Jentzer, Jacob C.

AbstractThe discrimination of ventricular tachycardia (VT) versus supraventricular wide complex tachycardia (SWCT) via 12‐lead electrocardiogram (ECG) is crucial for achieving appropriate, high‐quality, and cost‐effective care in patients presenting with wide QRS complex tachycardia (WCT). Decades of rigorous research have brought forth an expanding arsenal of applicable manual algorithm methods for differentiating WCTs. However, these algorithms are limited by their heavy reliance on the ECG interpreter for their proper execution. Herein, we introduce the Mayo Clinic ventricular tachycardia calculator (MC‐VTcalc) as a novel generalizable, accurate, and easy‐to‐use means to estimate VT probability independent of ECG interpreter competency. The MC‐VTcalc, through the use of web‐based and mobile device platforms, only requires the entry of computerized measurements (i.e., QRS duration, QRS axis, and T‐wave axis) that are routinely displayed on standard 12‐lead ECG recordings.

Abstract Management of sedation and shivering during targeted temperature management (TTM) after cardiac arrest is limited by a dearth of high-quality evidence to guide clinicians. Data from general intensive care unit (ICU) populations can likely be extrapolated to post-cardiac arrest patients, but clinicians should be mindful of key differences that exist between these populations. Most importantly, the goals of sedation after cardiac arrest are distinct from other ICU patients and may also involve suppression of shivering during TTM. Drug metabolism and clearance are altered considerably during TTM when a low goal temperature is used, which can delay accurate neuroprognostication. When neuromuscular blockade is used to prevent shivering, sedation should be deep enough to prevent awareness and providers should be aware that this can mask clinical manifestations of seizures. However, excessively deep or prolonged sedation is associated with complications including delirium, infections, increased duration of ventilatory support, prolonged ICU length of stay, and delays in neuroprognostication. In this manuscript, we review sedation and shivering management best practices in the post-cardiac arrest patient population.

AbstractBackgroundThere are limited national‐level data on the contemporary practices of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) use in acute myocardial infarction‐cardiogenic shock (AMI‐CS).MethodsWe utilized the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project‐National/Nationwide Inpatient Sample data (2005–2017) to identify adult admissions (>18 years) with AMI‐CS. MCS devices were classified as intra‐aortic balloon pump (IABP), percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (pLVAD), or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We evaluated trends in the initial device used (IABP alone, pLVAD alone or ≥2 MCS devices), device escalation, bridging to durable LVAD/heart transplantation, and predictors of in‐hospital mortality and device escalation.ResultsAmong 327,283 AMI‐CS admissions, 131,435 (40.2%) had an MCS device placed with available information on timing of placement. IABP, pLVAD, and ≥2 MCS devices were used as initial device in 120,928 (92.0%), 8202 (6.2%), and 2305 (1.7%) admissions, respectively. Most admissions were maintained on the initial MCS device with 1%–1.5% being escalated (IABP to pLVAD/ECMO, pLVAD to ECMO). Urban, medium, and large‐sized hospitals and acute multiorgan failure were significant independent predictors of MCS escalation. In admissions receiving MCS, escalation of MCS device was associated with higher in‐hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio: 1.56, 95% confidence interval: 1.38–1.75; p < 0.001). Admissions receiving durable LVAD/heart transplantation increased over time in those initiated on pLVAD and ≥2 MCS devices, resulting in lower in‐hospital mortality.ConclusionsIn this 13‐year study, escalation of MCS in AMI‐CS was associated with higher in‐hospital mortality suggestive of higher acuity of illness. The increase in number of durable LVAD/heart transplantations alludes to the role of MCS as successful bridge strategies.

