Pediatric Life Support: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) for pediatric life support is based on the most extensive evidence evaluation ever performed by the Pediatric Life Support Task Force. Three types of evidence evaluation were used in this review: systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence updates. Per agreement with the evidence evaluation recommendations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, only systematic reviews could result in a new or revised treatment recommendation. Systematic reviews performed for this 2020 CoSTR for pediatric life support included the topics of sequencing of airway-breaths-compressions versus compressions-airway-breaths in the delivery of pediatric basic life support, the initial timing and dose intervals for epinephrine administration during resuscitation, and the targets for oxygen and carbon dioxide levels in pediatric patients after return of spontaneous circulation. The most controversial topics included the initial timing and dose intervals of epinephrine administration (new treatment recommendations were made) and the administration of fluid for infants and children with septic shock (this latter topic was evaluated by evidence update). All evidence reviews identified the paucity of pediatric data and the need for more research involving resuscitation of infants and children

Pediatric Life Support: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) for pediatric life support is based on the most extensive evidence evaluation ever performed by the Pediatric Life Support Task Force. Three types of evidence evaluation were used in this review: systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence updates. Per agreement with the evidence evaluation recommendations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, only systematic reviews could result in a new or revised treatment recommendation. Systematic reviews performed for this 2020 CoSTR for pediatric life support included the topics of sequencing of airway-breaths-compressions versus compressions-airway-breaths in the delivery of pediatric basic life support, the initial timing and dose intervals for epinephrine administration during resuscitation, and the targets for oxygen and carbon dioxide levels in pediatric patients after return of spontaneous circulation. The most controversial topics included the initial timing and dose intervals of epinephrine administration (new treatment recommendations were made) and the administration of fluid for infants and children with septic shock (this latter topic was evaluated by evidence update). All evidence reviews identified the paucity of pediatric data and the need for more research involving resuscitation of infants and children

2017 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations Summary

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation has initiated a near-continuous review of cardiopulmonary resuscitation science that replaces the previous 5-year cyclic batch-and-queue approach process. This is the first of an annual series of International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations summary articles that will include the cardiopulmonary resuscitation science reviewed by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation in the previous year. The review this year includes 5 basic life support and 1 paediatric Consensuses on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. Each of these includes a summary of the science and its quality based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria and treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task force members are provided in Values and Preferences sections. Finally, the task force members have pri-oritised and listed the top 3 knowledge gaps for each population, intervention, comparator, and outcome question. (C) 2017 European Resuscitation Council and American Heart Association, Inc. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

2019 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations

The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation has initiated a continuous review of new, peer-reviewed, published cardiopulmonary resuscitation science. This is the third annual summary of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations. It addresses the most recent published resuscitation evidence reviewed by International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Task Force science experts. This summary addresses the role of cardiac arrest centers and dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation, the role of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults and children, vasopressors in adults, advanced airway interventions in adults and children, targeted temperature management in children after cardiac arrest, initial oxygen concentration during resuscitation of newborns, and interventions for presyncope by first aid providers. Members from 6 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation task forces have assessed, discussed, and debated the certainty of the evidence on the basis of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, and their statements include consensus treatment recommendations. Insights into the deliberations of the task forces are provided in the Justification and Evidence to Decision Framework Highlights sections. The task forces also listed priority knowledge gaps for further research

P-COSCA (pediatric core outcome set for cardiac arrest) in children : an advisory statement from the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation

Studies of pediatric cardiac arrest use inconsistent outcomes, including return of spontaneous circulation and short-term survival, and basic assessments of functional and neurological status. In 2018, the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation sponsored the COSCA initiative (Core Outcome Set After Cardiac Arrest) to improve consistency in reported outcomes of clinical trials of adult cardiac arrest survivors and supported this P-COSCA initiative (Pediatric COSCA). The P-COSCA Steering Committee generated a list of potential survival, life impact, and economic impact outcomes and assessment time points that were prioritized by a multidisciplinary group of healthcare providers, researchers, and parents/caregivers of children who survived cardiac arrest. Then expert panel discussions achieved consensus on the core outcomes, the methods to measure those core outcomes, and the timing of the measurements. The P-COSCA includes assessment of survival, brain function, cognitive function, physical function, and basic daily life skills. Survival and brain function are assessed at discharge or 30 days (or both if possible) and between 6 and 12 months after arrest. Cognitive function, physical function, and basic daily life skills are assessed between 6 and 12 months after cardiac arrest. Because many children have prearrest comorbidities, the P-COSCA also includes documentation of baseline (ie, prearrest) brain function and calculation of changes after cardiac arrest. Supplementary outcomes of survival, brain function, cognitive function, physical function, and basic daily life skills are assessed at 3 months and beyond 1 year after cardiac arrest if resources are available

Pediatric Life Support 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) for pediatric life support is based on the most extensive evidence evaluation ever performed by the Pediatric Life Support Task Force. Three types of evidence evaluation were used in this review: systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence updates. Per agreement with the evidence evaluation recommendations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, only systematic reviews could result in a new or revised treatment recommendation. Systematic reviews performed for this 2020 CoSTR for pediatric life support included the topics of sequencing of airway-breaths-compressions versus compressions-airway-breaths in the delivery of pediatric basic life support, the initial timing and dose intervals for epinephrine administration during resuscitation, and the targets for oxygen and carbon dioxide levels in pediatric patients after return of spontaneous circulation. The most controversial topics included the initial timing and dose intervals of epinephrine administration (new treatment recommendations were made) and the administration of fluid for infants and children with septic shock (this latter topic was evaluated by evidence update). All evidence reviews identified the paucity of pediatric data and the need for more research involving resuscitation of infants and children

Pediatric Life Support 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations

This 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) for pediatric life support is based on the most extensive evidence evaluation ever performed by the Pediatric Life Support Task Force. Three types of evidence evaluation were used in this review: systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and evidence updates. Per agreement with the evidence evaluation recommendations of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, only systematic reviews could result in a new or revised treatment recommendation.Systematic reviews performed for this 2020 CoSTR for pediatric life support included the topics of sequencing of airway-breaths-compressions versus compressions-airway-breaths in the delivery of pediatric basic life support, the initial timing and dose intervals for epinephrine administration during resuscitation, and the targets for oxygen and carbon dioxide levels in pediatric patients after return of spontaneous circulation. The most controversial topics included the initial timing and dose intervals of epinephrine administration (new treatment recommendations were made) and the administration of fluid for infants and children with septic shock (this latter topic was evaluated by evidence update). All evidence reviews identified the paucity of pediatric data and the need for more research involving resuscitation of infants and children

Pediatric timing of epinephrine doses : a systematic review

Aim: To evaluate the optimal timing and doses of epinephrine for Infants and children suffering in-hospital or out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Methods: We searched Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) for human randomized clinical trials and observational studies including comparative cohorts. Two investigators reviewed relevance of studies, extracted the data, conducted meta-analyses and assessed the risk of bias using the GRADE and CLARITY frameworks. Authors of the eligible studies were contacted to obtain additional data. Critically important outcomes included return of spontaneous circulation, survival to hospital discharge and survival with good neurological outcome. Results: We identified 7 observational studies suitable for meta-analysis and no randomized clinical trials. The overall certainty of evidence was very low. For the critically important outcomes, the earlier administration of epinephrine was favorable for both in-hospital and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Because of a limited number of eligible studies and the presence of severe confounding factors, we could not determine the optimal interval of epinephrine administration. Conclusions: Earlier administration of the first epinephrine dose could be more favorable in non-shockable pediatric cardiac arrest. The optimal interval for epinephrine administration remains unclear