Conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:与常规心肺复苏(CCPR)相比,体外心肺复苏(ECPR)对心脏骤停(CA)患者的潜在益处仍存在争议.我们旨在确定与CCPR相比,ECPR是否可以改善CA患者的预后。
    方法:我们系统地搜索了PubMed,EMBASE,和Cochrane图书馆从数据库开始到2023年7月,确定了随机对照试验(RCT)或队列研究,这些试验或研究比较了成人(≥16岁)发生院外心脏骤停(OHCA)和院内心脏骤停(IHCA)的ECPR和CCPR。这项荟萃分析是使用随机效应模型进行的。两名研究人员独立审查了这项研究的相关性,提取的数据,并对纳入文献的质量进行评价。主要结局是短期(从出院到心脏骤停后1个月)和长期(心脏骤停后≥90天)生存,具有良好的神经状态(定义为脑功能类别评分1或2)。次要结果包括1个月时的生存期,3-6个月,心脏骤停后1年。
    结果:荟萃分析包括3项RCT和14项队列研究,涉及167,728例患者。我们发现ECPR可以显着改善良好的神经系统预后(RR1.82,95CI1.42-2.34,I2=41%)和生存率(RR1.51,95CI1.20-1.89,I2=62%)。此外,结果显示,ECPR对OHCA患者的良好神经状态有不同的影响(短期:RR1.50,95CI0.98-2.29,I2=55%;长期:RR1.95,95%CI1.06-3.59,I2=11%).然而,ECPR对IHCA患者神经状态的影响明显优于CCPR(短期:RR2.18,95CI1.24-3.81,I2=9%;长期:RR2.17,95%CI1.19-3.94,I2=0%)。
    结论:这项荟萃分析表明,ECPR对良好的神经系统预后和生存率的影响明显优于CCPR。尤其是IHCA患者。然而,需要更多高质量的研究来探讨ECPR在OHCA患者中的作用.
    OBJECTIVE: Compared to the conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR), potential benefits of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for patients with cardiac arrest (CA) are still controversial. We aimed to determine whether ECPR can improve the prognosis of CA patients compared with CCPR.
    METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from database\'s inception to July 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies that compared ECPR with CCPR in adults (aged ≥ 16 years) with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) and in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). This meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Two researchers independently reviewed the relevance of the study, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of the included literature. The primary outcome was short-term (from hospital discharge to one month after cardiac arrest) and long-term (≥ 90 days after cardiac arrest) survival with favorable neurological status (defined as cerebral performance category scores 1 or 2). Secondary outcomes included survival at 1 months, 3-6 months, and 1 year after cardiac arrest.
    RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 3 RCTs and 14 cohort studies involving 167,728 patients. We found that ECPR can significantly improve good neurological prognosis (RR 1.82, 95%CI 1.42-2.34, I2 = 41%) and survival rate (RR 1.51, 95%CI 1.20-1.89, I2 = 62%). In addition, the results showed that ECPR had different effects on favorable neurological status in patients with OHCA (short-term: RR 1.50, 95%CI 0.98- 2.29, I2 = 55%; long-term: RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.06-3.59, I2 = 11%). However, ECPR had significantly better effects on neurological status than CCPR in patients with IHCA (short-term: RR 2.18, 95%CI 1.24- 3.81, I2 = 9%; long-term: RR 2.17, 95% CI 1.19-3.94, I2 = 0%).
    CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicated that ECPR had significantly better effects on good neurological prognosis and survival rate than CCPR, especially in patients with IHCA. However, more high-quality studies are needed to explore the role of ECPR in patients with OHCA.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:体外心肺复苏术(E-CPR)可以改善难治性院外心脏骤停(OHCA)患者的生存率,并具有良好的神经系统预后。不幸的是,近期的随机对照试验结果尚无定论.我们进行了一项荟萃分析,以研究与常规心肺复苏(C-CPR)相比,E-CPR对神经系统预后的影响。
    方法:对2023年4月27日之前接受E-CPR或C-CPR治疗的成年OHCA患者的结局进行了系统研究。主要结果是出院时或30天的生存率和良好的神经系统结局。还评估了总生存率。
    结果:共纳入18项研究。E-CPR与更好的生存相关,在出院或30天时具有良好的神经状态(14%vs7%,OR2.35,95%CI1.61-3.43,I2=80%,p<0.001,NNT=17)比C-CPR。如果分析仅限于RCT,则结果一致。E-CPR治疗对出院或30天的总生存率也有积极影响(OR=1.71,95%CI=1.18-2.46,I2=81%,p=0.004,NNT=11)。
    结论:在本荟萃分析中,E-CPR对神经系统预后良好的生存率有积极影响,在较小的程度上,难治性OHCA患者的总死亡率。
    OBJECTIVE: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (E-CPR) may improve survival with favorable neurological outcome in patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Unfortunately, recent results from randomized controlled trials were inconclusive. We performed a meta-analysis to investigate the impact of E-CPR on neurological outcome compared to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (C-CPR).
    METHODS: A systematic research for articles assessing outcomes of adult patients with OHCA either treated with E-CPR or C-CPR up to April 27, 2023 was performed. Primary outcome was survival with favorable neurological outcome at discharge or 30 days. Overall survival was also assessed.
    RESULTS: Eighteen studies were included. E-CPR was associated with better survival with favorable neurological status at discharge or 30 days (14% vs 7%, OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.61-3.43, I2 = 80%, p < 0.001, NNT = 17) than C-CPR. Results were consistent if the analysis was restricted to RCTs. Overall survival to discharge or 30 days was also positively affected by treatment with E-CPR (OR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.18-2.46, I2 = 81%, p = 0.004, NNT = 11).
    CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, E-CPR had a positive effect on survival with favorable neurological outcome and, to a smaller extent, on overall mortality in patients with refractory OHCA.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:对难治性院外心脏骤停患者进行体外心肺复苏(ECPR)的几项随机试验的结果进行了检查,根据p值而不是临床相关治疗效果的可能性对结果进行二分法解释。为了确定临床相关的基于ECPR的治疗对神经系统结果的影响的概率,这些试验的作者对全部随机ECPR证据进行了贝叶斯荟萃分析.
    方法:对三个电子数据库进行了系统检索。包括比较基于ECPR的治疗与常规CPR治疗难治性院外心脏骤停的随机试验。该研究在INPLASY(INPLASY2023120060)中进行了预注册。主要的贝叶斯分层荟萃分析估计了所有节律患者的6个月神经有利生存率的差异,次要分析评估了具有可电击节律的患者的这种差异(贝叶斯分层随机效应模型)。初级贝叶斯分析是在模糊的先验下进行的。结果被表述为估计的中位数相对风险,平均绝对风险差异,以及需要以相应的95%可信间隔(CrIs)治疗的数字。估计了各种临床相关绝对风险差异阈值的后验概率。
    结果:分析中包括三项随机试验(ECPR,n=209例;常规CPR,n=211名患者)。在所有节律的患者中,ECPR在6个月的神经系统有利生存中的估计中位相对风险为1.47(95%CrI0.73-3.32),平均绝对风险差异为8.7%(-5.0;42.7%),和中位数相对风险为1.54(95%CrI0.79-3.71),平均绝对风险差异为10.8%(95%CrI-4.2;73.9%)。在所有节律的患者中,绝对风险差异>0%和>5%的后验概率分别为91.0%和71.1%,在可电击节律的患者中分别为92.4%和75.8%。分别。
    结论:当前的贝叶斯荟萃分析发现,在所有节律和可电击节律的患者中,临床相关的基于ECPR的治疗效果对6个月的神经系统有利生存率分别为71.1%和75.8%。这些结果必须在报告的可信间隔和随机试验的不同设计的背景下进行解释。
    背景:插入(INPLASY2023120060,12月14日,2023年,https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2023.12.0060)。
    BACKGROUND: The outcomes of several randomized trials on extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) in patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were examined using frequentist methods, resulting in a dichotomous interpretation of results based on p-values rather than in the probability of clinically relevant treatment effects. To determine such a probability of a clinically relevant ECPR-based treatment effect on neurological outcomes, the authors of these trials performed a Bayesian meta-analysis of the totality of randomized ECPR evidence.
