Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) has been associated with poor overall survival and neurologic recovery. 1 The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic carries a high mortality rate with high risk of cardiopulmonary arrest. 2 Clear policies for crisis standards of care and CPR are essential in light of limited Intensive Care Unit (ICU) resources and aerosolized transmission among code team members. 3 There is limited literature regarding the survival outcomes and effectiveness of CPR in patients with COVID-19 who suffer cardiac arrest. 4 Here, we describe our experience with performing CPR in patients with COVID-19 who developed IHCA.This retrospective case series included patients 18 years of age or older with confirmed COVID-19 who subsequently had an IHCA between March 1st and May 18th, 2020, at a 500-bed teaching hospital in Manhattan. COVID-19 cases were confirmed using a reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction assay. Data were manually abstracted from electronic health records with the use of a standardized abstraction process. We identified 31 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Patients were grouped based on whether they suffered a cardiac arrest in ICU or non-ICU setting.Of the 31 patients, the median age was 69 (IQR 57À76) years, 71% were male, and 55% had cardiovascular disease (Table 1). 24 patients (77%) developed IHCA in the ICU and 7 (23%) in a non-ICU setting. The initial rhythm was PEA in 18 (58%) patients, asystole in 9

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of in-hospital cardiac arrest in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 and to describe the characteristics and outcomes for patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest within the ICU, compared with non-ICU patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest. Finally, we evaluated outcomes stratified by age. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, and preprint websites was conducted between January 1, 2020, and December 10, 2020. Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews identification: CRD42020203369. STUDY SELECTION: Studies reporting on consecutive in-hospital cardiac arrest with a resuscitation attempt among patients with coronavirus disease 2019. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors independently performed study selection and data extraction. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were synthesized according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews guidelines. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus or through an independent third reviewer. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eight studies reporting on 847 in-hospital cardiac arrest were included. In-hospital cardiac arrest incidence varied between 1.5% and 5.8% among hospitalized patients and 8.0–11.4% among patients in ICU. In-hospital cardiac arrest occurred more commonly in older male patients. Most initial rhythms were nonshockable (83.9%, [asystole = 36.4% and pulseless electrical activity = 47.6%]). Return of spontaneous circulation occurred in 33.3%, with a 91.7% in-hospital mortality. In-hospital cardiac arrest events in ICU had higher incidence of return of spontaneous circulation (36.6% vs 18.7%; p < 0.001) and relatively lower mortality (88.7% vs 98.1%; p < 0.001) compared with in-hospital cardiac arrest in non-ICU locations. Patients greater than or equal to 60 years old had significantly higher in-hospital mortality than those less than 60 years (93.1% vs 87.9%; p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately, one in 20 patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 received resuscitation for an in-hospital cardiac arrest. Hospital survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest within the ICU was higher than non-ICU locations and seems comparable with prepandemic survival for nonshockable rhythms. Although the data provide guidance surrounding prognosis after in-hospital cardiac arrest, it should be interpreted cautiously given the paucity of information surrounding treatment limitations and resource constraints during the pandemic. Further research is into actual causative mechanisms is needed.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Thrombocytopenia is a common lab finding. The two fundamental groups are lack of production versus overconsumption of platelets. When common causes of thrombocytopenia have been ruled out and less common causes, such as thrombotic microangiopathic conditions, have been considered, it is important to keep in mind that patients undergoing dialysis may develop thrombocytopenia from the dialyzer itself. This case is of a 51-year-old male who presented originally with celiac artery dissection and acute kidney injury requiring emergent dialysis. He ultimately developed thrombocytopenia during his hospitalization. It was initially presumed to be from thrombocytopenic purpura without improvement after plasmapheresis. No clear etiology was identified until it was suspected that the dialyzer was the source of thrombocytopenia. After changing the dialyzer type, the patient’s thrombocytopenia resolved. Dialyzer-associated thrombocytopenia is a rare but reversible complication of hemodialysis. It is important to keep this differential in mind for patients undergoing hemodialysis.

No abstract

No abstract