Live stream of prehospital point-of-care ultrasound during cardiopulmonary resuscitation - A feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: Current resuscitation guidelines recommend that skilled persons could use ultrasound to detect reversible causes during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) where the examination can be safely integrated into the Advanced Life Support (ALS) algorithm. However, in a prehospital setting performing and rapidly interpreting ultrasound can be challenging for physicians. Implementing remote, expert-guided, and real-time transmissions of ultrasound examinations offers the opportunity for tele-support, even during an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). The aim of this feasibility study was to evaluate the impact of tele-supported ultrasound in ALS on hands-off time during an OHCA. METHODS: In an urban setting, physicians performed point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) on patients during OHCA using a portable device, either with tele-support (n = 30) or without tele-support (n = 12). Where tele-support was used, the ultrasound image was transmitted via a remote real-time connection to an on-call specialist in anaesthesia and intensive care medicine with an advanced level of critical care ultrasound expertise. The primary safety endpoint of this study was to evaluate whether POCUS can be safely integrated into the algorithm, and to provide an analysis of hands-off time before, during, and after POCUS during OHCA. RESULTS: In all 42 cases it was possible to perform POCUS during regular rhythm analyses, and no additional hands-off time was required. In 40 of these 42 cases, the physicians were able to perform POCUS during a single regular rhythm analysis, with two periods required only in two cases. The median hands-off time during these rhythm analyses for POCUS with tele-support was 10 (8-13) seconds, and 11 (9-14) seconds for POCUS without tele-support. Furthermore, as a result of POCUS, in a quarter of all cases the physician on scene altered their diagnosis of the primary suspected cause of cardiac arrest, leading to a change in treatment strategy. CONCLUSIONS: This feasibility study demonstrated that POCUS with tele-support can be safely performed during OHCA in an urban environment. Trial Registration (before patient enrolment): ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04817475.

Reporting standard for describing first responder systems, smartphone alerting systems, and AED networks.

Standardized reporting of data is crucial for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) research. While the implementation of first responder systems dispatching volunteers to OHCA is encouraged, there is currently no uniform reporting standard for describing these systems. A steering committee established a literature search to identify experts in smartphone alerting systems. These international experts were invited to a conference held in Hinterzarten, Germany, with 40 researchers from 13 countries in attendance. Prior to the conference, participants submitted proposals for parameters to be included in the reporting standard. The conference comprised five workshops covering different aspects of smartphone alerting systems. Proposed parameters were discussed, clarified, and consensus was achieved using the Nominal Group Technique. Participants voted in a modified Delphi approach on including each category as a core or supplementary element in the reporting standard. Results were presented, and a writing group developed definitions for all categories and items, which were sent to participants for revision and final voting using LimeSurvey web-based software. The resulting reporting standard consists of 68 core items and 21 supplementary items grouped into five topics (first responder system, first responder network, technology/algorithm/strategies, reporting data, and automated external defibrillators (AED)). This proposed reporting standard generated by an expert opinion group fills the gap in describing first responder systems. Its adoption in future research will facilitate comparison of systems and research outcomes, enhancing the transfer of scientific findings to clinical practice.

Effect of intravenous S-ketamine on the MAC of sevoflurane: a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blinded clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Ketamine is routinely used in operating theatres, emergency departments, ICUs, and even outpatient units. Despite the widespread use of ketamine, only basic aspects of its interactions with inhalation anaesthetic agents are known, and formal testing of interactions in humans is lacking. The minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of inhalation anaesthetics is used to guide the depth of anaesthesia, and several drugs are known to influence the MAC. The aim of this study was to investigate whether intravenous application of ketamine influences the MAC of sevoflurane in humans. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing elective surgery were included in this randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. Patients were assigned to one of three groups, each of which received a bolus of placebo, 0.5 mg kg-1S-ketamine, or 1 mg kg-1S-ketamine followed by an infusion of the same amount per hour after inhalation induction with sevoflurane was performed. The response to skin incision (movement vs non-movement) was recorded. The MAC of sevoflurane was assessed using an up-and-down titration method. RESULTS: Sixty patients aged 30-65 yr were included. Each group consisted of 20 patients. The MAC of sevoflurane was higher in the placebo group (2.1 (sd 0.1) %) than in the low-dose ketamine group (0.9 (0.1)%, P<0.01) and the high-dose ketamine group (0.5 (0.1)%, P<0.01). In addition, the MAC of sevoflurane was higher in the low-dose ketamine group compared with the high-dose ketamine group (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The administration of S-ketamine significantly and dose-dependently reduced the MAC of sevoflurane in humans. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: EudraCT ref. no. 2012-001908-38.

Feasibility of a 'reversed' isolated forearm technique by regional antagonization of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular block: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The isolated forearm technique is used to monitor intraoperative awareness. However, this technique cannot be applied to patients who must be kept deeply paralysed for >1h, because the tourniquet preventing the neuromuscular blocking agent from paralysing the forearm must be deflated from time to time. To overcome this problem, we tested the feasibility of a 'reversed' isolated forearm technique. METHODS: Patients received rocuronium 0.6 mg kg(-1) i.v. to achieve muscle paralysis. A tourniquet was then inflated around one upper arm to prevent further blood supply to the forearm. Sugammadex was injected into a vein of this isolated forearm to antagonize muscle paralysis regionally. A dose titration of sugammadex to antagonize muscle paralysis in the isolated forearm was performed in 10 patients, and the effects of the selected dose were observed in 10 additional patients. RESULTS: The sugammadex dose required to antagonize muscle paralysis in the isolated forearm was 0.03 mg kg(-1) in 30 ml of 0.9% saline. Muscle paralysis was antagonized in the isolated forearm within 3.2 min in nine of 10 patients; the rest of the patients' bodies remained paralysed. Releasing the tourniquet 15 min later did not affect the train-of-four count in the isolated forearm but significantly increased the train-of-four count in the other arm by 7%. CONCLUSIONS: Regional antagonization of rocuronium-induced muscle paralysis using a sugammadex dose of 0.03 mg kg(-1) injected into an isolated forearm was feasible and did not have relevant systemic effects. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at EudraCT (ref. no. 2013-002164-53) before patient enrolment began.

Intravenous lidocaine increases the depth of anaesthesia of propofol for skin incision--a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The anaesthetic potency of intravenous propofol is quantified by its Cp50 value, which is defined as the plasma concentration required to prevent movement response in 50% of patients to surgical stimuli. We hypothesised that, in addition to propofol anaesthesia, an intravenous bolus of lidocaine 1.5 mg/kg will decrease the Cp50 value of propofol during anaesthesia. METHODS: We enrolled 54 elective surgical patients undergoing propofol-based anaesthesia, and randomised them to either lidocaine 1.5 mg/kg, lidocaine 0.5 mg/kg or placebo (NaCl 0.9%) 3 min before skin incision. The propofol Cp50 value was then calculated using the 'up-and-down' method of Dixon and Massey. RESULTS: There was no significant reduction in propofol requirements after the administration of 0.5 mg/kg lidocaine from 8.5 µg/ml [confidence interval (CI) 6.0-11.625] to 8.25 µg/ml (CI 6.75-9.76); however, a bolus of 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine decreased the Cp50 value of propofol by 42% from 8.5 µg/ml (CI 6.0-11.625) to 4.92 µg/ml (CI 4.5-5.78) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: An intravenous bolus injection of 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine 2% caused a significant reduction of the propofol Cp50 value.

Effects of repetitive or intensified instructions in telephone assisted, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation: an investigator-blinded, 4-armed, randomized, factorial simulation trial.

BACKGROUND: Compression depth is frequently suboptimal in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). We investigated effects of intensified wording and/or repetitive target depth instructions on compression depth in telephone-assisted, protocol driven, bystander CPR on a simulation manikin. METHODS: Thirty-two volunteers performed 10 min of compression only-CPR in a prospective, investigator-blinded, 4-armed, factorial setting. Participants were randomized either to standard wording ("push down firmly 5 cm"), intensified wording ("it is very important to push down 5 cm every time") or standard or intensified wording repeated every 20s. Three dispatchers were randomized to give these instructions. Primary outcome was relative compression depth (absolute compression depth minus leaning depth). Secondary outcomes were absolute distance, hands-off times as well as BORG-scale and nine-hole peg test (NHPT), pulse rate and blood pressure to reflect physical exertion. We applied a random effects linear regression model. RESULTS: Relative compression depth was 35 ± 10 mm (standard) versus 31 ± 11 mm (intensified wording) versus 25 ± 8 mm (repeated standard) and 31 ± 14 mm (repeated intensified wording). Adjusted for design, body mass index and female sex, intensified wording and repetition led to decreased compression depth of 13 (95%CI -25 to -1) mm (p=0.04) and 9 (95%CI -21 to 3) mm (p=0.13), respectively. Secondary outcomes regarding intensified wording showed significant differences for absolute distance (43 ± 2 versus 20 (95%CI 3-37) mm; p=0.01) and hands-off times (60 ± 40 versus 157 (95%CI 63-251) s; p=0.04). CONCLUSION: In protocol driven, telephone-assisted, bystander CPR, intensified wording and/or repetitive target depth instruction will not improve compression depth compared to the standard instruction.