Cardiopulmonary resuscitation and defibrillation for cardiac arrest when patients are in the prone position: A systematic review.

AIM: To perform a systematic review of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and/or defibrillation in the prone position compared to turning the patient supine prior to starting CPR and/or defibrillation. METHODS: The search included PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, CINAHL Plus, and medRxiv on December 9, 2020. The population included adults and children in any setting with cardiac arrest while in the prone position. The outcomes included arterial blood pressure and end-tidal capnography during CPR, time to start CPR and defibrillation, return of spontaneous circulation, survival and survival with favorable neurologic outcome to discharge, 30 days or longer. ROBINS-I was performed to assess risk of bias for observational studies. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 29 case reports (32 individual cases), two prospective observational studies, and two simulation studies. The observational studies enrolled 17 patients who were declared dead in the supine position and reported higher mean systolic blood pressure from CPR in prone position (72 mmHg vs 48 mmHg, p < 0.005; 79 ± 20 mmHg vs 55 ± 20 mmHg, p = 0.028). One simulation study reported a faster time to defibrillation in the prone position. Return of spontaneous circulation, survival to discharge or 30 days were reported in adult and paediatric case reports. Critical risk of bias limited our ability to perform pooled analyses. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a limited number of observational studies and case reports comparing prone versus supine CPR and/or defibrillation. Prone CPR may be a reasonable option if immediate supination is difficult or poses unacceptable risks to the patient.

2021 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; First Aid Task Forces; and the COVID-19 Working Group.

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation initiated a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed published cardiopulmonary resuscitation science. This is the fifth annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations; a more comprehensive review was done in 2020. This latest summary addresses the most recently published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force science experts. Topics covered by systematic reviews in this summary include resuscitation topics of video-based dispatch systems; head-up cardiopulmonary resuscitation; early coronary angiography after return of spontaneous circulation; cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the prone patient; cord management at birth for preterm and term infants; devices for administering positive-pressure ventilation at birth; family presence during neonatal resuscitation; self-directed, digitally based basic life support education and training in adults and children; coronavirus disease 2019 infection risk to rescuers from patients in cardiac arrest; and first aid topics, including cooling with water for thermal burns, oral rehydration for exertional dehydration, pediatric tourniquet use, and methods of tick removal. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the quality of the evidence, according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations or good practice statements. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in Justification and Evidence-to-Decision Framework Highlights sections. In addition, the task forces listed priority knowledge gaps for further research.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation in special circumstances.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation prioritises treatment for cardiac arrests from a primary cardiac cause, which make up the majority of treated cardiac arrests. Early chest compressions and, when indicated, a defibrillation shock from a bystander give the best chance of survival with a good neurological status. Cardiac arrest can also be caused by special circumstances, such as asphyxia, trauma, pulmonary embolism, accidental hypothermia, anaphylaxis, or COVID-19, and during pregnancy or perioperatively. Cardiac arrests in these circumstances represent an increasing proportion of all treated cardiac arrests, often have a preventable cause, and require additional interventions to correct a reversible cause during resuscitation. The evidence for treating these conditions is mostly of low or very low certainty and further studies are needed. Irrespective of the cause, treatments for cardiac arrest are time sensitive and most effective when given early-every minute counts.

Cardiac arrest as a reportable condition: a cohort study of the first 6 years of the Norwegian out-of-hospital cardiac arrest registry

OBJECTIVES: The Norwegian Cardiac Arrest Registry (NorCAR) was established in 2013 when cardiac arrest became a mandatory reportable condition. The aim of this cohort study is to describe how the world's first mandatory, population-based cardiac arrest registry evolved during its first 6 years. SETTING: Norway has a total population of 5.3 million inhabitants with a population density that varies considerably. All residents are assigned a unique identifier number, giving nationally approved registries access to information about all births and deaths in the country. Data in the registry are entered by data processors;public employees with close links to the emergency medical services. All data processors undergo a standardised training and meet for yearly retraining and updates. PARTICIPANTS: All events of cardiac arrest where bystanders or healthcare professionals have started cardiopulmonary resuscitation or performed defibrillation are included into the NorCAR. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Since the establishment of the registry, the number of reporting health trusts, the number of reported events and the corresponding population at risk were followed year by year. Outcome is measured as changes in inclusion rate, incidence per 100 000 inhabitants and survival to 30 days after cardiac arrest. RESULTS: In total, 14 849 cases were registered over 6 years, between 2013 and 2018. The number of health trusts reporting rose steadily from 2013. Within 3 years, all trusts reported to the registry with an increasing number of events reported;going from 1101 to 3400 per year. The prevalence of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation increased slightly, but the population incidence of survival did not change. CONCLUSION: Declaring cardiac arrest as a reportable condition and close follow-up of all reporting areas is essential when building a national registry.