Purpose To characterize the current scope and practices of centers performing extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) on the undifferentiated patient with cardiac arrest in the emergency department. Methods We contacted all US centers in January 2016 that had submitted adult eCPR cases to the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry and surveyed them, querying for programs that had performed eCPR in the Emergency Department (ED ECMO). Our objective was to characterize the following domains of ED ECMO practice: program characteristics, patient selection, devices and techniques, and personnel. Results Among 99 centers queried, 70 responded. Among these, 36 centers performed ED ECMO. Nearly 93% of programs are based at academic/teaching hospitals. 65% of programs are less than 5 years old, and 60% of programs perform ≤ 3 cases per year. Most programs (90%) had inpatient eCPR or salvage ECMO programs prior to starting ED ECMO programs. The majority of programs do not have formal inclusion and exclusion criteria. Most programs preferentially obtain vascular access via the percutaneous route (70%) and many (40%) use mechanical CPR during cannulation. The most commonly used console is the Maquet Rotaflow®. Cannulation is most often performed by cardiothoracic (CT) surgery, and nearly all programs (>85%) involve CT surgeons, perfusionists, and pharmacists. Conclusions Over a third of centers that submitted adult eCPR cases to ELSO have performed ED ECMO. These programs are largely based at academic hospitals, new, and have low volumes. They do not have many formal inclusion or exclusion criteria, and devices and techniques are variable.

No abstract

No abstract

Point-of-care ultrasonography provides diagnostic information in addition to visual pulse checks during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The most commonly used modality, transthoracic echocardiography, has unfortunately been repeatedly associated with prolonged pauses in chest compressions, which correlate with worsened neurologic outcomes. Unlike transthoracic echocardiography, transesophageal echocardiography does not require cessation of compressions for adequate imaging and provides the diagnostic benefit of point-of-care ultrasonography. To assess a benefit of transesophageal echocardiography, we compare the duration of chest compression pauses between transesophageal echocardiography, transthoracic echocardiography, and manual pulse checks on video recordings of cardiac arrest resuscitations.Methods: We analyzed 139 pulse check CPR pauses among 25 patients during cardiac arrest.Results: Transesophageal echocardiography provided the shortest mean pulse check duration (9 seconds [95% confidence interval {CI} 5 to 12 seconds]). Mean pulse check duration with transthoracic echocardiography was 19 seconds (95% CI 16 to 22 seconds), and it was 11 seconds (95% CI 8 to 14 seconds) with manual checks. Intraclass correlation coefficient between abstractors for a portion of individual and average times was 0.99 and 0.99, respectively (P<.001 for both). Conclusion:Our study suggests that pulse check times with transesophageal echocardiography are shorter versus with transthoracic echocardiography for ED point-of-care ultrasonography during cardiac arrest resuscitations, and further emphasizes the need for careful attention to compression pause duration when using transthoracic echocardiography for point-of-care ultrasonography during ED cardiac arrest resuscitations. [

No abstract