Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Bradycardia With Poor Perfusion Versus Pulseless Cardiac Arrest

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess whether pediatric inpatients who receive cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for bradycardia with poor perfusion are more likely to survive to hospital discharge than pediatric inpatients who receive CPR for pulseless arrest (asystole/pulseless electrical activity [PEA]), after controlling for confounding characteristics. METHODS: A prospective cohort from the National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation was enrolled between January 4, 2000, and February 23, 2008. Patients who were younger than 18 years and had an in-hospital event that required chest compressions for >2 minutes were eligible. Patients were divided into 2 groups on the basis of initial rhythm and pulse state: bradycardia/poor perfusion and asystole/PEA. Patient characteristics, event characteristics, and clinical characteristics were analyzed as possible confounders. Univariate analysis between bradycardia and asystole/PEA patient groups was performed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether an initial state of bradycardia/poor perfusion was independently associated with survival to discharge. RESULTS: A total of 6288 patients who were younger than 18 years were reported; 3342 met all inclusion criteria. A total of 1853 (55%) patients received chest compressions for bradycardia/poor perfusion compared with 1489 (45%) for asystole/PEA. Overall, 755 (40.7%) of 1353 patients with bradycardia survived to hospital discharge, compared with 365 (24.5%) of 1489 patients with asystole/PEA. After controlling for known confounders, CPR for bradycardia with poor perfusion was associated with increased survival to hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric inpatients with chest compressions initiated for bradycardia and poor perfusion before onset of pulselessness were more likely to survive to discharge than pediatric inpatients with chest compressions initiated for asystole or PEA. Pediatrics 2009;124:1541-1548