COVID-19 and pre-COVID-19 period for their effects in patients with cardiac arrest. RESULTS: Survival to hospital discharge for the pre-pandemic and pandemic period was reported in 3 studies (n =1432 patients) and was similar in the pre-pandemic vs. the pandemic period, 35.6% vs. 32.1%, respectively (odds ratio [OR] 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-3.65; p = 0.16; I2 = 72%). Return of spontaneous circulation was reported by all 4 studies and were also similar in the pre and during COVID-19 periods, 51.9% vs. 48.7% (OR 1.27; 95% CI 0.78-2.07; p = 0.33; I2 = 71%), respectively. Pooled analysis of cardiac arrest recurrence was also similar, 24.9% and 17.9% (OR 1.60; 95% CI 0.99-2.57; p = 0.06; I2 = 32%) in the pre and during COVID-19 cohorts. Survival with Cerebral Performance Category 1 or 2 was higher in pre vs. during pandemic groups (27.3 vs. 9.1%; OR 3.75; 95% CI 1.26-11.20; p = 0.02). Finally, overall mortality was similar in the pre vs. pandemic groups, 65.9% and 67.2%, respectively (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.33-1.34; p = 0.25; I2 = 76%). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the pre-pandemic period, in hospital cardiac arrest in COVID-19 patients was numerically higher but had statistically similar outcomes.

Outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest in COVID-19 patients: A proportional prevalence meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Limited epidemiological data are available on the outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest (CA) in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We performed literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Ovid to identify research articles that studied outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest in COVID-19 patients. The primary outcome was survival at discharge. Secondary outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and types of cardiac arrest. Pooled percentages with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for the prevalence of outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 7,891 COVID patients were included in the study. There were 621 (pooled prevalence 8%, 95% CI 4-13%) cardiac arrest patients. There were 52 (pooled prevalence 3.0%; 95% CI 0.0-10.0%) patients that survived at the time of discharge. ROSC was achieved in 202 (pooled prevalence 39%;95% CI 21.0-59.0%) patients. Mean time to ROSC was 7.74 (95% CI 7.51-7.98) min. The commonest rhythm at the time of cardiac arrest was pulseless electrical activity (pooled prevalence 46%; 95% 13-80%), followed by asystole (pooled prevalence 40%; 95% CI 6-80%). Unstable ventricular arrhythmia occurred in a minority of patients (pooled prevalence 8%; 95% CI 4-13%). CONCLUSION: This pooled analysis of studies showed that the survival post in-hospital cardiac arrest in COVID patients is dismal despite adequate ROSC obtained at the time of resuscitation. Nonshockable rhythm cardiac arrest is commoner suggesting a non-cardiac cause while cardiac related etiology is uncommon. Future studies are needed to improve the survival in these patients.

Broader Insights into Understanding Tumor Necrosis Factor and Neurodegenerative Disease Pathogenesis Infer New Therapeutic Approaches.

Proinflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF), with its now appreciated key roles in neurophysiology as well as neuropathophysiology, are sufficiently well-documented to be useful tools for enquiry into the natural history of neurodegenerative diseases. We review the broader literature on TNF to rationalize why abruptly-acquired neurodegenerative states do not exhibit the remorseless clinical progression seen in those states with gradual onsets. We propose that the three typically non-worsening neurodegenerative syndromes, post-stroke, post-traumatic brain injury (TBI), and post cardiac arrest, usually become and remain static because of excess cerebral TNF induced by the initial dramatic peak keeping microglia chronically activated through an autocrine loop of microglial activation through excess cerebral TNF. The existence of this autocrine loop rationalizes post-damage repair with perispinal etanercept and proposes a treatment for cerebral aspects of COVID-19 chronicity. Another insufficiently considered aspect of cerebral proinflammatory cytokines is the fitness of the endogenous cerebral anti-TNF system provided by norepinephrine (NE), generated and distributed throughout the brain from the locus coeruleus (LC). We propose that an intact LC, and therefore an intact NE-mediated endogenous anti-cerebral TNF system, plus the DAMP (damage or danger-associated molecular pattern) input having diminished, is what allows post-stroke, post-TBI, and post cardiac arrest patients a strong long-term survival advantage over Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease sufferers. In contrast, Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease patients remorselessly worsen, being handicapped by sustained, accumulating, DAMP and PAMP (pathogen-associated molecular patterns) input, as well as loss of the LC-origin, NE-mediated, endogenous anti-cerebral TNF system. Adrenergic receptor agonists may counter this.

