Improving Outcomes After Post-Cardiac Arrest Brain Injury: A Scientific Statement From the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation.

This scientific statement presents a conceptual framework for the pathophysiology of post-cardiac arrest brain injury, explores reasons for previous failure to translate preclinical data to clinical practice, and outlines potential paths forward. Post-cardiac arrest brain injury is characterized by 4 distinct but overlapping phases: ischemic depolarization, reperfusion repolarization, dysregulation, and recovery and repair. Previous research has been challenging because of the limitations of laboratory models; heterogeneity in the patient populations enrolled; overoptimistic estimation of treatment effects leading to suboptimal sample sizes; timing and route of intervention delivery; limited or absent evidence that the intervention has engaged the mechanistic target; and heterogeneity in postresuscitation care, prognostication, and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments. Future trials must tailor their interventions to the subset of patients most likely to benefit and deliver this intervention at the appropriate time, through the appropriate route, and at the appropriate dose. The complexity of post-cardiac arrest brain injury suggests that monotherapies are unlikely to be as successful as multimodal neuroprotective therapies. Biomarkers should be developed to identify patients with the targeted mechanism of injury, to quantify its severity, and to measure the response to therapy. Studies need to be adequately powered to detect effect sizes that are realistic and meaningful to patients, their families, and clinicians. Study designs should be optimized to accelerate the evaluation of the most promising interventions. Multidisciplinary and international collaboration will be essential to realize the goal of developing effective therapies for post-cardiac arrest brain injury.

Improving Outcomes After Post-Cardiac Arrest Brain Injury: A Scientific Statement From the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation.

This scientific statement presents a conceptual framework for the pathophysiology of post-cardiac arrest brain injury, explores reasons for previous failure to translate preclinical data to clinical practice, and outlines potential paths forward. Post-cardiac arrest brain injury is characterized by 4 distinct but overlapping phases: ischemic depolarization, reperfusion repolarization, dysregulation, and recovery and repair. Previous research has been challenging because of the limitations of laboratory models; heterogeneity in the patient populations enrolled; overoptimistic estimation of treatment effects leading to suboptimal sample sizes; timing and route of intervention delivery; limited or absent evidence that the intervention has engaged the mechanistic target; and heterogeneity in postresuscitation care, prognostication, and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments. Future trials must tailor their interventions to the subset of patients most likely to benefit and deliver this intervention at the appropriate time, through the appropriate route, and at the appropriate dose. The complexity of post-cardiac arrest brain injury suggests that monotherapies are unlikely to be as successful as multimodal neuroprotective therapies. Biomarkers should be developed to identify patients with the targeted mechanism of injury, to quantify its severity, and to measure the response to therapy. Studies need to be adequately powered to detect effect sizes that are realistic and meaningful to patients, their families, and clinicians. Study designs should be optimized to accelerate the evaluation of the most promising interventions. Multidisciplinary and international collaboration will be essential to realize the goal of developing effective therapies for post-cardiac arrest brain injury.

Wolf Creek XVII Part 8: Neuroprotection.

Introduction: Post-cardiac arrest brain injury (PCABI) is the primary determinant of clinical outcomes for patients who achieve return of spontaneous circulation after cardiac arrest (CA). There are limited neuroprotective therapies available to mitigate the acute pathophysiology of PCABI. Methods: Neuroprotection was one of six focus topics for the Wolf Creek XVII Conference held on June 14-17, 2023 in Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. Conference invitees included international thought leaders and scientists in the field of CA resuscitation from academia and industry. Participants submitted via online survey knowledge gaps, barriers to translation, and research priorities for each focus topic. Expert panels used the survey results and their own perspectives and insights to create and present a preliminary unranked list for each category that was debated, revised and ranked by all attendees to identify the top 5 for each category. Results: Top 5 knowledge gaps included developing therapies for neuroprotection; improving understanding of the pathophysiology, mechanisms, and natural history of PCABI; deploying precision medicine approaches; optimizing resuscitation and CPR quality; and determining optimal timing for and duration of interventions. Top 5 barriers to translation included patient heterogeneity; nihilism & lack of knowledge about cardiac arrest; challenges with the translational pipeline; absence of mechanistic biomarkers; and inaccurate neuro-triage and neuroprognostication. Top 5 research priorities focused on translational research and trial optimization; addressing patient heterogeneity and individualized interventions; improving understanding of pathophysiology and mechanisms; developing mechanistic and outcome biomarkers across post-CA time course; and improving implementation of science and technology. Conclusion: This overview can serve as a guide to transform the care and outcome of patients with PCABI. Addressing these topics has the potential to improve both research and clinical care in the field of neuroprotection for PCABI.

