Key result
Amiodarone was associated with higher odds of terminating shock-refractory VF/pVT within three shocks compared to lidocaine in in-hospital cardiac arrest (OR 11.61; 95% CI 1.34-100.84; p=0.03).
Why the study?
The study was conducted to determine the association between amiodarone or lidocaine and outcomes in adult in-hospital cardiac arrest with shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia.
Does amiodarone compared to lidocaine improve outcomes in adult patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest and shock-refractory pulseless ventricular tachyarrhythmia?
Observational (n=130)
No
Does amiodarone compared to lidocaine improve outcomes in adult patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest and shock-refractory pulseless ventricular tachyarrhythmia?
Odds Ratio: 11.61 (95% CI 1.34–100.84)
p-value: p=0.03
In adult in-hospital cardiac arrest with shock-refractory VF/pVT, using amiodarone as the first antiarrhythmic agent may terminate the arrhythmia with fewer shocks compared to lidocaine, though it does not significantly improve survival or neurological outcomes.
May support amiodarone for terminating refractory VF/pVT in IHCA; hypothesis-generating and requires RCT confirmation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: To determine the association between amiodarone or lidocaine and outcomes in adult in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) with shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation (VF) or pulseless ventricular tachycardia (pVT). METHODS: A retrospective study in a single medical centre was conducted. Patients experiencing an IHCA between 2006 and 2015 were screened. Shock-refractory ventricular tachyarrhythmias were defined as VF/pVT requiring more than one defibrillation attempt. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to study the associations between the independent variables and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were included. Among these, 113 patients (86.9%) were administered amiodarone as the first antiarrhythmic agent (amiodarone first) following VF/pVT, and the other patients were administered lidocaine (lidocaine first). The median time to the first defibrillation and first antiarrhythmic drug administration were 2 and 9 min, respectively. The analysis demonstrated that the amiodarone-first group experienced a higher likelihood of terminating the VF/pVT within three shocks (odds ratio: 11.61, 95% confidence interval: 1.34-100.84; p-value = 0.03), as compared with the lidocaine-first group. However, there were no significant differences between the amiodarone- and lidocaine-first groups in sustained return of spontaneous circulation, survival for 24 h, survival, or favourable neurological outcomes at hospital discharge. CONCLUSION: For patients with IHCA and shock-refractory VF/pVT, the adoption of an amiodarone-first strategy seemed to be associated with the termination of VF/pVT using fewer shocks. Nonetheless, because of the small sample size, additional large-scale studies should be conducted to investigate whether this advantage could be translated into a long-term benefit in survival or neurological outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Adult in-hospital cardiac arrest with shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia (n=130). Amiodarone vs. Lidocaine was evaluated on Terminating the VF/pVT within three shocks (OR 11.61, 95% CI 1.34-100.84, p=0.03). Amiodarone was associated with higher odds of terminating shock-refractory VF/pVT within three shocks compared to lidocaine in in-hospital cardiac arrest (OR 11.61; 95% CI 1.34-100.84; p=0.03).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: