News

Device May Improve Outcomes of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest


 

VANCOUVER, B.C. — The traditional “code blue” strategy of handling in-hospital cardiac arrests has remained essentially unchanged for about 30 years, a period during which—in sharp contrast—massive resources have been devoted to improving public access defibrillation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, Antoni Martinez-Rubio, M.D., said at a meeting of the International Academy of Cardiology.

“We [cardiologists] have spent lots of money and done lots of reports looking at what happens outside our hospitals, but we have not looked hard enough at what happens inside our hospitals,” according to Dr. Martinez-Rubio, a cardiologist at Sabadell Hospital, Barcelona.

Thirty percent of all sudden cardiac deaths occur in-hospital. The literature indicates that the acute survival rate following attempted resuscitation of in-hospital cardiac arrest is 40%–45%. Only 15%–20% of patients are discharged alive, many with permanent neurologic impairment.

Given the inefficiencies and generally poor outcomes of the code blue approach, it's time for a major change in how in-hospital cardiac arrests are managed. And the necessary tool is already at hand in the form of the Food and Drug Administration-approved Powerheart Cardiac Rhythm Module (CRM), he added.

The CRM continuously monitors a patient's heart at the bedside, detects the onset of a life-threatening arrhythmia, and automatically delivers a shock for external cardioversion.

In the multicenter European trial headed by Dr. Martinez-Rubio and sponsored by Cardiac Science Inc., the mean lapsed time between arrhythmia onset and delivery of a defibrillatory shock was 15 seconds.

Contrast that with the traditional code blue scenario, in which a hospital patient is continuously monitored by telemetry in a high-cost ICU or a coronary care unit.

In such a setting a detected arrhythmia triggers an automatic alarm, which first has to be recognized by someone on the nursing staff, who then calls for the crash cart and physicians to come to the bedside.

All of this takes time. And as a recent American Heart Association report emphasized, the earlier cardiac resuscitation can be performed, the better. Indeed, survival rates decrease by 7%–10% for every minute defibrillation is delayed, the cardiologist continued.

In addition to the 117-patient European multicenter study that was led by Dr. Martinez-Rubio and published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology (2003;41:627–32) there has also been a favorable single-center Brazilian study of the CRM (Resuscitation 2004;63:11–6).

In addition, physicians located at the Maimonides Medical Center in Brooklyn, N.Y., reported that the response time to simulated cardiac arrest achieved in their ICU and CCU averaged nearly 3 minutes, compared with just 38 seconds needed for the cardiac rhythmn module to charge up and deliver the patient a shock (Resuscitation 2004;63:183–8).

“In my opinion, this should be the new standard of care,” Dr. Martinez-Rubio declared.

He provided an update on an ongoing study he is directing in which patients at risk for arrhythmic death are being randomized to traditional monitoring and code blue response in the CCU or to a stay in a regular hospital ward while connected to the Powerheart.

With 95 patients randomized to date, during 5,340 hours of monitoring outside the CCU there have been 122 arrhythmic events, including 36 cases of ventricular arrhythmia.

There are as yet no significant differences in clinical outcome; however, the cost savings achieved by using the CRM on a regular ward instead of traditional monitoring in the CCU amounts thus far to $89,000.

And that calculation is done assuming a $400 per day difference in the cost of staying in a regular ward, compared with staying in the CCU, which is probably a considerable underestimate.

In addition, an ongoing prospective study being conducted at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, is comparing the effectiveness of the traditional code blue emergency response protocol with the cardiac rhythmn module in patients in the university hospital's cardiac ICU.

The study is being led by Kim A. Eagle, M.D., clinical director of the university's cardiovascular center.

Recommended Reading

'Mild' Nonobstructive CAD Is Often Anything But
MDedge Family Medicine
CV Biomarkers Not Set for Wide Use
MDedge Family Medicine
Incidence of Unrecognized MI Proves High in Older Patients
MDedge Family Medicine
Imaging Helps Guide Heart Failure Treatments : Assessments of left ventricular size and systolic function can demonstrate myocardial viability.
MDedge Family Medicine
CMR Addresses the Subtleties Of Heart Failure Diagnoses
MDedge Family Medicine
Data Watch: Racial/Ethnic Groups Reporting Multiple Risk Factors for Heart Disease, Stroke
MDedge Family Medicine
Greater Clarity From Nuclear Images Coming Soon
MDedge Family Medicine
Noninvasive Angiography a Reality With CT
MDedge Family Medicine
Reducing Homocysteine Doesn't Cut Cardiovascular Risk
MDedge Family Medicine
Society Issues Backwoods Cardiac Care Guidelines
MDedge Family Medicine