Critical Care Management of Patients After Cardiac Arrest: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association and Neurocritical Care Society.

The critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest is burdened by a lack of high-quality clinical studies and the resultant lack of high-certainty evidence. This results in limited practice guideline recommendations, which may lead to uncertainty and variability in management. Critical care management is crucial in patients after cardiac arrest and affects outcome. Although guidelines address some relevant topics (including temperature control and neurological prognostication of comatose survivors, 2 topics for which there are more robust clinical studies), many important subject areas have limited or nonexistent clinical studies, leading to the absence of guidelines or low-certainty evidence. The American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee and the Neurocritical Care Society collaborated to address this gap by organizing an expert consensus panel and conference. Twenty-four experienced practitioners (including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and a respiratory therapist) from multiple medical specialties, levels, institutions, and countries made up the panel. Topics were identified and prioritized by the panel and arranged by organ system to facilitate discussion, debate, and consensus building. Statements related to postarrest management were generated, and 80% agreement was required to approve a statement. Voting was anonymous and web based. Topics addressed include neurological, cardiac, pulmonary, hematological, infectious, gastrointestinal, endocrine, and general critical care management. Areas of uncertainty, areas for which no consensus was reached, and future research directions are also included. Until high-quality studies that inform practice guidelines in these areas are available, the expert panel consensus statements that are provided can advise clinicians on the critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest.

Critical Care Management of Patients After Cardiac Arrest: A Scientific Statement from the American Heart Association and Neurocritical Care Society.

The critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest is burdened by a lack of high-quality clinical studies and the resultant lack of high-certainty evidence. This results in limited practice guideline recommendations, which may lead to uncertainty and variability in management. Critical care management is crucial in patients after cardiac arrest and affects outcome. Although guidelines address some relevant topics (including temperature control and neurological prognostication of comatose survivors, 2 topics for which there are more robust clinical studies), many important subject areas have limited or nonexistent clinical studies, leading to the absence of guidelines or low-certainty evidence. The American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee and the Neurocritical Care Society collaborated to address this gap by organizing an expert consensus panel and conference. Twenty-four experienced practitioners (including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and a respiratory therapist) from multiple medical specialties, levels, institutions, and countries made up the panel. Topics were identified and prioritized by the panel and arranged by organ system to facilitate discussion, debate, and consensus building. Statements related to postarrest management were generated, and 80% agreement was required to approve a statement. Voting was anonymous and web based. Topics addressed include neurological, cardiac, pulmonary, hematological, infectious, gastrointestinal, endocrine, and general critical care management. Areas of uncertainty, areas for which no consensus was reached, and future research directions are also included. Until high-quality studies that inform practice guidelines in these areas are available, the expert panel consensus statements that are provided can advise clinicians on the critical care management of patients after cardiac arrest.

Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rapid Sequence Intubation in the Critically Ill Adult Patient.

