Advertisement

Click here for more guidelines.

 
 




CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home
     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 1984; 4:1118-1122
© 1984 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Myerburg, R.
Right arrow Articles by Castellanos, A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Myerburg, R.
Right arrow Articles by Castellanos, A

Outcome of resuscitation from bradyarrhythmic or asystolic prehospital cardiac arrest

RJ Myerburg, D Estes, L Zaman, RM Luceri, KM Kessler, RG Trohman, and A Castellanos

Previous studies of outcome as a function of the initial electrophysiologic mechanisms recorded at the scene of prehospital cardiac arrest have demonstrated that bradyarrhythmias and asystole have the worst prognosis. In this report, our observations in bradyarrhythmic and asystolic arrests occurring from 1980 to 1982 are compared with those from 1975 to 1978. From 1980 to 1982, 61 (27%) of 225 cardiac arrest events meeting entry criteria for the study were bradyarrhythmic or asystolic. Only 2 (8%) of 24 patients with asystole and 1 (20%) of 5 patients with sinus bradycardia survived prehospital intervention. Only 1 of these 29 patients was discharged from the hospital alive. In contrast, 15 (47%) of 32 patients who presented with idioventricular rhythm at initial contact survived prehospital intervention and were hospitalized, and 8 (25%) of these 32 were ultimately discharged alive. When compared with the 1975 to 1978 patients with bradyarrhythmia and asystole, both prehospital survival (8 versus 30%, p less than 0.001) and survival after hospitalization (0 versus 15%, p less than 0.05) significantly improved, but the improvement occurred predominantly in the subgroup with idioventricular rhythm. Survivors within this subgroup tended to have a prompt response to prehospital pharmacologic interventions that were not available to the 1975 to 1978 group. The response was manifested by return to a sinus mechanism or increase in the rate of idioventricular rhythm. In conclusion, outcome has improved for a specific subgroup of victims of prehospital cardiac arrest with bradyarrhythmia or asystole; the improved outcome may relate to field interventions by rescue personnel at the scene of arrest but the mortality rate is still high.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ESC Textbook of Cardiovascular MedicineHome page
P. E. Vardas, H. E. Mavrakis, and W. D. Toff
CHAPTER 27 Bradycardia
ESC Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine, January 1, 2009; 2(1): med-9780199566990-chapter - med-9780199566990-chapter.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
Adult Advanced Cardiac Life Support
JAMA, October 28, 1992; 268(16): 2199 - 2241.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
Standards and Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiac Care (ECC)
JAMA, June 6, 1986; 255(21): 2905 - 2984.
[Abstract] [PDF]



 
  CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home

Advertisement