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

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 regarding 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 were assessed at discharge or 30 days (or both if possible) and between 6 and 12 months postarrest. Cognitive function, physical function, and basic daily life skills were 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

The effect of alternative methods of cardiopulmonary resuscitation — Cough CPR, percussion pacing or precordial thump — on outcomes following cardiac arrest. A systematic review

Background Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) improves cardiac arrest survival. Cough CPR, percussion pacing and precordial thump have been reported as alternative CPR techniques. We aimed to summarise in a systematic review the effectiveness of these alternative CPR techniques. Methods We searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library on 24/08/2020. We included randomised controlled trials, observational studies and case series with five or more patients. Two reviewers independently reviewed title and abstracts to identify studies for full-text review, and reviewed bibliographies and ‘related articles’ (using PubMed) of full-texts for further eligible studies. We extracted data and performed risk-of-bias assessments on studies included in the systematic review. We summarised data in a narrative synthesis, and used GRADE to assess evidence certainty. Results We included 23 studies (cough CPR n = 4, percussion pacing n = 4, precordial thump n = 16; one study studied two interventions). Only two (both precordial thump) had a comparator group (‘standard’ CPR). For all techniques evidence certainty was very low. Available evidence suggests that precordial thump does not improve survival to hospital discharge in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The review did not find evidence that cough CPR or percussion pacing improve clinical outcomes following cardiac arrest. Conclusion Cough CPR, percussion pacing and precordial thump should not be routinely used in established cardiac arrest. In specific inpatient, monitored settings cough CPR (in conscious patients) or percussion pacing may be attempted at the onset of a potential lethal arrhythmia. These must not delay standard CPR efforts in those who lose cardiac output

JOSEFINA DE LA TORRE MILLARES Y BERNARDO DE LA TORRE BARCELÓ EN LAS CANTERAS [Material gráfico]

Copia digital. Madrid : Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. Subdirección General de Coordinación Bibliotecaria, 201

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

Diagnosis of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest by Emergency Medical Dispatch : a diagnostic systematic review

Introduction Cardiac arrest is a time-sensitive condition requiring urgent intervention. Prompt and accurate recognition of cardiac arrest by emergency medical dispatchers at the time of the emergency call is a critical early step in cardiac arrest management allowing for initiation of dispatcher-assisted bystander CPR and appropriate and timely emergency response. The overall accuracy of dispatchers in recognizing cardiac arrest is not known. It is also not known if there are specific call characteristics that impact the ability to recognize cardiac arrest. Methods We performed a systematic review to examine dispatcher recognition of cardiac arrest as well as to identify call characteristics that may affect their ability to recognize cardiac arrest at the time of emergency call. We searched electronic databases for terms related to “emergency medical dispatcher”, “cardiac arrest’, and “diagnosis,” among others, with a focus on studies that allowed for calculating diagnostic test characteristics (e.g. sensitivity and specificity). The review was consistent with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method for evidence evaluation. Results We screened 2520 article titles, resulting in 47 studies included in this review. There was significant heterogeneity between studies with a high risk of bias in 18 of the 47 which precluded performing meta-analyses. The reported sensitivities for cardiac arrest recognition ranged from 0.46 to 0.98 whereas specificities ranged from 0.32 to 1.00. There were no obvious differences in diagnostic accuracy between different dispatching criteria/algorithms or with the level of education of dispatchers. Conclusion The sensitivity and specificity of cardiac arrest recognition at the time of emergency call varied across dispatch centres and did not appear to differ by dispatch algorithm/criteria used or education of the dispatcher, although comparisons were hampered by heterogeneity across studies. Future efforts should focus on ways to improve sensitivity of cardiac arrest recognition to optimize patient care and ensure appropriate and timely resource utilizatio

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