RATIONALE: Controversies and practice variations exist related to the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic management of the airway during rapid sequence intubation (RSI). OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations on pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic topics related to RSI. DESIGN: A guideline panel of 20 Society of Critical Care Medicine members with experience with RSI and emergency airway management met virtually at least monthly from the panel's inception in 2018 through 2020 and face-to-face at the 2020 Critical Care Congress. The guideline panel included pharmacists, physicians, a nurse practitioner, and a respiratory therapist with experience in emergency medicine, critical care medicine, anesthesiology, and prehospital medicine; consultation with a methodologist and librarian was available. A formal conflict of interest policy was followed and enforced throughout the guidelines-development process. METHODS: Panelists created Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) questions and voted to select the most clinically relevant questions for inclusion in the guideline. Each question was assigned to a pair of panelists, who refined the PICO wording and reviewed the best available evidence using predetermined search terms. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework was used throughout and recommendations of "strong" or "conditional" were made for each PICO question based on quality of evidence and panel consensus. Recommendations were provided when evidence was actionable; suggestions, when evidence was equivocal; and best practice statements, when the benefits of the intervention outweighed the risks, but direct evidence to support the intervention did not exist. RESULTS: From the original 35 proposed PICO questions, 10 were selected. The RSI guideline panel issued one recommendation (strong, low-quality evidence), seven suggestions (all conditional recommendations with moderate-, low-, or very low-quality evidence), and two best practice statements. The panel made two suggestions for a single PICO question and did not make any suggestions for one PICO question due to lack of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Using GRADE principles, the interdisciplinary panel found substantial agreement with respect to the evidence supporting recommendations for RSI. The panel also identified literature gaps that might be addressed by future research.

Temperature Management for Comatose Adult Survivors of Cardiac Arrest: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association.

Targeted temperature management has been a cornerstone of post-cardiac arrest care for patients remaining unresponsive after return of spontaneous circulation since the initial trials in 2002 found that mild therapeutic hypothermia improves neurological outcome. The suggested temperature range expanded in 2015 in response to a large trial finding that outcomes were not better with treatment at 33° C compared with 36° C. In 2021, another large trial was published in which outcomes with temperature control at 33° C were not better than those of patients treated with a strategy of strict normothermia. On the basis of these new data, the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation and other organizations have altered their treatment recommendations for temperature management after cardiac arrest. The new American Heart Association guidelines on this topic will be introduced in a 2023 focused update. To provide guidance to clinicians while this focused update is forthcoming, the American Heart Association's Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee convened a writing group to review the TTM2 trial (Hypothermia Versus Normothermia After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest) in the context of other recent evidence and to present an opinion on how this trial may influence clinical practice. This science advisory was informed by review of the TTM2 trial, consideration of other recent influential studies, and discussion between cardiac arrest experts in the fields of cardiology, critical care, emergency medicine, and neurology. Conclusions presented in this advisory statement do not replace current guidelines but are intended to provide an expert opinion on novel literature that will be incorporated into future guidelines and suggest the opportunity for reassessment of current clinical practice.

Brain imaging after cardiac arrest.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Many patients who survive a cardiac arrest have a disorder of consciousness in the period after resuscitation, and prediction of long-term neurologic outcome requires multimodal assessments. Brain imaging with computed tomography (CT) and MRI is a key component. We aim to provide an overview of the types of neuroimaging available and their uses and limitations. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have evaluated qualitative and quantitative techniques to analyze and interpret CT and MRI to predict both good and poor outcomes. Qualitative interpretation of CT and MRI is widely available but is limited by low inter-rater reliability and lack of specificity around which findings have the highest correlation with outcome. Quantitative analysis of CT (gray-white ratio) and MRI (amount of brain tissue with an apparent diffusion coefficient below certain thresholds) hold promise, though additional research is needed to standardize the approach. SUMMARY: Brain imaging is important for evaluating the extent of neurologic injury after cardiac arrest. Future work should focus on addressing previous methodological limitations and standardizing approaches to qualitative and quantitative imaging analysis. Novel imaging techniques are being developed and new analytical methods are being applied to advance the field.