Rescue Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation After Cardiac Arrest in COVID-19 Myopericarditis: A Case Report.

Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) has been associated with potentially life threatening cardiovascular complications, including fulminant myocarditis and cardiac tamponade. Optimal management strategies are still unclear, including the role of immunomodulatory therapies and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in the context of cardiogenic shock. We report a case of a middle-aged female with COVID-19 who developed respiratory distress and hemodynamic deterioration with elevated troponin levels on the seventh day of symptoms. Echocardiography demonstrated pericardial effusion with diastolic restriction of the right ventricle. Cardiac arrest developed during pericardiocentesis, resulting in emergency thoracotomy and pericardial drainage. Venoarterial ECMO was subsequently initiated due to refractory cardiogenic shock. Tocilizumab, immunoglobulin, methylprednisolone and convalescent plasma were added to supportive care, with progressive recovery of cardiac function and successful weaning from mechanical ventilation. This case highlights the potential role of ECMO, convalescent plasma and immunomodulatory therapies in the management of cardiogenic shock associated with COVID-19 myopericarditis.

Characteristics and Outcomes of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Events During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Single-Center Experience From a New York City Public Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Patients hospitalized for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection are at risk for in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). It is unknown whether certain characteristics of cardiac arrest care and outcomes of IHCAs during the COVID-19 pandemic differed compared with a pre-COVID-19 period. METHODS: All patients who experienced an IHCA at our hospital from March 1, 2020 through May 15, 2020, during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, and those who had an IHCA from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019 were identified. All patient data were extracted from our hospital's Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry, a prospective hospital-based archive of IHCA data. Baseline characteristics of patients, interventions, and overall outcomes of IHCAs during the COVID-19 pandemic were compared with IHCAs in 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: There were 125 IHCAs during a 2.5-month period at our hospital during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic compared with 117 IHCAs in all of 2019. IHCAs during the COVID-19 pandemic occurred more often on general medicine wards than in intensive care units (46% versus 33%; 19% versus 60% in 2019; P<0.001), were overall shorter in duration (median time of 11 minutes [8.5-26.5] versus 15 minutes [7.0-20.0], P=0.001), led to fewer endotracheal intubations (52% versus 85%, P<0.001), and had overall worse survival rates (3% versus 13%; P=0.007) compared with IHCAs before the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who experienced an IHCA during the COVID-19 pandemic had overall worse survival compared with those who had an IHCA before the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings highlight important differences between these 2 time periods. Further study is needed on cardiac arrest care in patients with COVID-19.

COVID-19 and cardiac arrhythmias.

BACKGROUND: Early studies suggest that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with a high incidence of cardiac arrhythmias. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection may cause injury to cardiac myocytes and increase arrhythmia risk. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the risk of cardiac arrest and arrhythmias including incident atrial fibrillation (AF), bradyarrhythmias, and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) in a large urban population hospitalized for COVID-19. We also evaluated correlations between the presence of these arrhythmias and mortality. METHODS: We reviewed the characteristics of all patients with COVID-19 admitted to our center over a 9-week period. Throughout hospitalization, we evaluated the incidence of cardiac arrests, arrhythmias, and inpatient mortality. We also used logistic regression to evaluate age, sex, race, body mass index, prevalent cardiovascular disease, diabetes, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and intensive care unit (ICU) status as potential risk factors for each arrhythmia. RESULTS: Among 700 patients (mean age 50 ± 18 years; 45% men; 71% African American; 11% received ICU care), there were 9 cardiac arrests, 25 incident AF events, 9 clinically significant bradyarrhythmias, and 10 NSVTs. All cardiac arrests occurred in patients admitted to the ICU. In addition, admission to the ICU was associated with incident AF (odds ratio [OR] 4.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.66-13.18) and NSVT (OR 8.92; 95% CI 1.73-46.06) after multivariable adjustment. Also, age and incident AF (OR 1.05; 95% CI 1.02-1.09) and prevalent heart failure and bradyarrhythmias (OR 9.75; 95% CI 1.95-48.65) were independently associated. Only cardiac arrests were associated with acute in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: Cardiac arrests and arrhythmias are likely the consequence of systemic illness and not solely the direct effects of COVID-19 infection.