• Tim Harris, Syed Masud, Anna Lamond, and Mamoun Abu-Habsa.
• aEmergency Medicine, Barts Health NHS Trust bEmergency Medicine, London Emergency Academic Research Network (LEARN) cLondon Emergency Academic Research Network (LEARN) dEmergency Medicine, London's Air Ambulance eEmergency Medicine, East Anglia Air Ambulance fEmergency Medicine and Pre-Hospital Care, Oxford University Hospitals gEmergency Medicine and Pre-Hospital Care, Thames Valley Air Ambulance hPostgraduate School of General Practice, Mersey Deanery iEmergency Medicine and Trauma, King's College Hospital NHS Trust jKent Surrey and Sussex Air Ambulance.
• Eur J Emerg Med. 2015 Apr 1; 22 (2): 72-8.

AbstractResuscitation of patients who sustain a cardiac arrest as a result of trauma (traumatic cardiac arrest) has previously been described as 'futile'. Several published series have since contradicted this claim and reported survival-to-discharge data ranging from 0 to 35%. International resuscitation guidelines (European Resuscitation Council and American Heart Association) promote a consistent approach to cardiopulmonary resuscitation on the basis of up-to-date evidence and consensus opinions. This minimizes de-novo decision-making under high-stress situations, promotes a rational approach and reduces the burden on an individual clinician. This narrative review sets out to highlight the differences in aetiology of traumatic cardiac arrest as compared with medical cardiac arrest and the consequent priorities in resuscitation.

29 keywords...

hide…