Effect of rapid EEG on anti-seizure medication usage

Objective: To study how early diagnoses from rapid EEG (rEEG) during the initial evaluation of patients with suspected non-convulsive seizures correlates with changes in anti-seizure medication (ASM) use. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of 100 consecutive adult patients at an academic medical center who underwent rEEG monitoring for suspected non-convulsive seizures. We collected information on the timing of ASM administration and categorized EEG diagnoses as seizures (SZ), highly epileptiform patterns (HEP), or normal or slow activity (NL/SL). We used a χ² test to determine whether the use of ASMs was significantly different between SZ/HEP and NL/SL cases. Results: Of 100 patients, SZ were found in 5%, HEP in 14%, and no epileptiform/ictal activity in 81%. Forty-six percent of patients had received ASM(s) before rEEG. While 84% of HEP/SZ cases were started or continued on ASMs, only 51% of NL/SL cases were started or continued on ASMs after rEEG (χ² [1, n=100] = 7.09, p=0.008). Thirty-seven patients had received sedation (i.e., propofol or dexmedetomidine) prior to rEEG. In 15 patients (13/30 NL/SL, 2/7 HEP/SZ), sedation was discontinued following rEEG. Significance: Our study demonstrates that seizures were rapidly ruled out with rEEG in 81% of patients while 19% of patients were rapidly identified as having seizures or being at higher risk for seizures. The rapid evaluation of patients correlated with a significant reduction in ASM treatment in NL/SL cases compared to HEP/SZ cases. Thus, early access to EEG information may lead to more informed and targeted management of patients suspected to have nonconvulsive seizures.

Precision Care in Cardiac Arrest: ICECAP (PRECICECAP) Study Protocol and Informatics Approach.

BACKGROUND: Most trials in critical care have been neutral, in part because between-patient heterogeneity means not all patients respond identically to the same treatment. The Precision Care in Cardiac Arrest: Influence of Cooling duration on Efficacy in Cardiac Arrest Patients (PRECICECAP) study will apply machine learning to high-resolution, multimodality data collected from patients resuscitated from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. We aim to discover novel biomarker signatures to predict the optimal duration of therapeutic hypothermia and 90-day functional outcomes. In parallel, we are developing a freely available software platform for standardized curation of intensive care unit-acquired data for machine learning applications. METHODS: The Influence of Cooling duration on Efficacy in Cardiac Arrest Patients (ICECAP) study is a response-adaptive, dose-finding trial testing different durations of therapeutic hypothermia. Twelve ICECAP sites will collect data for PRECICECAP from multiple modalities routinely used after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, including ICECAP case report forms, detailed medication data, cardiopulmonary and electroencephalographic waveforms, and digital imaging and communications in medicine files (DICOMs). We partnered with Moberg Analytics to develop a freely available software platform to allow high-resolution critical care data to be used efficiently and effectively. We will use an autoencoder neural network to create low-dimensional representations of all raw waveforms and derivative features, censored at rewarming to ensure clinical usability to guide optimal duration of hypothermia. We will also consider simple features that are historically considered to be important. Finally, we will create a supervised deep learning neural network algorithm to directly predict 90-day functional outcome from large sets of novel features. RESULTS: PRECICECAP is currently enrolling and will be completed in late 2025. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac arrest is a heterogeneous disease that causes substantial morbidity and mortality. PRECICECAP will advance the overarching goal of titrating personalized neurocritical care on the basis of robust measures of individual need and treatment responsiveness. The software platform we develop will be broadly applicable to hospital-based research after acute illness or injury.

