Impact of initial intervention on long-term neurological recovey after cardiac arrest: data from the Luxembourg "North Pole" cohort.

P Stammet, D Collas, C Werer, L Muenster, C Clarens, D Wagner
{"title":"Impact of initial intervention on long-term neurological recovey after cardiac arrest: data from the Luxembourg \"North Pole\" cohort.","authors":"P Stammet,&nbsp;D Collas,&nbsp;C Werer,&nbsp;L Muenster,&nbsp;C Clarens,&nbsp;D Wagner","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prognosis after cardiac arrest is variable and difficult to predict. Early prognostic markers would facilitate the care of these patients.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>Therefore, we evaluated the impact of initial interventions after resuscitation on neurological outcome at 6 months.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective analysis of the patient charts from consecutive cardiac arrest patients admitted to our intensive care unit and treated with induced hypothermia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over a 3-year period, 90 patients were included in our study. Sixty-four percent of the patients had bystander cardio-pulmonary resuscitation. An automated external defibrillator (AED) was used in 19% of the patients and the mean time to first defibrillation was 11 +/- 8.9 minutes. Patients being resuscitated and defibrillated by bystanders did better than those who had CPR only and far better than those patients in whom no rescue measures where attempted at all (73% vs. 56% vs. 32% for good neurological outcome, respectively, p= 0.03). Witnessed cardiac arrest was more frequent in patients with a good outcome than in those who collapsed without a witness (91% vs 75%, p = 0.03). In 76% of the patients with good outcome, CPR was performed whereas only 52% benefited from these measures in the bad outcome group (p = 0.01). Although the use of an AED was not significantly different between good and bad outcome groups (26% vs. 11%, p = 0.06), time to first defibrillation was significantly lower in patients with good outcome (8.7 +/- 6.3 vs. 13.3 +/- 11.3 minutes, p = 0.05). In the 17 patients in whom an AED was used, 12 (71%) recovered without major sequelae whereas in the 73 cases where no AED was used, only 34 (47%) had a good outcome (p = 0.06). At 6 months follow-up, 46 (51%) survivors had a good outcome (cerebral performance category 1-2), 5 (6%) survived with severe neurological sequelae or stayed in coma and 39 (43%) died.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our local data confirm that early interventions have a major impact on survival of cardiac arrest patients. Efforts should concentrate on delivering rapid and high quality CPR as well as early defibrillation by AED's to every patient in cardiac arrest. Besides large scale Basic life support training, the introduction of dispatcher assisted CPR and the implementation and use of public AED's could considerably help to improve outcome in these patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":72476,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin de la Societe des sciences medicales du Grand-Duche de Luxembourg","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin de la Societe des sciences medicales du Grand-Duche de Luxembourg","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Prognosis after cardiac arrest is variable and difficult to predict. Early prognostic markers would facilitate the care of these patients.

Aims: Therefore, we evaluated the impact of initial interventions after resuscitation on neurological outcome at 6 months.

Material and methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the patient charts from consecutive cardiac arrest patients admitted to our intensive care unit and treated with induced hypothermia.

Results: Over a 3-year period, 90 patients were included in our study. Sixty-four percent of the patients had bystander cardio-pulmonary resuscitation. An automated external defibrillator (AED) was used in 19% of the patients and the mean time to first defibrillation was 11 +/- 8.9 minutes. Patients being resuscitated and defibrillated by bystanders did better than those who had CPR only and far better than those patients in whom no rescue measures where attempted at all (73% vs. 56% vs. 32% for good neurological outcome, respectively, p= 0.03). Witnessed cardiac arrest was more frequent in patients with a good outcome than in those who collapsed without a witness (91% vs 75%, p = 0.03). In 76% of the patients with good outcome, CPR was performed whereas only 52% benefited from these measures in the bad outcome group (p = 0.01). Although the use of an AED was not significantly different between good and bad outcome groups (26% vs. 11%, p = 0.06), time to first defibrillation was significantly lower in patients with good outcome (8.7 +/- 6.3 vs. 13.3 +/- 11.3 minutes, p = 0.05). In the 17 patients in whom an AED was used, 12 (71%) recovered without major sequelae whereas in the 73 cases where no AED was used, only 34 (47%) had a good outcome (p = 0.06). At 6 months follow-up, 46 (51%) survivors had a good outcome (cerebral performance category 1-2), 5 (6%) survived with severe neurological sequelae or stayed in coma and 39 (43%) died.

Conclusions: Our local data confirm that early interventions have a major impact on survival of cardiac arrest patients. Efforts should concentrate on delivering rapid and high quality CPR as well as early defibrillation by AED's to every patient in cardiac arrest. Besides large scale Basic life support training, the introduction of dispatcher assisted CPR and the implementation and use of public AED's could considerably help to improve outcome in these patients.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
初步干预对心脏骤停后长期神经系统恢复的影响:来自卢森堡“北极”队列的数据。
背景:心脏骤停后的预后是多变且难以预测的。早期预后指标将有助于这些患者的护理。目的:因此,我们评估复苏后初始干预对6个月时神经预后的影响。材料和方法:我们对入住重症监护室并采用诱导性低温治疗的连续心脏骤停患者的病历进行了回顾性分析。结果:在3年的时间里,我们的研究纳入了90例患者。64%的患者进行了旁观者心肺复苏。19%的患者使用自动体外除颤器(AED),首次除颤平均时间为11 +/- 8.9分钟。由旁观者进行复苏和除颤的患者比仅进行心肺复苏术的患者表现更好,远好于根本没有尝试任何抢救措施的患者(良好神经预后分别为73% vs 56% vs 32%, p= 0.03)。结果良好的患者比无目击者的患者心脏骤停更频繁(91% vs 75%, p = 0.03)。在76%的预后良好的患者中,实施了心肺复苏术,而在预后不良组中,只有52%的患者从这些措施中受益(p = 0.01)。虽然AED的使用在好结果组和坏结果组之间没有显著差异(26% vs. 11%, p = 0.06),但好结果组患者首次除颤时间明显更短(8.7 +/- 6.3 vs. 13.3 +/- 11.3分钟,p = 0.05)。在17例使用AED的患者中,12例(71%)无严重后遗症,而在73例未使用AED的患者中,只有34例(47%)预后良好(p = 0.06)。在6个月的随访中,46例(51%)幸存者预后良好(脑功能分类1-2),5例(6%)存活并伴有严重的神经系统后遗症或保持昏迷,39例(43%)死亡。结论:我们的本地数据证实,早期干预对心脏骤停患者的生存有重要影响。努力应该集中在提供快速和高质量的心肺复苏术,以及通过AED对每一个心脏骤停患者进行早期除颤。除了大规模的基础生命支持培训外,引入调度员辅助心肺复苏术以及实施和使用公共AED可以显著改善这些患者的预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Immune Network Case Report: Primary Spinal Lymphoma. [In process]. Treating the emotional and motivational inhibition of highly gifted underachievers with music psychotherapy: Meta-analysis of an evaluation study based on a sequential design. [In process]
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1