Background: Patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH) who undergo endotracheal intubation have an increased risk of adverse outcomes, but little is known regarding prognostic factors and there is limited evidence to guide management. We sought to define characteristics, prognostic factors, and outcomes of critically ill patients with PH who underwent intubation. Study Design: We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study of critically ill patients with group 1, 3 or 4 PH who underwent intubation. Results: Eighty-one patients were included. Patients had a median age of 56 years (interquartile range 44-65) and were predominantly female (n = 53, 65%) and Caucasian (n = 71, 88%). Forty-five (56%) had group 1 PH while 25 (31%) had group 3 PH and 11 (14%) had group 4 PH. Patients were admitted to the hospital for right ventricular failure (n = 21, 25.6%), sepsis (n = 18, 22.2%), and respiratory failure (n = 19, 23.1%). Hypoxemic respiratory failure (n = 54, 66.7%) was the most common indication for intubation. In-hospital mortality was 30.9% and 1-year mortality was 48.2% . All patients (11 of 11, 100%) intubated electively for intensive care unit procedures survived to hospital discharge while only 1 of 6 (16.7%) intubated in the setting of a cardiac arrest survived. After adjusting for right ventricular systolic pressure, pre-intubation PaO 2 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.00, P = .02) and postintubation PaO 2 (OR = 0.97 per 1mm Hg, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99, P = .003), pH (OR = 0.49 per 0.1 increase, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.80, P = .005) and PaCO 2 (OR = 1.08 per 1mm Hg, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.14, P = .005) were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality. Results were similar when we excluded patients intubated electively or in the setting of cardiac arrest. Conclusions: Intubation in critically ill patients with PH is associated with significant in-hospital mortality and nearly 50% 1-year mortality. Potentially modifiable factors, such as peri-intubation gas exchange, are associated with an increased risk of death while other demographic and hemodynamic variables are not.

Background: Mortality remains high in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS), and early reperfusion has been shown to improve outcomes. We analyzed the association between first medical contact (FMC)-to-percutaneous coronary angiography time with mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events among patients with STEMI with and without CS. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority STEMI registry, including all patients with STEMI who received primary percutaneous coronary angiography between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2020, and stratified them by presence or absence of CS at hospital arrival. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, the secondary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as a composite of the first occurrence of mortality, cardiac arrest, heart failure, intracerebral hemorrhage, cerebrovascular accident, or reinfarction. Mixed effects logistic regression with restricted cubic splines was used to estimate the relationships between FMC-to-device time and the outcomes in the CS and non-CS groups. Results: 2929 patients were included, 9.4% (n=275) had CS. Median FMC-to-device time was 113.5 (interquartile range, 93.0–145.0) and 103.0 (interquartile range, 85.0–130.0) minutes for patients with CS and without CS, respectively. More patients with CS had FMC-to-device times above guideline recommendations (76.6% versus 54.1%, P <0.001). Between 60 and 90 minutes, for each 10-minute increase in FMC-to-device time, absolute mortality for patients with CS increased by 4% to 7%, whereas for patients without CS, it increased by <0.5%. Conclusions: Among patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary angiography, reperfusion delays among patients with CS are associated with significantly worse outcomes. Strategies to reduce FMC-to-device times for patients with STEMI presenting with CS are required.

Purpose of review Cardiogenic shock (CS) results in persistently high short-term mortality and a lack of evidence-based therapies. Several trials of novel interventions have failed to show an improvement in clinical outcomes despite promising preclinical and physiologic principles. In this review, we highlight the challenges of CS trials and provide suggestions for the optimization and harmonization of their design. Recent findings CS clinical trials have been plagued by slow or incomplete enrolment, heterogeneous or nonrepresentative patient cohorts, and neutral results. To achieve meaningful, practice-changing results in CS clinical trials, an accurate CS definition, a pragmatic staging of its severity for appropriate patient selection, an improvement in informed consent process, and the use of patient-centered outcomes are required. Future optimizations include the use of predictive enrichment using host response biomarkers to unravel the biological heterogeneity of the CS syndrome and identify subphenotypes most likely to benefit from individualized treatment to allow a personalized medicine approach. Summary Accurate characterization of CS severity and its pathophysiology are crucial to unravel heterogeneity and identify the patients most likely to benefit from a tested treatment. Implementation of biomarker-stratified adaptive clinical trial designs (i.e., biomarker or subphenotype-based therapy) might provide important insights into treatment effects.

