Search

Background: Endotracheal intubation (ETI) is still the gold standard of airway management, but in cases of sudden cardiac arrest in patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, ETI is associated with risks for both the patient and the medical personnel. We hypothesized that the Vie Scope® is more useful for endotracheal intubation of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cardiac arrest patients than the conventional laryngoscope with Macintosh blade when operators are wearing personal protective equipment (PPE)., Methods: Study was designed as a prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial performed by Emergency Medical Services in Poland. Patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis who needed cardiopulmonary resuscitation in prehospital setting were included. Patients under 18 years old or with criteria predictive of impossible intubation under direct laryngoscopy, were excluded. Patients were randomly allocated 1:1 to Vie Scope® versus direct laryngoscopy with a Macintosh blade. Study groups were compared on success of intubation attempts, time to intubation, glottis visualization and number of optimization maneuvers., Results: We enrolled 90 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients, aged 43-92 years. Compared to the VieScope® laryngoscope, use of the Macintosh laryngoscope required longer times for tracheal intubation with an estimated mean difference of -48 s (95%CI confidence interval [CI], -60.23, -35.77; p < 0.001). Moreover VieScope® improved first attempt success rate, 93.3% vs. 51.1% respectively (odds ratio [OR] = 13.39; 95%CI: 3.62, 49.58; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: The use of the Vie Scope® laryngoscope in OHCA patients improved the first attempt success rate, and reduced intubation time compared to Macintosh laryngoscope in paramedics wearing PPE for against aerosol generating procedures., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials registration number NCT04365608., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The aim of the study was to assess the usefulness of the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score assessed by EMS team in predicting survival to hospital discharge in patients after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA)., Methods: Silesian Registry of OHCA (SIL-OHCA) is a prospective, population-based regional registry of OHCAs. All cases of OHCAs between the 1st of January 2018 and the 31st of December 2018 were included. Data were collected by EMS using a paper-based, Utstein-style form. OHCA patients aged ≥18 years, with CPR attempted or continued by EMS, who survived to hospital admission, were included in the current analysis. Patients who did not achieve return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in the field, with missing data on GCS after ROSC or survival status at discharge were excluded from the study., Results: Two hundred eighteen patients with OHCA, who achieved ROSC, were included in the present analysis. ROC analysis revealed GCS = 4 as a cut-off value in predicting survival to discharge (AUC 0.735; 95%CI 0.655-0.816; p < 0.001). Variables significantly associated with in-hospital survival were young age, short response time, witnessed event, previous myocardial infarction, chest pain before OHCA, initial shockable rhythm, coronary angiography, and GCS > 4. On the other hand, epinephrine administration, intubation, the need for dispatching two ambulances, and/or a physician-staffed ambulance were associated with a worse prognosis. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed GCS > 4 as an independent predictor of in-hospital survival after OHCA (OR of 6.4; 95% CI 2.0-20.3; p < 0.0001). Other independent predictors of survival were the lack of epinephrine administration, previous myocardial infarction, coronary angiography, and the patient's age., Conclusion: The survival to hospital discharge after OHCA could be predicted by the GCS score on hospital admission., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None declared., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Pediatric cardiac arrest is an uncommon but critical life-threatening event requiring effective cardiopulmonary resuscitation. High-quality cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is essential, but is poorly performed, even by highly skilled healthcare providers. The recently described two-thumb chest compression technique (nTTT) consists of the two thumbs directed at the angle of 90° to the chest while having the fingers fist-clenched. This technique might facilitate adequate chest-compression depth, chest-compression rate and rate of full chest-pressure relief., Methods: 42 paramedics from the national Emergency Medical Service of Poland performed three single-rescuer CPR sessions for 10 minutes each. Each session was randomly assigned to the conventional two-thumb (TTHT), the conventional two-finger (TFT) or the nTTT. The manikin used for this study was connected with an arterial blood pressure measurement device and blood measurements were documented on a 10-seconds cycle., Results: The nTTT provided significant higher systolic (82 vs. 30 vs. 41 mmHg). A statistically significant difference was noticed between nTTT and TFT (p<.001), nTTT and TTHT (p<0.001), TFT and TTHT (p=0.003). The median diastolic preassure using nTTT was 16 mmHg compared with 9 mmHg for TFT (p<0.001), and 9.5 mmHg for TTHT (p<0.001). Mean arterial pressure using distinct methods varied and amounted to 40 vs. 22. vs. 26 mmHg (nTTT vs. TFT vs. TTHT, respectively). A statistically significant difference was noticed between nTTT and TFT (p<0.001), nTTT and TTEHT (p<0.001), and TFT and TTHT (p<0.001). The highest median pulse pressure was obtained by the nTTT 67.5 mmHg. Pulse pressure was 31.5 mmHg in the TTHT and 24 mmHg in the TFT. The difference between TFT and TTHT (p=0.025), TFT and nTTT (p<0.001), as well as between TTHT and nTTT (p<0.001) were statistically significant., Conclusions: The new nTTT technique generated higher arterial blood pressures compared to established chest compression techniques using an infant manikin model, suggesting a more effective chest compression. Our results have important clinical implications as nTTT was simple to perform and could be widely taught to both healthcare professionals and bystanders. Whether this technique translates to improved outcomes over existing techniques needs further animal studies and subsequent human trials., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare C-MAC videolaryngoscopy with direct laryngoscopy for intubation in simulated cervical spine immobilization conditions., Methods: The study was designed as a prospective randomized crossover manikin trial. 70 paramedics with <5years of medical experience participated in the study. The paramedics attempted to intubate manikins in 3 airway scenarios: normal airway without cervical immobilization (Scenario A); manual inline cervical immobilization (Scenario B); cervical immobilization using cervical extraction collar (Scenario C)., Results: Scenario A: Nearly all participants performed successful intubations with both MAC and C-MAC on the first attempt (95.7% MAC vs. 100% C-MAC), with similar intubation times (16.5s MAC vs. 18s C-MAC). Scenario B: The results with C-MAC were significantly better than those with MAC (p<0.05) for the time of intubation (23 s MAC vs. 19 s C-MAC), success of the first intubation attempt (88.6% MAC vs. 100% C-MAC), Cormack-Lehane grade, POGO score, severity of dental compression, device difficulty score, and preferred airway device. Scenario C: The results with C-MAC were significantly better than those with MAC (p<0.05) for all the analysed variables: success of the first attempt (51.4% MAC vs. 100% C-MAC), overall success rate, intubation time (27 s MAC vs. 20.5 s C-MAC), Cormack-Lehane grade, POGO score, dental compression, device difficulty score and the preferred airway device., Conclusion: The C-MAC videolaryngoscope is an excellent alternative to the MAC laryngoscope for intubating manikins with cervical spine immobilization., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)