Prediction of good neurological outcome in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To assess the ability of clinical examination, blood biomarkers, electrophysiology or neuroimaging assessed within 7 days from return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) to predict good neurological outcome, defined as no, mild, or moderate disability (CPC 1-2 or mRS 0-3) at discharge from intensive care unit or later, in comatose adult survivors from cardiac arrest (CA). METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched. Sensitivity and specificity for good outcome were calculated for each predictor. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUIPS tool. RESULTS: A total of 37 studies were included. Due to heterogeneities in recording times, predictor thresholds, and definition of some predictors, meta-analysis was not performed. A withdrawal or localisation motor response to pain immediately or at 72-96 h after ROSC, normal blood values of neuron-specific enolase (NSE) at 24 h-72 h after ROSC, a short-latency somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) N20 wave amplitude > 4 µV or a continuous background without discharges on electroencephalogram (EEG) within 72 h from ROSC, and absent diffusion restriction in the cortex or deep grey matter on MRI on days 2-7 after ROSC predicted good neurological outcome with more than 80% specificity and a sensitivity above 40% in most studies. Most studies had moderate or high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: In comatose cardiac arrest survivors, clinical, biomarker, electrophysiology, and imaging studies identified patients destined to a good neurological outcome with high specificity within the first week after cardiac arrest (CA).

Prognostication of ICU Patients by Providers with and without Neurocritical Care Training.

BACKGROUND: Predictions of functional outcome in neurocritical care (NCC) patients impact care decisions. This study compared the predictive values (PVs) of good and poor functional outcome among health care providers with and without NCC training. METHODS: Consecutive patients who were intubated for  ≥ 72 h with primary neurological illness or neurological complications were prospectively enrolled and followed for 6-month functional outcome. Medical intensive care unit (MICU) attendings, NCC attendings, residents (RES), and nurses (RN) predicted 6-month functional outcome on the modified Rankin scale (mRS). The primary objective was to compare these four groups' PVs of a good (mRS score 0-3) and a poor (mRS score 4-6) outcome prediction. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-nine patients were enrolled. One hundred seventy-six had mRS scores predicted by a provider from each group and were included in the primary outcome analysis. At 6 months, 54 (31%) patients had good outcome and 122 (69%) had poor outcome. Compared with other providers, NCC attendings expected better outcomes (p < 0.001). Consequently, the PV of a poor outcome prediction by NCC attendings was higher (96% [95% confidence interval [CI] 89-99%]) than that by MICU attendings (88% [95% CI 80-93%]), RES (82% [95% CI 74-88%]), and RN (85% [95% CI 77-91%]) (p = 0.047, 0.002, and 0.012, respectively). When patients who had withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (n = 67) were excluded, NCC attendings remained better at predicting poor outcome (NCC 90% [95% CI 75-97%] vs. MICU 73% [95% CI 59-84%], p = 0.064). The PV of a good outcome prediction was similar among groups (MICU 65% [95% CI 52-76%], NCC 63% [95% CI 51-73%], RES 71% [95% CI 55-84%], and RN 64% [95% CI 50-76%]). CONCLUSIONS: Neurointensivists expected better outcomes than other providers and were better at predicting poor functional outcomes. The PV of a good outcome prediction was modest among all providers.

Influence of sex on survival, neurologic outcomes, and neurodiagnostic testing after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

AIM: Previous studies evaluating the relationship between sex and post-resuscitation care and outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) are conflicting. We investigated the association between sex and outcomes as well as neurodiagnostic testing in a prospective multicenter international registry of patients admitted to intensive care units following OHCA. METHODS: OHCA survivors enrolled in the International Cardiac Arrest Registry (INTCAR) from 2012 to 2017 were included. We assessed the independent association between sex and survival to hospital discharge, good neurologic outcome (Cerebral Performance Category 1 or 2), neurodiagnostic testing, and withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WLST). RESULTS: Of 2407 eligible patients, 809 (33.6%) were women. Baseline characteristics differed by sex, with less bystander CPR and initial shockable rhythms among women. Women were less likely to survive to hospital discharge, however significance abated following adjusted analysis (30.1% vs 42.7%, adjusted OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.67-1.08). Women were less likely to have good neurologic outcome at discharge (21.4% vs 34.0%, adjusted OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.57-0.96) and at six months post-arrest (16.7% vs 29.4%, adjusted OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54-0.98) that persisted after adjustment. Neuroimaging (75.5% vs 74.3%, p = 0.54) and other neurophysiologic testing (78.8% vs 78.6%, p = 0.91) was similar across sex. Women were more likely to undergo WLST (55.6% vs 42.8%, adjusted OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.66). CONCLUSIONS: Women with cardiac arrest have lower odds of good neurologic outcomes and higher odds of WLST, despite comparable rates of neurodiagnostic testing and after controlling for baseline differences in clinical characteristics and cardiac arrest features.

