Background and Aims: Mortality attributed to anaesthetics and therapeutic gases is a public health concern. Recognition of this issue has increased over the years, yet research is limited. This study aimed to explore the trends and geographical differences in the United States. Methods: Deaths attributed to toxicity, adverse effects, and underdosing of anaesthetics were traced from 1999 to 2022 using the data available on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (CDC WONDER) website. The data were analysed according to gender, age, race, and geographic region. Results: Between 1999 and 2022, there were 10,157 anaesthesia-related deaths. The age-adjusted mortality rate (AAMR) increased from 0.1 to 0.4 from 1999 to 2022. AAMR stayed the same from 1999 to 2014, that is, 0.1 [annual percent change (APC) -0.12; 95% confidence interval (CI): -3.9 to 3.4] and increased from 2014 to 2020 to 0.4 (APC: 27.28; 95% CI: 20.8 to 49.4) and from 2020 to 2022 at 0.42 (APC: 3.54; 95% CI: -4.6 to 17.1). Among Hispanics/Latinos, mortality decreased before having a sharp increase after 2019 (AAMR 0.09, 95% CI: 0.07–0.13). Non-Hispanics (NHs) showed a similar pattern, with a notable increase seen after 2016 (Overall AAMR 0.14, 95% CI: 0.13–0.16). The northeast region exhibited an AAMR of 0.21 (0.18–0.25), 95% CI. Conclusion: Following a period of decline, mortality has increased in the United States since 2014. AAMRs were high among males, NHs, and residents of the Northeast region. The study highlights the increasing mortality along with the presence of disparities among gender, race, and region.

Background: Amiodarone and lidocaine are antiarrhythmic agents recommended for advanced cardiac life support in shockable ventricular arrhythmias during cardiac arrest, yet their comparative effectiveness in in-hospital (IHCA) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains uncertain. Methods: From 930 records identified in PubMed, ScienceDirect, Embase, and Cochrane Library, 14 studies were included. Outcomes were analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis in R with IHCA and OHCA subgroup analyses. Bayesian meta-analysis using the bayesmeta package assessed result credibility. Results: Amiodarone did not improve return of spontaneous circulation (R0SC) compared with lidocaine (Risk ratio (RR) 0.96, p = 0.40). In IHCA, amiodarone was associated with lower survival to hospital discharge (RR 0.88, p < 0.0001), lower 24 h survival (RR 0.93, p < 0.0001), worse neurological recovery (RR 0.83, p < 0.0001), and longer arrest duration (Mean difference (MD) 7.46 min, p = 0.002). Termination of shockable rhythms favored lidocaine only after sensitivity analysis (RR 0.51, p = 0.02). In OHCA, amiodarone did not improve survival to discharge (RR 0.93, p = 0.44), while return of spontaneous circulation favored lidocaine after sensitivity analysis (RR 0.88, p = 0.002). No consistent benefit was observed across outcomes. Bayesian analysis showed overlapping credible intervals and low probabilities of benefit, indicating no clear superiority. Conclusions: No survival difference was observed between amiodarone and lidocaine arrest. Although lidocaine showed more favorable in-hospital outcomes, long-term survival was similar, suggesting agents may be selected based on availability and practice.