Abstract 199: Pulmonary Embolism and Accidental Hypothermia Have a Favorable Outcome in Cardiac Arrest With PEA Treated by ECPR

Abstract

Introduction: We have reported previously a favorable neurological outcome by extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for out of hospital cardiac arrest. However, effects of ECPR on patients with prolonged pulseless electrical activity (PEA) are unclear. We analyzed etiology of patients with favorable neurological outcomes after ECPR for PEA with witness. Methods: In this single center retrospective study, from January 2007 to May 2018, we identified 68 patients who underwent ECPR for PEA with witness. Of these, 13 patients (19%) had good neurological outcome at 1 month (Glasgow-Pittsburgh Cerebral Performance Category (CPC):1-2, Group G), and 55 patients (81%) had unfavorable neurological outcome (CPC:3-5, Group B). We compared courses of treatment and causes/places of arrests between two groups. Results are expressed as mean ± SD. Results: Patient characteristics were not different between the two groups. Time intervals from collapse to induction of V-A ECMO were also not significantly different (Group G; 46.1 ± 20.2 min vs Group B; 46.8 ± 21.7 min, p=0.92). Ten patients achieved favorable neurological outcome among 39 (26%) with non-cardiac etiology. In cardiac etiology, only 3 of 29 patients (9%) had a good outcome at 1 month (p=0.08). In particular, 5 patients of 10 pulmonary embolism, and 4 of 4 accidental hypothermia responded well to ECPR with a favorable neurological outcome. Additionally, 6 of 13 (46%), who had in hospital cardiac arrest, had good outcome, whereas 7 of 55 (15%) who had out of hospital cardiac arrest, had good outcome (p=0.02). Conclusions: In our small cohort of cardiac arrest patients with pulmonary embolism or accidental hypothermia and PEA with witness, EPCR contributed to favorable neurological outcomes at 1 month.