    METHODS: A systematic search was applied to three electronic databases. Randomized trials that compared ECPR-based treatment with conventional CPR for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were included. The study was preregistered in INPLASY (INPLASY2023120060). The primary Bayesian hierarchical meta-analysis estimated the difference in 6-month neurologically favorable survival in patients with all rhythms, and a secondary analysis assessed this difference in patients with shockable rhythms (Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model). Primary Bayesian analyses were performed under vague priors. Outcomes were formulated as estimated median relative risks, mean absolute risk differences, and numbers needed to treat with corresponding 95% credible intervals (CrIs). The posterior probabilities of various clinically relevant absolute risk difference thresholds were estimated.
    RESULTS: Three randomized trials were included in the analysis (ECPR, n = 209 patients; conventional CPR, n = 211 patients). The estimated median relative risk of ECPR for 6-month neurologically favorable survival was 1.47 (95%CrI 0.73-3.32) with a mean absolute risk difference of 8.7% (- 5.0; 42.7%) in patients with all rhythms, and the median relative risk was 1.54 (95%CrI 0.79-3.71) with a mean absolute risk difference of 10.8% (95%CrI - 4.2; 73.9%) in patients with shockable rhythms. The posterior probabilities of an absolute risk difference > 0% and > 5% were 91.0% and 71.1% in patients with all rhythms and 92.4% and 75.8% in patients with shockable rhythms, respectively.
    CONCLUSIONS: The current Bayesian meta-analysis found a 71.1% and 75.8% posterior probability of a clinically relevant ECPR-based treatment effect on 6-month neurologically favorable survival in patients with all rhythms and shockable rhythms. These results must be interpreted within the context of the reported credible intervals and varying designs of the randomized trials.
    BACKGROUND: INPLASY (INPLASY2023120060, December 14th, 2023, https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2023.12.0060 ).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:院外心脏骤停(OHCA)的发生率很高。尽管体外心肺复苏(ECPR)已被认为是常规心肺复苏(CCPR)失败后难治性心脏骤停的潜在治疗方法,ECPR在难治性OHCA中的获益仍不确定.
    方法:在这项回顾性队列研究中,我们纳入了2018年1月至2023年4月在航空航天中心医院急诊科就诊的难治性OHCA患者.我们将患者分为ECPR组和CCPR组。研究的主要终点是两组患者在心脏骤停后3个月的神经功能。通过对ECPR组中神经功能良好的存活患者进行单变量和多变量相关分析,我们使用倾向评分匹配来减少选择偏倚,并确定OHCA接受ECPR治疗时与神经功能良好相关的因素。
    结果:在研究期间,我们招募了133名患者,由ECPR组中的33和CCPR组中的100组成。出院时神经功能良好的患者,ECPR组为18.2%(6/33例),CCPR组为9%(9/100例),p=.20。出院三个月后,ECPR组神经功能良好患者的生存率为15.2%(5/33例),CCPR组为8%(8/100例),p=.31。使用倾向得分匹配,我们确定了22对患者进行进一步分析.其中,出院后3个月,ECPR组神经功能良好患者的生存率为13.6%(3/22例),CCPR组为4.5%(1/22例),p=.61,出院时生存率ECPR组为18.2%(4/22例),CCPR组为4.5%(1/22例),p=.34。ECPR组神经功能良好患者的单因素分析显示,无灌注时间,灌注不足时间,PCI治疗是影响患者神经功能预后的相关因素,多因素分析显示,灌注不足时间与良好的神经功能独立相关,OR(95%CI)为1.06(1.00-1.14),p=0.05。
    结论:我们的研究结果表明,ECPR未能显著改善难治性OHCA患者的神经系统预后;然而,本研究中的小样本量可能不足以检测临床相关差异.此外,灌注不足时间可能是确定ECPR候选者的关键预测因素。
    OBJECTIVE: The incidence of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is high. Though extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) has been considered a potential treatment for refractory cardiac arrest after failure of conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR), the benefit of ECPR in refractory OHCA remains uncertain.
    METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we included patients with refractory OHCA who visited the Emergency Department of the Aerospace Center Hospital between January 2018 and April 2023. We divided the patients into the ECPR Group and the CCPR Group. The primary endpoint of the study was the neurological function of the patients in both groups 3 months after the cardiac arrest. We used propensity score matching to reduce selection bias and identified factors associated with good neurological function when OHCA was treated with ECPR by performing univariate and multivariate correlation analyses on surviving patients with good neurological function in the ECPR group.
    RESULTS: During the study period, we enrolled 133 patients, consisting of 33 in the ECPR group and 100 in the CCPR group. The survival rate of patients with good neurological function at discharge was 18.2% (6/33 cases) in the ECPR group and 9% (9/100 cases) in the CCPR group, p = .20. Three months after discharge, the survival rate of patients with good neurological function was 15.2% (5/33 cases) in the ECPR group and 8% (8/100 cases) in the CCPR group, p = .31. Using propensity score matching, we identified 22 pairs of patients for further analysis. Among these, 3 months after discharge, the survival rate of patients with good neurological function was 13.6% (3/22 cases) in the ECPR group and 4.5% (1/22 cases) in the CCPR group, p = .61, and the survival rate at discharge was 18.2% (4/22 cases) in the ECPR group and 4.5% (1/22 cases) in the CCPR group, p = .34. The univariate analysis of patients with good neurological function in the ECPR group showed that time without perfusion, hypoperfusion time, and PCI treatment were associated factors affecting the prognosis of neurological function in patients, while multivariate analysis showed that hypoperfusion time was independently associated with good neurological function, with an OR (95% CI) of 1.06 (1.00-1.14) and p = .05.
    CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggested that ECPR failed to significantly improve neurological outcome in patients with refractory OHCA; however, the small sample size in this study may be insufficient to detect clinically relevant differences. In addition, hypoperfusion time may be a key predictive factor in identifying candidates for ECPR.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    当复苏失败时,体外心肺复苏(E-CPR)起着不可或缺的作用;但是,婴儿的体外生命支持(ECLS)与成人不同。这项研究的目的是评估婴儿E-CPR的结果。
    进行了单中心回顾性研究,分析2010年至2021年间因院内心脏骤停而接受E-CPR的51例连续患者(年龄<1岁)。
    年龄和体重中位数为51天(四分位距[IQR],17-111天)和3.4公斤(IQR,2.9-5.1kg),分别。45例患者(88.2%)心源性猝死,48例(94.1%)有先天性心脏异常。开始ECLS前的中位常规心肺复苏(C-CPR)时间为77分钟(IQR,61-103分钟),ECLS的持续时间为7天(IQR,3-12天)。有36例住院死亡(70.6%),另一个病人在心脏移植后存活下来.在多变量分析中,单心室生理学(比值比[OR],5.05;p=0.048),胸骨开放状态(或,8.69;p=0.013),和C-CPR时间(或,每10分钟1.47;p=0.021)是住院死亡率的重要预测因子。在接收器工作特性曲线中,C-CPR时间的最佳截止时间为70.5分钟.早期E-CPR(C-CPR时间<70.5分钟)的亚组显示出较低的住院死亡率趋势(54.5%vs.82.8%,p=0.060),尽管没有统计学意义。
    如果婴儿复苏失败,电子心肺复苏术可能是一种拯救生命的选择。提高C-CPR质量和缩短ECLS开始前的时间至关重要。
    UNASSIGNED: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (E-CPR) plays an indispensable role when resuscitation fails; however, extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in infants is different from that in adults. The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of E-CPR in infants.
