There is increasing recognition that systematic post–cardiac arrest care after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) can improve the likelihood of patient survival with good quality of life. This is based in part on the publication of results of randomized controlled clinical trials as well as a description of the post–cardiac arrest syndrome. 1–3 Post–cardiac arrest care has significant potential to reduce early mortality caused by hemodynamic instability and later morbidity and mortality from multiorgan failure and brain injury. 3,4 This section summarizes our evolving understanding of the hemodynamic, neurological, and metabolic abnormalities encountered in patients who are initially resuscitated from cardiac arrest. The initial objectives of post–cardiac arrest care are to ● Optimize cardiopulmonary function and vital organ perfusion. ● After out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, transport patient to an appropriate hospital with a comprehensive post–cardiac arrest treatment system of care that includes acute coronary interventions, neurological care, goal-directed critical care, and hypothermia. ● Transport the in-hospital post–cardiac arrest patient to an appropriate critical-care unit capable of providing comprehensive post–cardiac arrest care. ● Try to identify and treat the precipitating causes of the arrest and prevent recurrent arrest.

http://www.kardio.hu/feltoltott/dokumentumok/fajl_201148104747Cardiopulm_resuscit_Pt9_Post_cardiac.pdf

Part 9: Post-Cardiac Arrest Care: 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care

https://genoplivning.dk/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/european-resuscitation-council-guidelines-for-resuscitation-2010-section-4-adult-advanced-life-support.pdf

European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2010 Section 4 Adult advanced life support

Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock

The recommendations in this 2015 American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care are based on an extensive evidence review process that was begun by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) after the publication of the 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations 1,2 and was completed in February 2015.3,4

In this in-depth evidence review process, ILCOR examined topics and then generated a prioritized list of questions for systematic review. Questions were first formulated in PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) format,5 and then search strategies and inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined and a search for relevant articles was performed. The evidence was evaluated by the ILCOR task forces by using the standardized methodological approach proposed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group.6

The quality of the evidence was categorized based on the study methodologies and the 5 core GRADE domains of risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, and other considerations (including publication bias). Then, where possible, consensus-based treatment recommendations were created.

To create this 2015 Guidelines Update, the AHA formed 15 writing groups, with careful attention to manage conflicts of interest, to assess the ILCOR treatment recommendations and to write AHA treatment recommendations by using the AHA Class of Recommendation (COR) and Level of Evidence (LOE) system. The recommendations made in the Guidelines are informed by the ILCOR recommendations and GRADE classification, in the context of the delivery of medical care in North America. The AHA writing group made new recommendations only on topics specifically reviewed by ILCOR in 2015. This chapter delineates instances where the AHA writing group developed recommendations that are significantly stronger or weaker than the ILCOR statements. In the online …

Part 8: Post-cardiac arrest care: 2015 American Heart Association guidelines update for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) Advanced Life Support (ALS) Task Force performed detailed systematic reviews based on the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies1 and using the methodological approach proposed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group.2 Questions to be addressed (using the PICO [population, intervention, comparator, outcome] format)3 were prioritized by ALS Task Force members (by voting). Prioritization criteria included awareness of significant new data and new controversies or questions about practice. Questions about topics no longer relevant to contemporary practice or where little new research has occurred were given lower priority. The ALS Task Force prioritized 42 PICO questions for review. With the assistance of information specialists, a detailed search for relevant articles was performed in each of 3 online databases (PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library).

By using detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria, articles were screened for further evaluation. The reviewers for each question created a reconciled risk of bias assessment for each of the included studies, using state-of-the-art tools: Cochrane for randomized controlled trials (RCTs),4 Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 for studies of diagnostic accuracy,5 and GRADE for observational studies that inform both therapy and prognosis questions.6

GRADE evidence profile tables7 were then created to facilitate an evaluation of the evidence in support of each of the critical and important outcomes. The quality of the evidence (or confidence in the estimate of the effect) was categorized as high, moderate, low, or very low,8 based on the study methodologies and the 5 core GRADE domains of risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, and other considerations (including publication bias).9

These evidence profile tables were then used to create a …

/pdf/part-4-advanced-life-support-2015-international-consensus-on-3s0zzf6w8u.pdf

Part 4: Advanced life support: 2015 International consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations

Early goal-directed hemodynamic optimization combined with therapeutic hypothermia in comatose survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Introduction: Survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains unacceptably low. Therapeutic hypothermia (TH) is the most efficacious treatment option available for comatose survivors of cardiac arrest. However, clearly delineated instructions for how to induce, maintain, and conclude TH have not been published in a codified format. Objective: We assembled 11 clinicians from the University of Pennsylvania Schools of Medicine and Nursing for a day-long moderated discussion to review our institution's TH protocol and reach consensus on a step-by-step management plan of the comatose survivor of OHCA. We attempted to systematically work our way through the existing University of Pennsylvania TH protocol. The goal was to address critical decisions at each stage of care of the post-arrest patient, including whom to cool, how to cool, how long to cool, how to rewarm, neuroprognostication, and other fundamental aspects of patient management. We made every effort to include relevant scientific ...

Cheryl Maguire

Papers

Early goal-directed hemodynamic optimization combined with therapeutic hypothermia in comatose survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Practical implementation of therapeutic hypothermia after cardiac arrest.

1360: micu advanced practice providers: deliver quality care and reduced bed strain and physician burnout