Measuring and improving outcomes that matter to patients after cardiac arrest

A Comparison between Conventional and Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

There is limited evidence comparing the use of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) to CPR in the management of refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare survival and neurologic outcomes associated with ECPR versus CPR in the management of OHCA. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus to identify observational studies and randomized controlled trials comparing ECPR and CPR. We used the Newcastle−Ottawa Scale and Cochrane’s risk-of-bias tool to assess studies’ quality. We used random-effects models to compare outcomes between the pooled populations and moderator analysis to identify sources of heterogeneity and perform subgroup analysis. We identified 2088 articles and included 13, with 18,620 patients with OHCA. A total of 16,701 received CPR and 1919 received ECPR. Compared with CPR, ECPR was associated with higher odds of achieving favorable neurologic outcomes at 3 (OR 5, 95% CI 1.90−13.1, p < 0.01) and 6 months (OR 4.44, 95% CI 2.3−8.5, p < 0.01). We did not find a significant survival benefit or impact on neurologic outcomes at hospital discharge or 1 month following arrest. ECPR is a promising but resource-intensive intervention with the potential to improve long-term outcomes among patients with OHCA.

The Additive Effect of Atropine Sulfate during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Out-of-hospital Non-traumatic Cardiac Arrest Patients with Non-shockable Rhythm

Objective The updated guidelines of 2015 for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) do not recommend the routine use of atropine for cardiopulmonary arrest. Methods The study population included out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients with non-shockable rhythm who were encountered at a Japanese community hospital between October 1, 2012 and April 30, 2017. Results At the outcome, the epinephrine with atropine and epinephrine-only groups had a similar survival rate to that at hospital admission (28.7% vs. 26.7%: p=0.723). The odds ratio (OR) for the survival to hospital admission after the administration of atropine with epinephrine was 1.33 (95% CI 1.09-1.62; p<0.01), while that after the administration of epinephrine was 0.64 (95% CI: 0.55-0.74, p<0.01). The ORs for the survival to hospital admission for patients with pulseless electrical activity in the epinephrine-alone group and the atropine with epinephrine group were 0.62 (95% CI 0.49-0.78; p<0.01) and 1.35 (95% CI 0.99-1.83; p=0.06), respectively, and those for such patients with asystole in the epinephrine-alone group and the atropine with epinephrine group were 0.64 (95% CI 0.53-0.76; p<0.01) and 1.39 (95% CI 1.10-1.77; p<0.01), respectively. The OR for the survival to hospital admission after the administration of atropine sulfate (1 mg) was 2.91 (95% CI 1.49-5.67; p<0.01), while that for the survival to hospital admission after the administration of 0, 2 and ≥3 mg atropine sulfate was 0.38 (95% CI 0.29-0.50; p<0.01), 1.54 (95% CI 0.58-4.08; p=0.38) and 0.23 (95% CI 0.09-0.60; p<0.01), respectively. Conclusion The addition of atropine (within 2 mg) following epinephrine was a comprehensive independent predictor of the survival to hospital admission for non-shockable (especially asystole) OHCA adults.