    UNASSIGNED: A single-center retrospective study was conducted, analyzing 51 consecutive patients (age <1 year) who received E-CPR for in-hospital cardiac arrest between 2010 and 2021.
    UNASSIGNED: The median age and body weight was 51 days (interquartile range [IQR], 17-111 days) and 3.4 kg (IQR, 2.9-5.1 kg), respectively. The cause of arrest was cardiogenic in 45 patients (88.2%), and 48 patients (94.1%) had congenital cardiac anomalies. The median conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (C-CPR) time before the initiation of ECLS was 77 minutes (IQR, 61-103 minutes) and duration of ECLS was 7 days (IQR, 3-12 days). There were 36 in-hospital deaths (70.6%), and another patient survived after heart transplantation. In the multivariate analysis, single-ventricular physiology (odds ratio [OR], 5.05; p=0.048), open sternum status (OR, 8.69; p=0.013), and C-CPR time (OR, 1.47 per 10 minutes; p=0.021) were significant predictors of in-hospital mortality. In a receiver operating characteristic curve, the optimal cut-off of C-CPR time was 70.5 minutes. The subgroup with early E-CPR (C-CPR time <70.5 minutes) showed a tendency for lower in-hospital mortality tendency (54.5% vs. 82.8%, p=0.060), albeit not statistically significant.
    UNASSIGNED: If resuscitation fails in an infant, E-CPR could be a life-saving option. It is crucial to improve C-CPR quality and shorten the time before ECLS initiation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    未经证实:小儿院外心脏骤停(OHCA)通常与呼吸道病因有关。尽管患有OHCA的学龄前儿童比例很高,对这种特殊人群的研究很少。这项研究描述了学龄前儿童OHCA的流行病学特征,并分析了常规(胸部按压通气)旁观者心肺复苏(CPR)相对于仅按压旁观者CPR(BCPR)的优势。
    UNASSIGNED:在2016年至2019年的4年间发生的所有救护车运输事件和OHCA的日本全国数据库合并在一起,共3,608例患者事件。包括≤6岁的儿童;物理学家和EMS见证的事件,没有院前复苏努力事件,排除新生儿患者事件.在倾向评分匹配之前和之后,使用单变量和多变量分析比较各组之间的神经系统良好的1个月生存率。
    UNASSIGNED:从组合数据库,2,882名符合选择标准的儿科OHCA被归类为无BCPR(984),仅压缩BCPR(1,428),和常规BCPR(470)。旁观者见证的病例比例较低(22.3%)。大多数OHCA证人是家庭成员(88.5%),大多数OHCA发生在家中(88.0%)。神经上有利的1个月生存率为:无BCPR2.4%,仅压缩,3.2%,常规6.6%(P<0.01)。匹配前后的多因素logistic回归分析显示,常规BCPR比仅压缩BCPR具有更高的神经系统1个月生存率。匹配后的亚组分析表明,常规BCPR与非医学患者的结局更好(调整后的比值比;95%置信区间,2.83;1.09-7.32)和未见证的OHCA案件(3.42;1.09-10.8)。
    UNASSIGNED:在学龄前儿童OHCA中,旁观者很少进行常规CPR。然而,常规BCPR可在非医学和目击病例中获得良好的神经系统结局.
    UNASSIGNED: Pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) are frequently associated with a respiratory etiology. Despite the high proportion of preschool children with OHCAs, very few studies on this special population exist. This study characterizes the epidemiologic features of preschool pediatric OHCAs and analyzes the advantage of conventional (ventilations with chest compressions) bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) over compression-only bystander CPR (BCPR) on the one-month post-event neurological status of the patient.
    UNASSIGNED: Japanese nationwide databases for all ambulance transport events and OHCAs occurring during a 4-year period between 2016 and 2019 were combined, totalling 3,608 patient events. Children ≤6-years-old were included; physician- and EMS-witnessed events, no prehospital resuscitation effort events, and neonatal patient events were excluded. Neurologically favorable 1-month survival rates were compared among groups using univariate and multivariate analyses before and after propensity score matching.