Incidence of cardiac interventions and associated cardiac arrest outcomes in patients with nonshockable initial rhythms and no ST elevation post resuscitation.

BACKGROUND: Out of Hospital Cardiac arrest (OHCA) survivors with ST elevation (STE) with or without shockable rhythms often benefit from coronary angiography (CAG) and, if indicated, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the benefits of CAG and PCI in OHCA survivors with nonshockable rhythms (PEA/asystole) and no STE are debated. METHODS: Using the International Cardiac Arrest Registry (INTCAR 2.0), representing 44 centers in the US and Europe, comatose OHCA survivors with known presenting rhythms and post resuscitation ECGs were identified. Survival to hospital discharge, neurological recovery on discharge, and impact of CAG with or without PCI on such outcome were assessed and compared with other groups (shockable rhythms with or without STE). RESULTS: Total of 2113 OHCA survivors were identified and described as; nonshockable/no STE (Nsh-NST) (n = 940, 44.5%), shockable/no STE (Sh-NST) (n = 716, 33.9%), nonshockable/STE (Nsh-ST) (n = 110, 5.2%), and shockable/STE (Sh-ST) (n = 347, 16.4%). Of Nsh-NST, 13.7% (129) were previously healthy before CA and only 17.3% (161) underwent CAG; of those, 30.4% (52) underwent PCI. A total of 18.6% (174) Nsh-NST patients survived to hospital discharge, with 57.5% (100) of such survivors having good neurological recovery (cerebral performance category 1 or 2) on discharge. Coronary angiography was associated with improved odds for survival and neurological recovery among all groups, including those with NSh-NST. CONCLUSIONS: Nonshockable initial rhythms with no ST elevation post resuscitation was the most common presentation after OHCA. Although most of these patients did not undergo coronary angiography, among those who did, 1 in 4 patients had a culprit lesion and underwent revascularization. Invasive CAG should be at least considered for all OHCA survivors, including those with nonshockable rhythms and no ST elevation post resuscitation. BRIEF ABSTRACT: Out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survivors with ST elevation and/or shockable rhythms benefit from coronary angiography and revascularization. Nonshockable cardiac arrest survivors with no ST elevation have the worst prognosis and rarely undergo coronary angiography. Nonshockable rhythms with no ST elevation was the most common presentation after OHCA and among a small subgroup underwent coronary angiography, 1 in 4 patients with had culprit lesion and underwent revascularization. Coronary angiography was associated with high prevalence of acute culprit coronary lesions and should be considered for those with a probably cardiac cause for their arres.

