Introduction: Cardiac arrests are traditionally classified according to the setting in which they occur, including out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). However, cardiac arrests that occur in the emergency department (EDCA) could constitute a third category, due to the peculiar characteristics of the emergency department (ED). In recent years, the need to study EDCAs separately from other intra-hospital events has emerged. The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics and outcomes of a cohort of patients experiencing EDCA in an Italian hospital over a 14-year period. Methods: This was a single-centre retrospective observational study conducted in the ED of the Santa Croce e Carle Hospital in Cuneo, Italy. All adult patients who experienced EDCA between 1 January 2010 and 30 June 2023 were included. OHCA patients, those arriving in the ED with on-going resuscitation measures, patients with EDCA not undergoing resuscitation, and patients with post-traumatic cardiac arrest were excluded from the study. The main outcome of the study was survival at hospital discharge with a favourable neurological outcome. Results: 350 cases of EDCA were included. The median age was 78 (63–85) years, and the median Charlson Comorbidity Index score was 5 (3–6). A total of 35 patients (10%) survived to hospital discharge with a cerebral performance category (CPC) Score of 1–2; survival in the ED was 28.3%. The causes of cardiac arrests were identified in 212 cases (60.6%) and included coronary thrombosis (35%), hypoxia (22%), hypovolemia (17%), pulmonary embolism (11%), metabolic (8%), cardiac tamponade (4%), toxins (2%) and hypothermia (1%). Variables associated with survival with a favourable neurological outcome were young age, a lower Charlson Comorbidity Index, coronary thrombosis as the primary EDCA cause, and shockable presenting rhythm; however, only the latter was associated with the outcome in a multivariate age-weighted model. Conclusions: In a cohort of patients with EDCA over a period of more than a decade, the most frequent cause identified was coronary thrombosis; 10% of patients survived with a good neurological status, and the only factor associated with the best prognosis was presenting a shockable rhythm. EDCA should be considered an independent category in order to fully understand its characteristics and outcomes.

In the Emergency Department (ED), the decision to hospitalize or discharge COVID-19 patients is challenging. We assessed the utility of lung ultrasound (LUS), alone or in association with a clinical rule/score. This was a multicenter observational prospective study involving six EDs (NCT046291831). From October 2020 to January 2021, COVID-19 outpatients discharged from the ED based on clinical judgment were subjected to LUS and followed-up at 30 days. The primary clinical outcome was a composite of hospitalization or death. Within 393 COVID-19 patients, 35 (8.9%) reached the primary outcome. For outcome prognostication, LUS had a C-index of 0.76 (95%CI 0.68–0.84) and showed good performance and calibration. LUS-based classification provided significant differences in Kaplan–Meier curves, with a positive LUS leading to a hazard ratio of 4.33 (95%CI 1.95–9.61) for the primary outcome. The sensitivity and specificity of LUS for primary outcome occurrence were 74.3% (95%CI 59.8–88.8) and 74% (95%CI 69.5–78.6), respectively. The integration of LUS with a clinical score further increased sensitivity. In patients with a negative LUS, the primary outcome occurred in nine (3.3%) patients (p < 0.001 vs. unselected). The efficiency for rule-out was 69.7%. In unvaccinated ED patients with COVID-19, LUS improves prognostic stratification over clinical judgment alone and may support standardized disposition decisions.

The COVID-19 pandemic has deeply affected the activity and patient flows of Emergency Departments (EDs), and concern for the worsening outcome of cardiovascular emergencies has been raised. However, the impact of COVID-19 on all subtypes of acute aortic syndromes (AASs) has not been evaluated so far. Cases of AASs managed in the ED of three hub hospitals in a large area of Northern Italy were retrospectively analyzed, comparing those registered during the pandemic (March 2020 to May 2021) with corresponding pre-COVID-19 periods. A total of 124 patients with AAS were managed during the COVID-19 period vs. 118 pre-COVID-19 (p = 0.70), despite a −34.6% change in ED visits. Posterior chest pain at presentation was the only clinical variable with a different prevalence (46.0% vs. 32.2%, p = 0.03). Surgery and endovascular treatment rates were unchanged. Time intervals influenced by patient transfer to the hub center were longer during the COVID-19 period and longest during high viral circulation periods. Ninety-day mortality was unchanged, with a higher mortality trend during the pandemic surges. In conclusion, ED presentation and care of AASs were marginally affected by COVID-19, but efforts are needed to preserve efficient patient transfer to specialized centers and prevent mortality, especially during pandemic peaks.

Differential diagnosis of shock occurring within few hours to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) performed to treat acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) encompass periprocedural complications and causes of other type, including adrenal crisis (AC), sometimes presenting as Takotsubo syndrome.