    UNASSIGNED: From the combined database, 2,882 pediatric OHCAs meeting selection criteria were categorized as no BCPR (984), compression-only BCPR (1,428), and conventional BCPR (470). The proportion of bystander-witnessed cases was low (22.3%). Most OHCA witnesses were family members (88.5%), and most OHCAs occurred at home (88.0%). The neurologically favorable 1-month survival rates were: no BCPR 2.4%, compression only, 3.2%, and conventional 6.6% (P < 0.01). Multivariate logistic regression analysis before and after matching showed that conventional BCPR was associated with higher neurologically favorable 1-month survival than compression-only BCPR. Subgroup analyses after matching demonstrated that conventional BCPR was associated with better outcomes in nonmedical (adjusted odds ratio; 95% confidence interval, 2.83; 1.09-7.32) and unwitnessed OHCA cases (3.42; 1.09-10.8).
    UNASSIGNED: Conventional CPR is rarely performed by bystanders in preschool pediatric OHCA. However, conventional BCPR results in neurologically favorable outcomes in nonmedical and unwitnessed cases.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    高氧与心脏骤停(CA)后患者的不良后果有关。研究目的是在两种不同模式的心肺复苏(CPR)的混合队列中检查高氧与30天死亡率之间的关系:体外(ECPR)与常规(CCPR)。
    在这项回顾性队列研究中,对澳大利亚三级CA中心收治的CA患者(在6.5年的时间内)的平均动脉血氧水平(PaO2)和极端高氧发作(最大平均PaO2≥300mmHg)进行了分析。
    评估了一百六十九名CA后患者(ECPRn=79/CCPRn=90)。ECPR与CCPR组的平均PaO2水平较高(211mmHg±58.4vs119mmHg±18.1;p<0.0001),至少有一次极端高氧发作的比例(74.7%vs16.7%;p<0.001)。在校正混杂因素和CPR模式后,任何极端高氧事件都与30天死亡率增加2.52倍的风险独立相关(OR:2.52,95%CI:1.06-5.98;p=0.036)。
    我们发现,在CA后的前8天,ECPR患者中极端高氧更为常见,并且与更高的30天死亡率独立相关。无论CPR模式如何。
    Hyperoxia has been associated with adverse outcomes in post cardiac arrest (CA) patients. Study-objective was to examine the association between hyperoxia and 30-day mortality in a mixed cohort of two different modes of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR): Extracorporeal (ECPR) vs. Conventional (CCPR).
    In this retrospective cohort study of CA patients admitted to a tertiary level CA centre in Australia (over a 6.5-year time period) mean arterial oxygen levels (PaO2) and episodes of extreme hyperoxia (maximum of mean PaO2 ≥ 300 mmHg) were analysed over the first 8 days post CA.
    One hundred and sixty-nine post CA patients were assessed (ECPR n = 79 / CCPR n = 90). Mean PaO2-levels were higher in the ECPR vs CCPR group (211 mmHg ± 58.4 vs 119 mmHg ± 18.1; p < 0.0001) as was the proportion with at least one episode of extreme hyperoxia (74.7% vs 16.7%; p < 0.001). After adjusting for confounders and the mode of CPR any episode of extreme hyperoxia was independently associated with a 2.52-fold increased risk of 30-day mortality (OR: 2.52, 95% CI: 1.06-5.98; p = 0.036).
    We found extreme hyperoxia was more common in ECPR patients in the first 8 days post CA and independently associated with higher 30-day mortality, irrespective of the CPR-mode.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    UNASSIGNED: The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation on survival and neurological outcomes in in-hospital cardiac arrest patients.
    UNASSIGNED: Between January 2018 and December 2020, a total of 22 patients (17 males, 5 females; mean age: 52.8±9.0 years; range, 32 to 70 years) treated with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation using veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for in-hospital cardiac arrest after acute coronary syndrome were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into two groups as those weaned (n=13) and non-weaned (n=9) from the veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Demographic data of the patients, heart rhythms at the beginning of conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation, the angiographic and interventional results, survival and neurological outcomes of the patients before and after extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation were recorded.
