Dataset Information

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and propensity score-matched studies.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In selected patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation represents a promising approach when conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation fails to achieve return of spontaneous circulation. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to November 28, 2021, for randomized trials and observational studies reporting propensity score-matched data and comparing adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest treated with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation with those treated with conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The primary outcome was survival with favorable neurological outcome at the longest follow-up available. Secondary outcomes were survival at the longest follow-up available and survival at hospital discharge/30 days.

Results

We included six studies, two randomized and four propensity score-matched studies. Patients treated with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation had higher rates of survival with favorable neurological outcome (81/584 [14%] vs. 46/593 [7.8%]; OR = 2.11; 95% CI, 1.41-3.15; p < 0.001, number needed to treat 16) and of survival (131/584 [22%] vs. 102/593 [17%]; OR = 1.40; 95% CI, 1.05-1.87; p = 0.02) at the longest follow-up available compared with conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Survival at hospital discharge/30 days was similar between the two groups (142/584 [24%] vs. 122/593 [21%]; OR = 1.26; 95% CI, 0.95-1.66; p = 0.10).

Conclusions

Evidence from randomized trials and propensity score-matched studies suggests increased survival and favorable neurological outcome in patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest treated with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Large, multicentre randomized studies are still ongoing to confirm these findings.

SUBMITTER: Scquizzato T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9307006 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction:In this systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched cohort studies, we quantitatively summarize whether venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) used as extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR), compared with conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR), is associated with improved rates of 30-day and long-term favorable neurological outcomes and survival in patients resuscitated from in- and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Methods:We searched MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar for eligible studies on January 14, 2019. All searches were limited to studies published between January 2000 and January 2019. Two investigators independently evaluated the quality (or certainty) of evidence according to GRADE guidelines. Pooled results are presented as relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results:Six cohort studies using propensity score-matched analysis were included, totaling 1108 matched patients. Pooled analyses showed that ECPR was likely associated with improved 30-day and long-term favorable neurological outcome in adults compared to CCPR for in- and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (RR = 2.02, 95% CI = 1.29-3.16; I2 = 20%, P = 0.002; very low-quality evidence) and (RR = 2.86, 95% CI = 1.64-5.01; I2 = 0%, P = 0.0002; moderate-quality evidence), respectively. When we analyzed in- and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest separately, ECPR was likely associated with improved 30-day favorable neurological outcome compared to CCPR for in-hospital cardiac arrest (RR = 2.18, 95% CI = 1.24-3.81; I2 = 9%, P = 0.006; very low-quality evidence), but not for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (RR = 2.61, 95% CI = 0.56-12.20; I2 = 59%, P = 0.22; very low-quality evidence). ECPR was also likely associated with improved long-term favorable neurological outcome compared to CCPR for in-hospital cardiac arrest (RR = 2.50, 95% CI = 1.33-4.71; I2 = 0%, P = 0.005; moderate-quality evidence) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (RR = 4.64, 95% CI = 1.41-15.25; I2 = 0%, P = 0.01; moderate-quality evidence). Conclusions:Our analysis suggests that VA-ECMO used as ECPR may improve long-term favorable neurological outcomes and survival when compared to the best standard of care in a selected patient population. Therefore, it is imperative for well-designed randomized clinical trials to obtain a higher level of scientific evidence to ensure optimal outcomes for cardiac arrest patients.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The prognosis in refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) with ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) at hospital arrival is often considered dismal. The use of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) for perfusion enhancement during resuscitation has shown variable results. We aimed to investigate outcome in refractory OHCA patients managed conservatively without use of eCPR. METHODS:We included consecutive OHCA patients with refractory arrest or prehospital return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in the Copenhagen area in 2002-2011. RESULTS:A total of 3992 OHCA patients with resuscitation attempts were included; in 2599, treatment was terminated prehospital, and 1393 (35%) were brought to the hospital either with ROSC (n?=?1285, 92%) or with refractory OHCA (n?=?108, 8%). Of patients brought in with refractory OHCA, 56 (52%) achieved ROSC in the emergency department. There were no differences between patients with refractory OHCA or prehospital ROSC with regard to age, sex, comorbidities, or etiology of OHCA. Time to emergency medical services (EMS) arrival was similar, whereas time to ROSC (when ROSC was achieved) was longer in refractory OHCA patients (EMS, 6 (5-9] vs. 7 [5-10] min, p?=?0.8; ROSC, 15 [9-22] vs. 27 [20-41] min, p?<?0.001). Independent factors associated with transport with refractory OHCA instead of prehospital termination of therapy were OHCA in public (OR, 3.6 [95% CI, 2.2-5.8]; p?<?0.001), witnessed OHCA (OR, 3.7 [2.0-7.1]; p?<?0.001), shockable rhythm (OR, 3.0 [1.9-4.7]; p?<?0.001), younger age (OR, 1.2 [1.1-1.2]; p?<?0.001), and later calendar year (OR, 1.4 [1.2-1.6]; p?<?0.001). Thirty-day survival was 20% in patients with refractory OHCA compared with 42% in patients with prehospital ROSC (p?<?0.001). Four of 28 refractory OHCA patients with duration of resuscitation >?60 min achieved ROSC. No difference in favorable neurological outcome in patients surviving to discharge was found (prehospital ROSC 84% vs. refractory OHCA 86%; p?=?0.7). CONCLUSIONS:Survival after refractory OHCA with ongoing CPR at hospital arrival was significantly lower than among patients with prehospital ROSC. Despite a lower survival, the majority of survivors with both refractory OHCA and prehospital ROSC were discharged with a similar degree of favorable neurological outcome, indicating that continued efforts in spite of refractory OHCA are not in vain and may still lead to favorable outcome even without eCPR.

