Justin Lee Benoit

The intra-arrest stage of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a poorly understood syndrome. We created an emergency medical services (EMS) clinical research infrastructure to systematically study its biological pathophysiology from the earliest medical contact in the prehospital setting. Our objectives were to evaluate the feasibility of intra-arrest blood collection at two timepoints by on-duty paramedics and qualitatively describe the preliminary results of laboratory analysis. Two urban fire-based EMS stations conducted this prospective observational pilot study. Intra-arrest patients necessitating intravenous medication administration were included. Traumatic arrests or children <8 years old were excluded. Paramedics obtained blood samples using preassembled blood collection kits immediately after intravenous access, and again after return of spontaneous circulation or resuscitative efforts were terminated on scene. Blood samples were rapidly transported, centrifuged, and frozen. Multiple pathways of biological pathophysiology were analyzed. Preexisting quality improvement activities monitored for interference with clinical care. Throughout the 7-month study period, there were no episodes of interference with standard clinical care during 27 patient encounters. Initial and repeat blood samples from 10 subjects had a panel of blood-based biomarker levels measured. In initial samples, we observed 6 subjects with hyperkalemia, 6 with hypernatremia, 1 with hypocalcemia, 7 with complement activation, 2 with hyperreninemia, and 1 with low antithrombin. In repeat samples, we observed renormalization of potassium in 2 subjects despite no pharmacological treatment. Complement activation, fibrin degradation products, and lactate levels increased over time in all but 1 subject. Serial intra-arrest blood sample collection by treating paramedics is feasible. Intra-arrest biological pathophysiology is heterogeneous.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a Geospatial Information System analysis of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) centers in the United States utilizing data from the U.S. Census Bureau to better understand access to ECMO care and identify potential disparities. DESIGN: A cross-sectional descriptive and statistical analysis of geospatial access to ECMO-capable centers in the United States, accounting for demographic variables. SETTING: The unit of analysis were U.S. Census block groups and demographic variables of interest obtained from the American Community Survey. PATIENTS: Patients accounted for in the U.S. Census data. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sixty-seven percent of the U.S. population had direct access to ECMO-capable centers. Disparities were present, with Puerto Rico, Wyoming, North Dakota, and Alaska having no access. Poverty, increased age, and lower population density consistently correlated with limited access. We identified significant racial and ethnic disparities in the Midwest and Northeast. CONCLUSIONS: While 67% of the U.S. population had access to ECMO-capable centers by ground transportation, significant disparities in access exist. These findings emphasize the need for thoughtful implementation of ECMO systems of care to ensure equitable access. Future work should focus on developing novel systems of care that increase access utilizing advanced technology, such as aeromedical transport services.

