Suppr超能文献

难治性心室颤动心脏骤停的双重(双相)序贯除颤:一项系统评价。

Double (dual) sequential defibrillation for refractory ventricular fibrillation cardiac arrest: A systematic review.

作者信息

Deakin Charles D, Morley Peter, Soar Jasmeet, Drennan Ian R

机构信息

University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK; South Central Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust, Otterbourne, UK.

Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

出版信息

Resuscitation. 2020 Oct;155:24-31. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.06.008. Epub 2020 Jun 16.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac arrests associated with shockable rhythms such as ventricular fibrillation or pulseless VT (VF/pVT) are associated with improved outcomes from cardiac arrest. The more defibrillation attempts required to terminate VF/pVT, the lower the survival. Double sequential defibrillation (DSD) has been used for refractory VF/pVT cardiac arrest despite limited evidence examining this practice. We performed a systematic review to summarize the evidence related to the use of DSD during cardiac arrest.

METHODS

This review was performed according to PRISMA and registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42020152575). We searched Embase, Pubmed, and the Cochrane library from inception to 28 February 2020. We included adult patients with VF/pVT in any setting. We excluded case studies, case series with less than five patients, conference abstracts, simulation studies, and protocols for clinical trials. We predefined our outcomes of interest as neurological outcome, survival to hospital discharge, survival to hospital admission, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and termination of VF/pVT. Risk of bias was examined using ROBINS-I or ROB-2 and certainty of studies were reported according to GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Overall, 314 studies were identified during the initial search. One hundred and thirty studies were screened during title and abstract stage and 10 studies underwent full manuscript screening, nine included in the final analysis. Included studies were cohort studies (n = 4), case series (n = 3), case-control study (n = 1) and a prospective pilot clinical trial (n-1). All studies were considered to have serious or critical risk of bias and no meta-analysis was performed. Overall, we did not find any differences in terms of neurological outcome, survival to hospital discharge, survival to hospital admission, ROSC, or termination of VF/pVT between DSD and a standard defibrillation strategy.

CONCLUSION

The use of double sequential defibrillation was not associated with improved outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, however the current literature has a number of limitations to interpretation. Further high-quality evidence is needed to answer this important question.

摘要

引言

与可电击心律相关的心脏骤停,如心室颤动或无脉性室性心动过速(VF/pVT),与心脏骤停后改善的预后相关。终止VF/pVT所需的除颤尝试次数越多,生存率越低。尽管研究这种做法的证据有限,但双序贯除颤(DSD)已用于难治性VF/pVT心脏骤停。我们进行了一项系统评价,以总结与心脏骤停期间使用DSD相关的证据。

方法

本评价按照PRISMA进行,并在PROSPERO上注册(ID:CRD42020152575)。我们检索了从创刊到2020年2月28日的Embase、Pubmed和Cochrane图书馆。我们纳入了任何环境下患有VF/pVT的成年患者。我们排除了病例研究、患者少于5例的病例系列、会议摘要、模拟研究和临床试验方案。我们将感兴趣的结局预先定义为神经学结局、出院生存率、入院生存率、自主循环恢复(ROSC)以及VF/pVT的终止。使用ROBINS-I或ROB-2检查偏倚风险,并根据GRADE方法报告研究的确定性。

结果

总体而言,在初步检索中识别出314项研究。在标题和摘要阶段筛选了130项研究,10项研究进行了全文筛选,9项纳入最终分析。纳入的研究包括队列研究(n = 4)、病例系列(n = 3)、病例对照研究(n = 1)和一项前瞻性试点临床试验(n = 1)。所有研究均被认为存在严重或关键的偏倚风险,未进行荟萃分析。总体而言,我们未发现DSD与标准除颤策略在神经学结局、出院生存率、入院生存率、ROSC或VF/pVT终止方面存在任何差异。

结论

双序贯除颤的使用与院外心脏骤停的预后改善无关,然而目前的文献在解释方面存在一些局限性。需要进一步的高质量证据来回答这个重要问题。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验