Project description:IntroductionExtracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is an emerging invasive rescue therapy for treatment of refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA). We aim to describe the incidence of traumatic and hemorrhagic complications among patients undergoing ECPR for OHCA and examine the association between CPR duration and ECPR-related injuries or bleeding.MethodsWe examined prospectively collected data from the Extracorporeal Resuscitation Outcomes Database (EROD), which includes ECPR-treated OHCAs from participating hospitals (October 2014 to August 2019). The primary outcome was traumatic or hemorrhagic complications, defined any of the following: pneumothorax, pulmonary hemorrhage, major bleeding, cannula site bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, thoracotomy, cardiac tamponade, aortic dissection, or vascular injury during hospitalization. The primary exposure was the cardiac arrest to ECPR initiation interval (CA-ECPR interval), measured as the time from arrest to initiation of ECPR. Descriptive statistics were used to compare demographic, cardiac arrest, and ECPR characteristics among patients with and without CPR-related traumatic or bleeding complications. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between CA-ECPR interval and traumatic or bleeding complications.ResultsA total of 68 patients from 4 hospitals receiving ECPR for OHCA were entered into EROD and met inclusion criteria. Median age was 51 (interquartile range 38-58), 81% were male, 40% had body mass index > 30, and 70% had pre-existing medical comorbidities. A total of 65% had an initial shockable cardiac rhythm, mechanical CPR was utilized in at least 29% of patients, and 27% were discharged alive. The median time from arrest to ECPR initiation was 73 min (IQR 60-104). A total of 37% experienced a traumatic or bleeding complication, with major bleeding (32%), vascular injury (18%), and cannula site bleeding (15%) being the most common. Compared to patients with shorter CPR times, patients with a longer CA-ECPR interval had 18% (95% confidence interval - 2-42%) higher odds of suffering a mechanical or bleeding complication, but this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.08).ConclusionsTraumatic injuries and bleeding complications are common among patients undergoing ECPR. Further study is needed to investigate the relation between arrest duration and complications. Clinicians performing ECPR should anticipate and assess for injuries and bleeding in this high-risk population.