• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在疑似心源性心搏骤停的院外心脏骤停中,双相固定 360 焦耳与 200 焦耳递增至 360 焦耳除颤策略相比,存活至出院。

Survival to hospital discharge with biphasic fixed 360 joules versus 200 escalating to 360 joules defibrillation strategies in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac etiology.

机构信息

Norwegian National Advisory Unit on Prehospital Emergency Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

Resuscitation. 2019 Mar;136:112-118. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2019.01.020. Epub 2019 Jan 29.

DOI:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2019.01.020
PMID:30708074
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines recommend constant or escalating energy levels for shocks after the initial defibrillation attempt. Studies comparing survival to hospital discharge with escalating vs fixed high energy level shocks are lacking. We compared survival to hospital discharge for 200 J escalating to 360 J vs fixed 360 J in patients with initial ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia in a post-hoc analysis of the Circulation Improving Resuscitation Care trial database.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Pre-shock rhythm, rhythm 5 s after shock, shock energy levels, termination of ventricular fibrillation/pulseless ventricular tachycardia (TOF), and survival to hospital discharge were recorded. Association between defibrillation strategy and survival to hospital discharge was investigated with multivariable logistic regression. The escalating energy group included 260 patients and 883 shocks vs 478 patients and 1736 shocks in the fixed-high energy group. There was no difference in survival to hospital discharge between escalating (70/255 patients, 28%) and fixed energy group (132/478 patients, 28%) (unadjusted OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.72-1.42 and adjusted OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.54-1.22, p = 0.32). First shock TOF was 86% in the escalating group compared to 83% in the fixed-high group, p = 0.27.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in survival to hospital discharge or the frequency of TOF between escalating energy and fixed-high energy group. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00597207.

摘要

简介

指南建议在初始除颤尝试后保持或增加电击能量。缺乏比较递增与固定高能级电击与存活率至出院的研究。我们在Circulation Improving Resuscitation Care 试验数据库的事后分析中比较了初始心室颤动/无脉性室性心动过速患者中 200J 递增至 360J 与固定 360J 的存活率至出院。

方法和结果

记录了预电击节律、电击后 5 秒的节律、电击能量水平、心室颤动/无脉性室性心动过速终止(TOF)和存活率至出院。使用多变量逻辑回归研究了除颤策略与存活率至出院的关系。递增能量组包括 260 例患者和 883 次电击,固定高能量组包括 478 例患者和 1736 次电击。递增能量组(70/255 例患者,28%)与固定高能组(132/478 例患者,28%)的存活率至出院无差异(未调整的 OR 1.00,95%CI 0.72-1.42 和调整后的 OR 0.81,95%CI 0.54-1.22,p=0.32)。递增组的首次电击 TOF 为 86%,而固定高组为 83%,p=0.27。

结论

在存活率至出院或 TOF 频率方面,递增能量组与固定高能级组之间无差异。临床试验.gov 标识符:NCT00597207。

相似文献

1
Survival to hospital discharge with biphasic fixed 360 joules versus 200 escalating to 360 joules defibrillation strategies in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac etiology.在疑似心源性心搏骤停的院外心脏骤停中,双相固定 360 焦耳与 200 焦耳递增至 360 焦耳除颤策略相比,存活至出院。
Resuscitation. 2019 Mar;136:112-118. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2019.01.020. Epub 2019 Jan 29.
2
BIPHASIC Trial: a randomized comparison of fixed lower versus escalating higher energy levels for defibrillation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.双相波试验:院外心脏骤停时固定较低能量与递增较高能量水平除颤的随机对照比较。
Circulation. 2007 Mar 27;115(12):1511-7. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.648204. Epub 2007 Mar 12.
3
DOuble SEquential External Defibrillation for Refractory Ventricular Fibrillation (DOSE VF): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.双次序贯体外除颤治疗难治性心室颤动(DOSE VF):一项随机对照试验的研究方案。
Trials. 2020 Nov 26;21(1):977. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04904-z.
4
Amiodarone, Lidocaine, or Placebo in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.胺碘酮、利多卡因或安慰剂治疗院外心脏骤停。
N Engl J Med. 2016 May 5;374(18):1711-22. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1514204. Epub 2016 Apr 4.
5
Rhythm profiles and survival after out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation cardiac arrest.院外室颤性心脏骤停后的节律特征和生存情况。
Resuscitation. 2018 Apr;125:22-27. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.01.037. Epub 2018 Feb 6.
6
Electrocardiographic evaluation of defibrillation shocks delivered to out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest patients.对院外心脏骤停患者进行除颤电击的心电图评估。
Resuscitation. 1999 Jul;41(2):133-44. doi: 10.1016/s0300-9572(99)00040-4.
7
Double sequential defibrillation therapy for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests: The London experience.院外心脏骤停的双重序贯除颤治疗:伦敦的经验。
Resuscitation. 2017 Aug;117:97-101. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.011. Epub 2017 Jun 15.
8
Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest rectilinear biphasic to monophasic damped sine defibrillation waveforms with advanced life support intervention trial (ORBIT).院外心脏骤停从直线双相波到单相波衰减正弦波除颤波形与高级生命支持干预试验(ORBIT)
Resuscitation. 2005 Aug;66(2):149-57. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2004.11.031.
9
Survival in ventricular fibrillation with emphasis on the number of defibrillations in relation to other factors at resuscitation.心室颤动时的生存情况,重点关注除颤次数与复苏时其他因素的关系。
Resuscitation. 2017 Apr;113:33-38. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.01.006. Epub 2017 Jan 18.
10
Pediatric defibrillation doses often fail to terminate prolonged out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation in children.儿科除颤剂量往往无法终止儿童长时间的院外心室颤动。
Resuscitation. 2005 Oct;67(1):63-7. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2005.04.018.

引用本文的文献

1
Fingerprint of Circulating Immunocytes as Biomarkers for the Prognosis of Brain Inflammation and Neuronal Injury after Cardiac Arrest.循环免疫细胞特征可作为心脏骤停后脑炎症和神经元损伤预后的生物标志物。
ACS Chem Neurosci. 2023 Dec 6;14(23):4115-4127. doi: 10.1021/acschemneuro.3c00397. Epub 2023 Nov 15.
2
Protocol for a cluster randomised controlled feasibility study of Prehospital Optimal Shock Energy for Defibrillation (POSED).院外除颤最佳电击能量(POSED)的整群随机对照可行性研究方案
Resusc Plus. 2022 Oct 6;12:100310. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2022.100310. eCollection 2022 Dec.
3
Effectiveness of alternative shock strategies for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review.
院外心脏骤停替代电击策略的有效性:一项系统评价。
Resusc Plus. 2022 May 11;10:100232. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2022.100232. eCollection 2022 Jun.
4
Comparison of Resuscitation Outcomes Between 2- or 3-Stacked Defibrillation Strategies With Minimally Interrupted Chest Compression and the Single Defibrillation Strategy: A Swine Cardiac Arrest Model.两种或三种叠瓦式除颤策略与最小中断胸部按压和单次除颤策略在复苏结果方面的比较:猪心搏骤停模型。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Sep 21;10(18):e021250. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.121.021250. Epub 2021 Sep 17.
5
[Adult advanced life support].[成人高级生命支持]
Notf Rett Med. 2021;24(4):406-446. doi: 10.1007/s10049-021-00893-x. Epub 2021 Jun 8.