    UNASSIGNED: There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of comorbidity and baseline laboratory test values. The underlying rhythm was ventricular fibrillation in 92% of the patients in the weaned group and there was no cardiac rhythm in 67% of the patients in the non-weaned group (p=0.125). The recovery in the mean left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly evident in the weaned group (36.5±12.7% vs. 21.1±7.4%, respectively; p=0.004). The overall wean rate from veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was 59.1%; however, the discharge rate from hospital of survivors without any neurological sequelae was 36.4%.
    UNASSIGNED: In-hospital cardiac arrest is a critical emergency situation requiring instantly life-saving interventions through conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation. If it fails, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation should be initiated, regardless the underlying etiology or rhythm disturbances. An effective conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation is mandatory to prevent brain and body hypoperfusion.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is a more promising treatment for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) than conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR). However, previous studies that compared ECPR and CCPR included mixed groups of patients with or without target temperature management (TTM). In this study, we compared the neurological outcomes of OHCA between ECPR and CCPR with TTM in all patients. We performed retrospective subanalyses of the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine OHCA registry. Witnessed adult cases of cardiogenic OHCA treated with TTM were eligible for this study. We used univariate and multivariable analyses in all eligible patients to compare the neurological outcomes after ECPR or CCPR. We also conducted propensity score analyses of all patients and according to the interval from witnessed OHCA to reaching the target temperature (IWT) of ≤600, ≤480, ≤360, ≤240, and ≤120 minutes. We analyzed 1146 cases. The propensity score analysis did not show a significant difference in favorable neurological outcomes (defined as a Glasgow-Pittsburgh Cerebral Performance Category of 1-2 at 1 month after collapse) between EPCR and CCPR (odds ratio: OR 4.683 [95% confidence interval: CI 0.859-25.535], p = 0.747). However, ECPR was associated with more favorable neurological outcomes in patients with IWT of ≤600 minutes (OR 7.089 [95% CI 1.091-46.061], p = 0.406), ≤480 minutes (OR 10.492 [95% CI 1.534-71.773], p = 0.0168), ≤360 minutes (OR 17.573 [95% CI 2.486-124.233], p = 0.0042), ≤240 minutes (OR 38.908 [95% CI 5.045-300.089], p = 0.0005), and ≤120 minutes (OR 200.390 [95% CI 23.730-1692.211], p < 0.001). This study revealed significant differences in the neurological outcomes between ECPR and CCPR in patients with TTM whose IWT was ≤600 minutes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    The objectives of this study were to 1) identify the risk factors for predicting re-arrest and 2) determine whether extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation results in better outcomes than conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation for managing re-arrest in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients.
    This retrospective analysis was based on a prospective cohort. We included adult patients with non-traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who achieved a survival event. The primary measurement was re-arrest, defined as recurrent cardiac arrest within 24 hours after survival event. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to predict re-arrest. Subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation on the survival to discharge in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients who experienced re-arrest.
    Of 534 patients suitable for inclusion, 203 (38.0%) were enrolled in the re-arrest group. Old age, prolonged advanced cardiac life support duration and the presence of hypotension at 0 hours after survival event were independent variables predicting re-arrest. In the re-arrest group, the extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation group (n = 25) showed better outcomes than the conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation group. However, multiple logistic regression for predicting survival to discharge revealed that extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation was not an independent factor. Multiple logistic regression revealed that a hypotensive state at re-arrest was an independent risk factor for survival.
    Alternative methods that reduce the advanced cardiac life support duration should be considered to prevent re-arrest and attain good outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for re-arrest tended to show a good outcome compared to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation for re-arrest. Avoiding or immediately correcting hypotension may prevent re-arrest and improve the outcome of re-arrested patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号