Change of target temperature from 36°C to strict fever avoidance only in comatose cardiac arrest survivors - A before and after study

Temperature Control in the Era of Personalized Medicine: Knowledge Gaps, Research Priorities, and Future Directions

Hypoxic-ischemic brain injury (HIBI) is the leading cause of death and disability after cardiac arrest. To date, temperature control is the only intervention shown to improve neurologic outcomes in patients with HIBI. Despite robust preclinical evidence supporting hypothermia as neuroprotective therapy after cardiac arrest, there remains clinical equipoise regarding optimal core temperature, therapeutic window, and duration of therapy. Current guidelines recommend continuous temperature monitoring and active fever prevention for at least 72 h and additionally note insufficient evidence regarding temperature control targeting 32 °C-36 °C. However, population-based thresholds may be inadequate to support the metabolic demands of ischemic, reperfused, and dysregulated tissue. Promoting a more personalized approach with individualized targets has the potential to further improve outcomes. This review will analyze current knowledge and evidence, address research priorities, explore the components of high-quality temperature control, and define critical future steps that are needed to advance patient-centered care for cardiac arrest survivors.

Comparative before-after study of fever prevention versus targeted temperature management following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Background

International guidelines for neuroprotection following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) recommend fever prevention ahead of routine temperature management. This study aimed to identify any effect of changing from targeted temperature management to fever prevention on neurological outcome following OHCA.

Methods

A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted of consecutive admissions to an ICU at a tertiary OHCA centre. Comparison was made between a period of protocolised targeted temperature management (TTM) to 36 °C and a period of fever prevention.

Results

Data were available for 183 patients. Active temperature management was administered in 86/118 (72%) of the TTM cohort and 20/65 (31%) of the fever prevention group. The median highest temperature prior to the start of temperature management was significantly lower in the TTM group at 35.6 (IQR 34.9-36.2) compared to 37.9 °C (IQR 37.7-38.2) in the fever prevention group (adjusted p < 0.001).There was no difference in the proportion of patients discharged with Cerebral Performance Category 1 or 2 between the groups (42% vs. 40%, p = 0.88). Patients in the fever prevention group required a reduced duration of noradrenaline (36 vs. 46 h, p = 0.03) and a trend towards a reduced duration of propofol (37 vs. 56 h, p = 0.06).In unadjusted analysis, use of active temperature management (irrespective of group) appeared to be associated with decreased risk of poor outcome (OR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.23-0.78) but after adjustment for patient age, presenting rhythm, witnessed arrest and duration of CPR, this was no longer significant (OR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.37-2.31, p = 0.88).

Conclusion

Switching from TTM to fever prevention following OHCA was associated with similar rates of neurological outcomes, with a possible decrease in sedation and vasopressor requirements.