Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
BACKGROUND Outcomes from extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) are felt to be influenced by selective use, but the characteristics of those receiving ECPR are undefined. We demonstrate the relationship between individual patient and hospital characteristics and the probability of ECPR use. METHODS AND RESULTS We performed an observational analysis of adult inpatient cardiac arrests in the United States from 2000 to 2018 reported to the American Heart Association's Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry restricted to hospitals that provided ECPR. We calculated case mix adjusted relative risk (RR) of receiving ECPR for individual characteristics. From 2000 to 2018, 129 736 patients had a cardiac arrest (128 654 conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation and 1082 ECPR) in 224 hospitals that offered ECPR. ECPR use was associated with younger age (RR, 1.5 for <40 vs. 40-59 years; 95% CI, 1.2-1.8), no pre-existing comorbidities (RR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8) or cardiac-specific comorbidities (congestive heart failure [RR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.5], prior myocardial infarction [RR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2-1.6], or current myocardial infarction [RR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.8]), and in locations of procedural areas at the times of cardiac arrest (RR, 12.0; 95% CI, 9.5-15.1). ECPR decreased after hours (3-11 pm [RR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.7-1.0] and 11 pm-7 am [RR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7]) and on weekends (RR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9). CONCLUSIONS Less than 1% of in-hospital cardiac arrest patients are treated with ECPR. ECPR use is influenced by patient age, comorbidities, and hospital system factors. Randomized controlled trials are needed to better define the patients in whom ECPR may provide a benefit.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7428578 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.015522 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!