Clinical paperOHCA (Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest) and CAHP (Cardiac Arrest Hospital Prognosis) scores to predict outcome after in-hospital cardiac arrest: Insight from a multicentric registry
Introduction
Despite recent advance in resuscitation procedures and post cardiac arrest (CA) management, in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) incidence remains high, with an estimated mortality rate of 10–25% and significant neurological impairment in survivors.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Many physiological, clinical and biological parameters are identified as prognosis factors after IHCA occurrence.1, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 Some outcome prediction scores calculated during or immediately after IHCA resuscitation attempts are proposed but with limited clinical application.15, 16, 17, 18 However, these models were tested on small or monocentric cohorts, included IHCA occurring in intensive care unit (ICU), operating room or in cath lab and excluded IHCA occurring in emergency department or in general wards (without patient’s continuous monitoring system). Finally, physicians need easy-to-obtain and reliable tools to early assess prognosis that could help them to optimize treatments. The Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA) score and the Cardiac Arrest Hospital Prognosis (CAHP) score have been proposed to evaluate the likelihood of poor outcome in patients admitted in ICU after out-of-hospital CA. These scores are based on easy-to-obtain data and showed a high performance for outcome prediction19, 20 with external validations.21, 22, 23
The aim of our study was to assess OHCA and CAHP scores ability to predict outcome in patients who were successfully resuscitated after an IHCA, compared with others general severity illness scores routinely used in ICU.
Section snippets
Study setting and population
We retrospectively reviewed the data of all unconscious (Glasgow coma scale ≤8) adult patients (≥18 years old), successfully resuscitated after an IHCA and admitted in ten French ICUs from January 2008 to December 2014. Patients with CA occurring in ICU, in operating room or in cath lab were excluded. Patients with missing data needed for OHCA or CAPH scores calculations were secondarily excluded. The ethical board of the French Intensive Care Society approved the study protocol (IRB N°14-36)
Patient characteristics
The flow chart of the study is described in Fig. 1. Among the 773 patients assessed for eligibility, 381 patients were finally analysed, with 125 patients (33%) being discharged alive from hospital with CPC 1−2. Among the 256 patients (77%) with unfavourable outcome, 10 were discharged alive with CPC 3 (4%), 130 died from withdrawal of life sustaining therapies because of severe neurological impairment (51%), 107 from multiorgan failure (42%) and 9 died after ICU discharge from complications
Discussion
To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest observational cohort evaluating the prognostic value of several severity scores including OHCA and CAHP scores in IHCA patients. In this population of IHCA occurring in general wards and emergency departments, our main findings can be summarized as follows: (1) OHCA and CAHP scores are independently associated with unfavourable outcome at hospital discharge; (2) The accuracy of OHCA and CAHP scores to early predict outcome remains moderate but
Conclusion
This study suggests OHCA and CAHP scores as simple and reliable tools to early predict neurological status at hospital discharge after IHCA. Although these scores seem superior to the others general severity of illness scoring systems (such as SAPS-2 and SOFA score), their moderate prediction accuracy suggests to propose another specific score dedicated for the early prediction of IHCA patient’s outcome.
Conflict of interest
None declared.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Jonathan Chelly: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing, Visualization, Supervision, Project administration. Alain-Gil Mpela: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Sebastien Jochmans: Formal analysis, Data curation, Project administration. Jennifer Brunet: Investigation. Stéphane Legriel: Investigation. Laurent Guerin: Investigation. Alexis Soummer: Investigation. Romain Persichini:
References (36)
- et al.
European resuscitation council and european society of intensive care medicine guidelines for post-resuscitation care 2015
Resuscitation
(2015) - et al.
Part 4: advanced life support
Resuscitation
(2015) - et al.
One-year survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Resuscitation
(2018) - et al.
ILCOR scientific knowledge gaps and clinical research priorities for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care: a consensus statement
Resuscitation
(2018) - et al.
A decade of in-hospital resuscitation: outcomes and prediction of survival?
Resuscitation
(2006) - et al.
Long-term survival after successful inhospital cardiac arrest resuscitation
Am Heart J
(2007) - et al.
Long-term mortality and morbidity among 30-day survivors after in-hospital cardiac arrests–a Swedish cohort study
Resuscitation
(2018) - et al.
Trends in survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest during nights and weekends
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2018) - et al.
Survival and outcome prediction using the Apache III and the out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) score in patients treated in the intensive care unit (ICU) following out-of-hospital, in-hospital or ICU cardiac arrest
Resuscitation
(2012) - et al.
Predicting neurologically intact survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest-external validation of the Good Outcome Following Attempted Resuscitation score
Resuscitation
(2018)
Prognostic performance of simplified out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and cardiac arrest hospital prognosis (CAHP) scores in an East Asian population: a prospective cohort study
Resuscitation
Cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation outcome reports: update and simplification of the Utstein templates for resuscitation registries. A statement for healthcare professionals from a task force of the international liaison committee on resuscitation (American Heart Association, European Resuscitation Council, Australian Resuscitation Council, New Zealand Resuscitation Council, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, InterAmerican Heart Foundation, Resuscitation Council of Southern Africa)
Resuscitation
Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage
Lancet
Predicting survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: role of the utstein data elements
Ann Emergency Med
Prearrest prediction of favourable neurological survival following in-hospital cardiac arrest: the Prediction of outcome for In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (PIHCA) score
Resuscitation
In-hospital cardiac arrest: incidence, prognosis and possible measures to improve survival
Intensive Care Med
Trends in survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest
N Engl J Med
Strategies for improving survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest in the United States: 2013 consensus recommendations: a consensus statement from the American Heart Association
Circulation
Cited by (17)
Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Cardiac Arrest and Emergency Care
2023, Heart Failure ClinicsCharacteristics, survival and neurological outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A nationwide study of 56,203 cases with emphasis on cardiovascular comorbidities
2022, Resuscitation PlusCitation Excerpt :We found no statistically significant difference in the probability of CPC 1 among survivors, it was clear that HT, HF and DM were associated with lowest crude rates of CPC 1 among survivors. While the rate of good neurological outcome was high in our study population, results are still in line with other European countries, as evident in the EuReCa reports.15 Compared with other countries, Sweden has fewer OHCAs due to trauma,16,17 and a very high degree of bystander CPR.12
Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Cardiac Arrest and Emergency Care
2022, Cardiology ClinicsCitation Excerpt :In an evaluation before the pandemic, Andersen and colleagues28 reported that the underlying cause of arrest was primary cardiac (50%–60%) followed by respiratory. In contrast, the most common cause for arrest in most studies during the pandemic was respiratory and most patients were intubated before the arrest.29,31,35 Most studies found low rates of a shockable rhythm during the COVID-19 pandemic, ranging from 3% to 18%, similar to prepandemic data.19,29–32,36
Targeted Temperature Management After In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: An Ancillary Analysis of Targeted Temperature Management for Cardiac Arrest With Nonshockable Rhythm Trial Data
2022, ChestCitation Excerpt :Continuous data were described as median (interquartile range) and were compared by applying Student t test if normally distributed and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test otherwise. Given the small number of events in our analysis, we planned only a mixed multivariate adjusted logistic regression analysis with survival and a CPC score of 1 or 2 on day 90 as the dependent variable and group assignment, the Cardiac Arrest Hospital Prognosis (CAHP) score (as a continuous variable),23 and circulatory shock as the independent variables. Center was the random effect.