Background: Urine output (UO) measurement utility after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survivors who undergo targeted temperature management (TTM) is not well understood. Methods: We included 247 comatose adult patients who underwent TTM after OHCA between 2007 and 2017 and excluded those on maintenance dialysis. Groups were defined based on mean hourly UO during the first 24 hours: Group 1 (<0.5 ml/kg/hr, n=73), Group 2 (0.5-1 ml/kg/hr, n=81) and Group 3 (>1 ml/kg/hr, n=93). Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) serum creatinine criteria were used to define and stage acute kidney injury (AKI). Multivariable analysis was used to evaluate in-hospital mortality. Results: In-hospital mortality decreased as 24-hour mean UO increased (56.2% [41/73] vs 29.6% [24/81] vs 18.3% [17/93] in Groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively; adjusted OR 0.93 per 0.1 ml/kg/h higher, 95% CI 0.87-0.99, p = 0.03), and UO < 0.5 ml/kg/hr was strongly associated with in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 4.2 [1.6-10.8], p=0.003). In-hospital mortality varied by the KDIGO stage and UO group (Figure), lowest in KDIGO stage 0 and highest in KDIGO stage 3. Both UO (adjusted OR 0.92 per 0.1 ml/kg/h higher, p = 0.002) and KDIGO stage (adjusted OR 1.62 per each stage, p = 0.002) were associated with in-hospital mortality when included in the same model. Among patients with KDIGO stage 0, lower UO portended higher mortality (Figure). Likewise, among patients with low UO (group 1), a higher KDIGO stage predicted higher mortality. Conclusion: Amongst OHCA survivors undergoing TTM, higher UO is incrementally associated with lower in-hospital mortality. The lowest mortality was observed at UO >=1 ml/kg/h, suggesting this as a target for resuscitation in OHCA patients undergoing TTM. Low UO remains associated with in-hospital mortality even when accounting for AKI by creatinine criteria, suggesting that oliguria is a more sensitive prognostic marker in the early post-OHCA phase.

Purpose of review Cardiogenic shock (CS) has been recognized for >50 years, most commonly in the setting of myocardial infarction. This review covers recent advances in the definitions, epidemiology and severity assessment of cardiogenic shock. Recent findings In this review, the authors discuss the evolving definitions of cardiogenic shock, detailing the early approaches as well as more contemporary ideas. The epidemiology of CS is reviewed and then granular detail on the assessment of shock severity is provided including the role of lactate measurement and invasive hemodynamic assessment. The development of the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Intervention (SCAI) consensus statement on Classification of Cardiogenic Shock is reviewed by the principal authors. The revised SCAI Shock document is reviewed as well and the future directions for assessment of shock along with clinical applications are reviewed. Summary Cardiogenic shock mortality has not changed in a significant way in many years. Recent advances such as more granular assessment of shock severity have the potential to improve outcomes by allowing research to separate the patient groups which may respond differently to various therapies.

OBJECTIVES: To review a contemporary approach to the management of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). DATA SOURCES: We reviewed salient medical literature regarding CS. STUDY SELECTION: We included professional society scientific statements and clinical studies examining outcomes in patients with CS, with a focus on randomized clinical trials. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted salient study results and scientific statement recommendations regarding the management of CS. DATA SYNTHESIS: Professional society recommendations were integrated with evaluated studies. CONCLUSIONS: CS results in short-term mortality exceeding 30% despite standard therapy. While acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been the focus of most CS research, heart failure-related CS now predominates at many centers. CS can present with a wide spectrum of shock severity, including patients who are normotensive despite ongoing hypoperfusion. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention Shock Classification categorizes patients with or at risk of CS according to shock severity, which predicts mortality. The CS population includes a heterogeneous mix of phenotypes defined by ventricular function, hemodynamic profile, biomarkers, and other clinical variables. Integrating the shock severity and CS phenotype with nonmodifiable risk factors for mortality can guide clinical decision-making and prognostication. Identifying and treating the cause of CS is crucial for success, including early culprit vessel revascularization for AMI. Vasopressors and inotropes titrated to restore arterial pressure and perfusion are the cornerstone of initial medical therapy for CS. Temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is indicated for appropriately selected patients as a bridge to recovery, decision, durable MCS, or heart transplant. Randomized controlled trials have not demonstrated better survival with the routine use of temporary MCS in patients with CS. Accordingly, a multidisciplinary team-based approach should be used to tailor the type of hemodynamic support to each individual CS patient’s needs based on shock severity, phenotype, and exit strategy.