Risk Stratification Among Survivors of Cardiac Arrest Considered for Coronary Angiography.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Cardiology Interventional Council published consensus-based recommendations to help identify resuscitated cardiac arrest patients with unfavorable clinical features in whom invasive procedures are unlikely to improve survival. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to identify how many unfavorable features are required before prognosis is significantly worsened and which features are most impactful in predicting prognosis. METHODS: Using the INTCAR (International Cardiac Arrest Registry), the impact of each proposed "unfavorable feature" on survival to hospital discharge was individually analyzed. Logistic regression was performed to assess the association of such unfavorable features with poor outcomes. RESULTS: Seven unfavorable features (of 10 total) were captured in 2,508 patients successfully resuscitated after cardiac arrest (ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation and noncardiac etiology were exclusion criteria in our registry). Chronic kidney disease was used in lieu of end-stage renal disease. In total, 39% survived to hospital discharge. The odds ratio (OR) of survival to hospital discharge for each unfavorable feature was as follows: age >85 years OR: 0.30 (95% CI: 0.15 to 0.61), time-to-ROSC >30 min OR: 0.30 (95% CI: 0.23 to 0.39), nonshockable rhythm OR: 0.39 (95% CI: 0.29 to 0.54), no bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation OR: 0.49 (95% CI: 0.38 to 0.64), lactate >7 mmol/l OR: 0.50 (95% CI: 0.40 to 0.63), unwitnessed arrest OR: 0.58 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.78), pH <7.2 OR: 0.78 (95% CI: 0.63 to 0.98), and chronic kidney disease OR: 0.96 (95% CI: 0.70 to 1.33). The presence of any 3 or more unfavorable features predicted <40% survival. Presence of the 3 strongest risk factors (age >85 years, time-to-ROSC >30 min, and non-ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation) together or ≥6 unfavorable features predicted a ≤10% chance of survival to discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Patients successfully resuscitated from cardiac arrest with 6 or more unfavorable features have a poor long-term prognosis. Delaying or even forgoing invasive procedures in such patients is reasonable.

Early Head Computed Tomography Abnormalities Associated with Elevated Intracranial Pressure in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is recommended in severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI), yet invasive monitoring has risks, and many patients do not develop elevated ICP. Tools to identify patients at risk for ICP elevation are limited. We aimed to identify early radiologic biomarkers of ICP elevation. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we analyzed a prospectively enrolled cohort of patients with a sTBI at an academic level 1 trauma center. Inclusion criteria were nonpenetrating TBI, age ≥16 years, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score ≤8, and presence of an ICP monitor. Two independent reviewers manually evaluated 30 prespecified features on serial head computed tomography (CTs). Patient characteristics and radiologic features were correlated with elevated ICP. The primary outcome was clinically relevant ICP elevation, defined as ICP ≥ 20 mm Hg on at least 5 or more hourly recordings during postinjury days 0-7 with concurrent administration of an ICP-lowering treatment. RESULTS: Among 111 sTBI patients, the median GCS was 6 (interquartile range 3-8), and 45% had elevated ICP. Features associated with elevated ICP were younger age (every 10-year decrease, odds ratio [OR] 1.4), modified Fisher scale (mFS) score at 0-4 hours postinjury (every 1 point, OR 1.8), and combined volume of contusional hemorrhage and peri-hematoma edema (10 ml, OR 1.2) at 4-18 hours postinjury. CONCLUSIONS: Younger age, mFS score, and volume of contusion are associated with ICP elevation in patients with a sTBI. Imaging features may stratify patients by their risk of subsequent ICP elevation.

Part 7: Systems of Care: 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.

Survival after cardiac arrest requires an integrated system of people, training, equipment, and organizations working together to achieve a common goal. Part 7 of the 2020 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care focuses on systems of care, with an emphasis on elements that are relevant to a broad range of resuscitation situations. Previous systems of care guidelines have identified a Chain of Survival, beginning with prevention and early identification of cardiac arrest and proceeding through resuscitation to post-cardiac arrest care. This concept is reinforced by the addition of recovery as an important stage in cardiac arrest survival. Debriefing and other quality improvement strategies were previously mentioned and are now emphasized. Specific to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, this Part contains recommendations about community initiatives to promote cardiac arrest recognition, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, public access defibrillation, mobile phone technologies to summon first responders, and an enhanced role for emergency telecommunicators. Germane to in-hospital cardiac arrest are recommendations about the recognition and stabilization of hospital patients at risk for developing cardiac arrest. This Part also includes recommendations about clinical debriefing, transport to specialized cardiac arrest centers, organ donation, and performance measurement across the continuum of resuscitation situations.