BACKGROUND: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is associated with higher survival for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, but whether its association with survival differs by patients’ sex and race and ethnicity is less clear. METHODS: Within a large US registry, we identified 623 342 nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrests during 2013 to 2022 for this observational cohort study. Using hierarchical logistic regression, we examined whether there was a differential association between bystander CPR and survival outcomes by patients’ sex and race and ethnicity, overall and by neighborhood strata. RESULTS: Mean age was 62.1±17.1 years, and 35.9% were women. Nearly half of patients (49.8%) were non-Hispanic White; 20.6% were non-Hispanic Black; 7.3% were Hispanic; 2.9% were Asian; and 0.4% were Native American. Overall, 58 098 (9.3%) survived to hospital discharge. Although bystander CPR was associated with higher survival in each race and ethnicity group, the association of bystander CPR compared with patients without bystander CPR in each racial and ethnic group was highest in individuals who were White (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.33 [95% CI, 1.30–1.37]) and Native American (adjusted OR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.02–1.90]) and lowest in individuals who were Black (adjusted OR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.04–1.14]; P _interaction P _interaction <0.001). The weaker association of bystander CPR in Black individuals and women was consistent across neighborhood race and ethnicity and income strata. Similar results were observed for the outcome of survival without severe neurological deficits. CONCLUSIONS: Although bystander CPR was associated with higher survival in all patients, its association with survival was weakest for Black individuals and women with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Background: Cardiac arrest is a common and devastating emergency of both the heart and brain. More than 380,000 patients suffer out-of-hospital cardiac arrest annually in the USA. Induced cooling of comatose patients markedly improved neurological and functional outcomes in pivotal randomized clinical trials, but the optimal duration of therapeutic hypothermia has not yet been established. Methods: This study is a multi-center randomized, response-adaptive, duration (dose) finding, comparative effectiveness clinical trial with blinded outcome assessment. We investigate two populations of adult comatose survivors of cardiac arrest to ascertain the shortest duration of cooling that provides the maximum treatment effect. The design is based on a statistical model of response as defined by the primary endpoint, a weighted 90-day mRS (modified Rankin Scale, a measure of neurologic disability), across the treatment arms. Subjects will initially be equally randomized between 12, 24, and 48 h of therapeutic cooling. After the first 200 subjects have been randomized, additional treatment arms between 12 and 48 h will be opened and patients will be allocated, within each initial cardiac rhythm type (shockable or non-shockable), by response adaptive randomization. As the trial continues, shorter and longer duration arms may be opened. A maximum sample size of 1800 subjects is proposed. Secondary objectives are to characterize: the overall safety and adverse events associated with duration of cooling, the effect on neuropsychological outcomes, and the effect on patient-reported quality of life measures. Discussion: In vitro and in vivo studies have shown the neuroprotective effects of therapeutic hypothermia for cardiac arrest. We hypothesize that longer durations of cooling may improve either the proportion of patients that attain a good neurological recovery or may result in better recovery among the proportion already categorized as having a good outcome. If the treatment effect of cooling is increasing across duration, for at least some set of durations, then this provides evidence of the efficacy of cooling itself versus normothermia, even in the absence of a normothermia control arm, confirming previous RCTs for OHCA survivors of shockable rhythms and provides the first prospective controlled evidence of efficacy in those without initial shockable rhythms. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04217551. Registered on 30 December 2019.

COVID-19 is now established to be associated with a thrombotic phenomenon, now called COVID-19 associated coagulopathy (CAC). Anti-Endothelial Cell Antibodies (AECA) are a heterogenous group of autoantibodies targeting various endothelial cell antigens or antigens adhering to endothelial cells. These antibodies are commonly observed in a variety of auto-immune and rheumatologic conditions, and were observed in patients with the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2005. We aimed to assess AECA status in patients with COVID-19 and their potential contributing role to endothelial injury and CAC. AECA identification was a relatively infrequent finding in COVID-19 patients on admission, and their presence, albeit in only 2/33 patients, was not associated with disease severity. However, as the autoantibodies were only measured at admission, we cannot exclude the possibility of pathogenic AECA developing later in the course of disease. Further studies using additional methods are needed to evaluate the presence and potential pathogenic role of AECA in later stages of COVID-19. (www.actabiomedica.it)

COVID-19 is now established to be associated with a thrombotic phenomenon, now called COVID-19 associated coagulopathy (CAC). Anti-Endothelial Cell Antibodies (AECA) are a heterogenous group of autoantibodies targeting various endothelial cell antigens or antigens adhering to endothelial cells, They are commonly observed in a variety of auto-immune and rheumatologic conditions, and were observed in patients with the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2005. We aimed to assess AECA status in patients with COVID-19 and their potential contributing role to endothelial injury and CAC. AECA identification was a relatively infrequent finding in COVID-19 patients on admission, and their presence, albeit in only 2/33 patients, was not associated with disease severity. However, as the autoantibodies were only measured at admission, we cannot exclude the possibility of pathogenic AECA developing later in the course of diseaseFurther studies using additional methods are needed to evaluate the presence and potential pathogenic role of AECA in later stages of COVID-19.

Novel technologies and techniques can influence airway management execution as well as procedural and clinical outcomes. While conventional wisdom underscores the need for rigorous scientific data as a foundation before implementation, high-quality supporting evidence is frequently not available for the prehospital setting. Therefore, implementation decisions are often based upon preliminary or evolving data, or pragmatic information from clinical use. When considering novel technologies and techniques. NAEMSP recommends: