Eligibility of cardiac arrest patients for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation and their clinical characteristics:a retrospective two-centre study

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Sudden cardiac arrest has a high incidence and often leads to death. A treatment option that might improve the outcomes in refractory cardiac arrest is Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (ECPR).OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the number of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients eligible to ECPR and identifies clinical characteristics that may help to identify which patients benefit the most from ECPR.DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective two-centre study was conducted in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. All IHCA and OHCA patients between 1 January 2017 and 1 January 2020 were screened for eligibility to ECPR. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients eligible to ECPR and patients treated with ECPR. The secondary outcome was the comparison of the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients eligible to ECPR treated with conventional Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CCPR) vs. those of patients treated with ECPR.MAIN RESULTS: Out of 1246 included patients, 412 were IHCA patients and 834 were OHCA patients. Of the IHCA patients, 41 (10.0%) were eligible to ECPR, of whom 20 (48.8%) patients were actually treated with ECPR. Of the OHCA patients, 83 (9.6%) were eligible to ECPR, of whom 23 (27.7%) were actually treated with ECPR. In the group IHCA patients eligible to ECPR, no statistically significant difference in survival was found between patients treated with CCPR and patients treated with ECPR (hospital survival 19.0% vs. 15.0% respectively, 4.0% survival difference 95% confidence interval -21.3 to 28.7%). In the group OHCA patients eligible to ECPR, no statistically significant difference in-hospital survival was found between patients treated with CCPR and patients treated with ECPR (13.3% vs. 21.7% respectively, 8.4% survival difference 95% confidence interval -30.3 to 10.2%).CONCLUSION: This retrospective study shows that around 10% of cardiac arrest patients are eligible to ECPR. Less than half of these patients eligible to ECPR were actually treated with ECPR in both IHCA and OHCA.</p

Affective Symptoms and Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Head-and-Neck Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review

Oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) is a high impact morbidity in head-and-neck cancer (HNC) patients. A wide variety of instruments are developed to screen for affective symptoms and OD. The current paper aims to systematically review and appraise the literature to obtain insight into the prevalence, strength, and causal direction of the relationship between affective symptoms and OD in HNC patients. This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. A systematic search of the literature was performed using PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and Embase. All available publications reporting on the relationship between affective conditions and swallowing function in HNC patients were included. Conference papers, tutorials, reviews, and studies with less than 5 patients were excluded. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The level of evidence and methodological quality were assessed using the ABC-rating scale and QualSyst critical appraisal tool. Eleven studies reported a positive relationship between affective symptoms and OD. The findings of this paper highlight the importance of affective symptom screening in dysphagic HNC patients as clinically relevant affective symptoms and OD seems to be prevalent and coincident in this population. Considering the impact of affective symptoms and OD on patients' daily life, early detection and an integrated interdisciplinary approach are recommended. However, due to the heterogeneity of study designs, outcomes, and outcome measures, the generalization of study results is limited

Medically Unexplained Oropharyngeal Dysphagia at the University Hospital ENT Outpatient Clinic for Dysphagia:A Cross-Sectional Cohort Study

Medically unexplained oropharyngeal dysphagia (MUNOD) is a rare condition. It presents without demonstrable abnormalities in the anatomy of the upper aero-digestive tract and/or swallowing physiology. This study investigates whether MUNOD is related to affective or other psychiatric conditions. The study included patients with dysphagic complaints who had no detectible structural or physiological abnormalities upon swallowing examination. Patients with any underlying disease or disorder that could explain the oropharyngeal dysphagia were excluded. All patients underwent a standardized examination protocol, with FEES examination, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Dysphagia Severity Scale (DSS). Two blinded judges scored five different FEES variables. None of the 14 patients included in this study showed any structural or physiological abnormalities during FEES examination. However, the majority did show abnormal piecemeal deglutition, which could be a symptom of MUNOD. Six patients (42.8%) had clinically relevant symptoms of anxiety and/or depression. The DSS scores did not differ significantly between patients with and without affective symptoms. Affective symptoms are common in patients with MUNOD, and their psychiatric conditions could possibly be related to their swallowing problems.</p

COVID outcome prediction in the emergency department (COPE):using retrospective Dutch hospital data to develop simple and valid models for predicting mortality and need for intensive care unit admission in patients who present at the emergency department with suspected COVID-19

OBJECTIVES: Develop simple and valid models for predicting mortality and need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission in patients who present at the emergency department (ED) with suspected COVID-19.DESIGN: Retrospective.SETTING: Secondary care in four large Dutch hospitals.PARTICIPANTS: Patients who presented at the ED and were admitted to hospital with suspected COVID-19. We used 5831 first-wave patients who presented between March and August 2020 for model development and 3252 second-wave patients who presented between September and December 2020 for model validation.OUTCOME MEASURES: We developed separate logistic regression models for in-hospital death and for need for ICU admission, both within 28 days after hospital admission. Based on prior literature, we considered quickly and objectively obtainable patient characteristics, vital parameters and blood test values as predictors. We assessed model performance by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and by calibration plots.RESULTS: Of 5831 first-wave patients, 629 (10.8%) died within 28 days after admission. ICU admission was fully recorded for 2633 first-wave patients in 2 hospitals, with 214 (8.1%) ICU admissions within 28 days. A simple model-COVID outcome prediction in the emergency department (COPE)-with age, respiratory rate, C reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, albumin and urea captured most of the ability to predict death. COPE was well calibrated and showed good discrimination for mortality in second-wave patients (AUC in four hospitals: 0.82 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.86); 0.82 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.90); 0.79 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.88); 0.83 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.86)). COPE was also able to identify patients at high risk of needing ICU admission in second-wave patients (AUC in two hospitals: 0.84 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.90); 0.81 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.95)).CONCLUSIONS: COPE is a simple tool that is well able to predict mortality and need for ICU admission in patients who present to the ED with suspected COVID-19 and may help patients and doctors in decision making.</p