Choi Dong Sun, Kim Taeyun, Ro Young Sun, Ahn Ki Ok, Lee Eui Jung, Hwang Seung Sik, Song Sung Wook, Song Kyoung Jun, Shin Sang Do
Dept. of Emergency Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 166 Gumi-ro Bundang-gu, Seongnam 463-707, Republic of Korea.
Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro Jongno-gu, Seoul 110-744, Republic of Korea; Dept. of Emergency Medicine, Gyeongsang National University Hospital, 79 Gangnam-ro, Jinju-si, Gyeongsangnam-do 52727, Republic of Korea.
Resuscitation. 2016 Feb;99:26-32. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.11.013. Epub 2015 Dec 10.
The benefit of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in highly selective patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is supported by previous studies; however, it is unclear whether the effects of ECLS are observed at a population level. This study aimed to determine whether ECLS is associated with improved survival outcomes compared to conventional CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) at a national level.
We used a Korean national OHCA cohort database from 2009 to 2013. The inclusion criteria were OHCA adults with presumed cardiac aetiology and resuscitation by emergency medical services (EMS). Patients were excluded if their information on prehospital time intervals or clinical outcomes at hospital discharge was incomplete or not captured. The primary outcome was neurologically favourable survival to discharge. We compared the primary outcomes between the ECLS and non-ECLS groups using a multivariable logistic regression and a propensity score matching analysis.
Of the 119,077 patients with OHCA, 36,547 were included in the analysis. There were 320 patients who received ECLS. There was no significant difference in neurologically favourable survival to discharge between the ECLS group and the non-ECLS group after adjusting for covariates (adjusted OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.41-1.04). In the propensity score-matched cohort, there was also no significant difference between the two groups (adjusted OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.41-2.14).
In this propensity score-matched cohort using a nationwide OHCA database, OHCA victims who received ECLS did not show better survival outcomes than those who did not receive ECLS.
先前的研究支持体外生命支持(ECLS)对高度选择性的院外心脏骤停(OHCA)患者有益;然而,在人群水平上是否能观察到ECLS的效果尚不清楚。本研究旨在确定在全国范围内,与传统心肺复苏(CPR)相比,ECLS是否与改善生存结局相关。
我们使用了2009年至2013年韩国全国OHCA队列数据库。纳入标准为病因推测为心脏原因且由紧急医疗服务(EMS)进行复苏的成年OHCA患者。如果患者院前时间间隔或出院时临床结局的信息不完整或未获取,则将其排除。主要结局是出院时神经功能良好的存活。我们使用多变量逻辑回归和倾向评分匹配分析比较了ECLS组和非ECLS组之间的主要结局。
在119,077例OHCA患者中,36,547例纳入分析。有320例患者接受了ECLS。调整协变量后,ECLS组和非ECLS组出院时神经功能良好的存活情况无显著差异(调整后的比值比,0.65;95%置信区间,0.41 - 1.04)。在倾向评分匹配队列中,两组之间也无显著差异(调整后的比值比,0.94;95%置信区间,0.41 - 2.14)。
在这个使用全国OHCA数据库的倾向评分匹配队列中,接受ECLS的OHCA患者的生存结局并不比未接受ECLS的患者更好。