Comparative Effectiveness of Amiodarone and Lidocaine for the Treatment of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Background American Heart Association Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) guidelines support the use of either amiodarone or lidocaine for cardiac arrest caused by ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) based on studies of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Studies comparing amiodarone and lidocaine in adult populations with in-hospital VT/VF arrest are lacking. Research Question Does treatment with amiodarone vs lidocaine therapy have differential associations with outcomes among adult patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest from VT/VF? Study Design and Methods This retrospective cohort study of adult patients receiving amiodarone or lidocaine for VT/VF in-hospital cardiac arrest refractory to CPR and defibrillation between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2014, was conducted within American Heart Association Get With the Guidelines-Resuscitation (GWTG-R) participating hospitals. The primary outcome was return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Secondary outcomes were 24 h survival, survival to hospital discharge, and favorable neurologic outcome. Results Among 14,630 patients with in-hospital VT/VF arrest, 68.7% (n = 10,058) were treated with amiodarone and 31.3% (n = 4,572) with lidocaine. When all covariates were statistically controlled, compared with amiodarone, lidocaine was associated with statistically significantly higher odds of the following: (1) ROSC (adjusted OR [AOR], 1.15, P = .01; average marginal effect [AME], 2.3; 95% CI, 0.5 to 4.2); (2) 24 h survival (AOR, 1.16; P = 004; AME, 3.0; 95% CI, 0.9 to 5.1); (3) survival to discharge (AOR, 1.19; P < .001; AME, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.5 to 5.2); and (4) favorable neurologic outcome at hospital discharge (AOR, 1.18; P < .001; AME, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 4.9). Results using propensity score methods were similar to those from multivariable logistic regression analyses. Interpretation Compared with amiodarone, lidocaine therapy among adult patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest from VT/VF was associated with statistically significantly higher rates of ROSC, 24 h survival, survival to hospital discharge, and favorable neurologic outcome. American Heart Association Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) guidelines support the use of either amiodarone or lidocaine for cardiac arrest caused by ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation (VT/VF) based on studies of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Studies comparing amiodarone and lidocaine in adult populations with in-hospital VT/VF arrest are lacking. Does treatment with amiodarone vs lidocaine therapy have differential associations with outcomes among adult patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest from VT/VF? This retrospective cohort study of adult patients receiving amiodarone or lidocaine for VT/VF in-hospital cardiac arrest refractory to CPR and defibrillation between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2014, was conducted within American Heart Association Get With the Guidelines-Resuscitation (GWTG-R) participating hospitals. The primary outcome was return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Secondary outcomes were 24 h survival, survival to hospital discharge, and favorable neurologic outcome. Among 14,630 patients with in-hospital VT/VF arrest, 68.7% (n = 10,058) were treated with amiodarone and 31.3% (n = 4,572) with lidocaine. When all covariates were statistically controlled, compared with amiodarone, lidocaine was associated with statistically significantly higher odds of the following: (1) ROSC (adjusted OR [AOR], 1.15, P = .01; average marginal effect [AME], 2.3; 95% CI, 0.5 to 4.2); (2) 24 h survival (AOR, 1.16; P = 004; AME, 3.0; 95% CI, 0.9 to 5.1); (3) survival to discharge (AOR, 1.19; P < .001; AME, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.5 to 5.2); and (4) favorable neurologic outcome at hospital discharge (AOR, 1.18; P < .001; AME, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 4.9). Results using propensity score methods were similar to those from multivariable logistic regression analyses. Compared with amiodarone, lidocaine therapy among adult patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest from VT/VF was associated with statistically significantly higher rates of ROSC, 24 h survival, survival to hospital discharge, and favorable neurologic outcome. Regarding the Comparative Effectiveness of Lidocaine and Amiodarone for Treatment of In-Hospital Cardiac ArrestCHESTVol. 163Issue 5PreviewThere are an estimated 292,000 adult and 15,200 pediatric in-hospital events in the United States each year.1 Amiodarone and lidocaine have been the subject of much study for out-of-hospital arrest, with a 2016 study by Kudenchuk et al2 showing no significant advantage over placebo for either medication. The 2018 American Heart Association Focused Update specifically regarding the use of antiarrhythmics in the treatment of cardiac arrest made the weak recommendation for consideration of either amiodarone or lidocaine, given the available evidence that cardiac arrest has limited treatment options beyond chest compressions and defibrillation. Full-Text PDF