Transesophageal Echocardiography During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Is Associated With Shorter Compression Pauses Compared With Transthoracic Echocardiography.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Point-of-care ultrasonography provides diagnostic information in addition to visual pulse checks during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The most commonly used modality, transthoracic echocardiography, has unfortunately been repeatedly associated with prolonged pauses in chest compressions, which correlate with worsened neurologic outcomes. Unlike transthoracic echocardiography, transesophageal echocardiography does not require cessation of compressions for adequate imaging and provides the diagnostic benefit of point-of-care ultrasonography. To assess a benefit of transesophageal echocardiography, we compare the duration of chest compression pauses between transesophageal echocardiography, transthoracic echocardiography, and manual pulse checks on video recordings of cardiac arrest resuscitations. METHODS: We analyzed 139 pulse check CPR pauses among 25 patients during cardiac arrest. RESULTS: Transesophageal echocardiography provided the shortest mean pulse check duration (9 seconds [95% confidence interval {CI} 5 to 12 seconds]). Mean pulse check duration with transthoracic echocardiography was 19 seconds (95% CI 16 to 22 seconds), and it was 11 seconds (95% CI 8 to 14 seconds) with manual checks. Intraclass correlation coefficient between abstractors for a portion of individual and average times was 0.99 and 0.99, respectively (P<.001 for both). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that pulse check times with transesophageal echocardiography are shorter versus with transthoracic echocardiography for ED point-of-care ultrasonography during cardiac arrest resuscitations, and further emphasizes the need for careful attention to compression pause duration when using transthoracic echocardiography for point-of-care ultrasonography during ED cardiac arrest resuscitations.

Development and Implementation of a Comprehensive, Multidisciplinary Emergency Department Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Program.

Despite advances in the medical and surgical management of cardiovascular disease, greater than 350,000 patients experience out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the United States annually, with only a 12% neurologically favorable survival rate. Of these patients, 23% have an initial shockable rhythm of ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VF/VT), a marker of high probability of acute coronary ischemia (80%) as the precipitating factor. However, few patients (22%) will experience return of spontaneous circulation and sufficient hemodynamic stability to undergo cardiac catheterization and revascularization. Previous case series and observational studies have demonstrated the successful application of intra-arrest extracorporeal life support, including to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest victims, with a neurologically favorable survival rate of up to 53%. For patients with refractory cardiac arrest, strategies are needed to bridge them from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest to the catheterization laboratory and revascularization. To address this gap, we expanded our ICU and perioperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) program to the emergency department (ED) to reach this cohort of patients to improve survival. In this report, we illustrate our process and initial experience of developing a multidisciplinary team for rapid deployment of ED ECMO as a template for institutions interested in building their own ED ECMO programs.

Practice characteristics of Emergency Department extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) programs in the United States: The current state of the art of Emergency Department extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ED ECMO).

PURPOSE: To characterize the current scope and practices of centers performing extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) on the undifferentiated patient with cardiac arrest in the emergency department. METHODS: We contacted all US centers in January 2016 that had submitted adult eCPR cases to the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry and surveyed them, querying for programs that had performed eCPR in the Emergency Department (ED ECMO). Our objective was to characterize the following domains of ED ECMO practice: program characteristics, patient selection, devices and techniques, and personnel. RESULTS: Among 99 centers queried, 70 responded. Among these, 36 centers performed ED ECMO. Nearly 93% of programs are based at academic/teaching hospitals. 65% of programs are less than 5 years old, and 60% of programs perform ≤3 cases per year. Most programs (90%) had inpatient eCPR or salvage ECMO programs prior to starting ED ECMO programs. The majority of programs do not have formal inclusion and exclusion criteria. Most programs preferentially obtain vascular access via the percutaneous route (70%) and many (40%) use mechanical CPR during cannulation. The most commonly used console is the Maquet Rotaflow(®). Cannulation is most often performed by cardiothoracic (CT) surgery, and nearly all programs (>85%) involve CT surgeons, perfusionists, and pharmacists. CONCLUSIONS: Over a third of centers that submitted adult eCPR cases to ELSO have performed ED ECMO. These programs are largely based at academic hospitals, new, and have low volumes. They do not have many formal inclusion or exclusion criteria, and devices and techniques are variable.

GlideScope versus flexible fiber optic for awake upright laryngoscopy.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: We compare laryngoscopic quality and time to highest-grade view between a face-to-face approach with the GlideScope and traditional flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy in awake, upright volunteers. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover study in which we performed awake laryngoscopy under local anesthesia on 23 healthy volunteers, using both a GlideScope video laryngoscopy face-to-face technique with the blade held upside down and flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy. Operator reports of Cormack-Lehane laryngoscopic views and video-reviewed time to highest-grade view, as well as number of attempts, were recorded. RESULTS: Ten women and 13 men participated. A grade II or better view was obtained with GlideScope video laryngoscopy in 22 of 23 (95.6%) participants and in 23 of 23 (100%) participants with flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy (relative risk GlideScope video laryngoscopy versus flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy 0.96; 95% confidence interval 0.88 to 1.04). Median time to highest-grade view for GlideScope video laryngoscopy was 16 seconds (interquartile range 9 to 34) versus 51 seconds (interquartile range 35 to 96) for flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy. A distribution of interindividual differences demonstrated that GlideScope video laryngoscopy was, on average, 39 seconds faster than flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy (95% confidence interval 0.2 to 76.9 seconds). CONCLUSION: GlideScope video laryngoscopy can be used to obtain a Cormack-Lehane grade II or better view in the majority of awake, healthy volunteers when an upright face-to-face approach is used and was slightly faster than traditional flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy. However, flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy may be more reliable at obtaining high-grade views of the larynx. Awake, face-to-face GlideScope use may offer an alternative approach to the difficulty airway, particularly among providers uncomfortable with flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy.

Variability in Ultrasound Education among Emergency Medicine Residencies.

OBJECTIVE: Education in emergency ultrasound (EUS) has become an essential part of emergency medicine (EM) resident training. In 2009, comprehensive residency training guidelines were published to ensure proficiency in ultrasound education. The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) recommends that 150 ultrasound exams be performed for physician competency. Our goal is to evaluate the current ultrasound practices among EM residency programs and assess the need for further formalization of EUS training. METHODS: We generated a survey using an online survey tool and administered via the internet. The survey consisted of 25 questions that included multiple choice and free text answers. These online survey links were sent via email to EM ultrasound directors at all 149 American College of Graduate Medical Education EM residency programs in April 2008. We surveyed programs regarding EUS curriculum and residency proficiency requirements and descriptive statistics were used to report the survey findings. RESULTS: Sixty-five residency programs responded to the survey. The average number of ultrasound exams required by programs for EUS competency was 137 scans. However, the majority of programs 42/65 (64%) require their residents to obtain 150 scans or greater for competency. Fifty-one out of 64 (79%) programs reported having a structured ultrasound curriculum while 14/64 (21%) of programs reported that EUS training is primarily resident self-directed. In terms of faculty credentialing, 29/62 (47%) of residency programs have greater than 50% of faculty credentialed. Forty-four out of 61 (72%) programs make EUS a required rotation. Thirty-four out of 63 (54%) programs felt that they were meeting all their goals for resident EUS education. CONCLUSION: Currently discrepancies exist between EM residency programs in ultrasound curriculum and perceived needs for achieving proficiency in EUS. Although a majority of residency programs require 150 ultrasound exams or more to achieve resident competency, overall the average number of scans required by all programs is 137 exams. This number is less than that recommended by ACEP for physician competency. These data suggest that guidelines are needed to help standardize ultrasound training for all EM residency programs.