Sunnybrook Centre for Prehospital Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 77 Brown's Line, Suite 100, Toronto, Ontario, M8W 3S2, Canada.
Sunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Trials. 2020 Nov 26;21(1):977. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04904-z.
Despite high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), early defibrillation, and antiarrhythmic medications, some patients remain in refractory ventricular fibrillation (VF) during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. These patients have worse outcomes compared to patients who respond to initial treatment. Double sequential external defibrillation (DSED) and vector change (VC) defibrillation have been proposed as viable options for patients in refractory VF. However, the evidence supporting the use of novel defibrillation strategies is inconclusive. The objective of this study is to compare two novel therapeutic defibrillation strategies (DSED and VC) against standard defibrillation for patients with treatment refractory VF or pulseless ventricular tachycardia (pVT) during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
Among adult (≥ 18 years) patients presenting in refractory VF or pulseless ventricular tachycardia (pVT) during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, does DSED or VC defibrillation result in greater rates of survival to hospital discharge compared to standard defibrillation?
This will be a three-arm, cluster randomized trial with repeated crossover conducted in six regions of Ontario, Canada (Peel, Halton, Toronto, Simcoe, London, and Ottawa), over 3 years. All adult (≥ 18 years) patients presenting in refractory VF (defined as patients presenting in VF/pVT and remaining in VF/pVT after three consecutive standard defibrillation attempts during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac etiology will be treated by one of three strategies: (1) continued resuscitation using standard defibrillation, (2) resuscitation involving DSED, or (3) resuscitation involving VC (change of defibrillation pads from anterior-lateral to anterior-posterior pad position) defibrillation. The primary outcome will be survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes will include return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), VF termination after the first interventional shock, VF termination inclusive of all interventional shocks, and number of defibrillation attempts to obtain ROSC. We will also perform an a priori subgroup analysis comparing rates of survival for those who receive "early DSED," or first DSED shock is shock 4-6, to those who receive "late DSED," or first DSED shock is shock 7 or later.
A well-designed randomized controlled trial employing a standardized approach to alternative defibrillation strategies early in the treatment of refractory VF is urgently required to determine if the treatments of DSED or VC defibrillation impact clinical outcomes.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04080986 . Registered on 6 September 2019.
尽管心肺复苏(CPR)质量高、早期除颤和抗心律失常药物治疗,但一些院外心脏骤停患者仍处于难治性心室颤动(VF)中。与初始治疗有反应的患者相比,这些患者的预后更差。双序贯体外除颤(DSED)和向量变换(VC)除颤已被提议作为难治性 VF 患者的可行选择。然而,支持新型除颤策略的证据尚无定论。本研究的目的是比较两种新型治疗性除颤策略(DSED 和 VC)与标准除颤在院外心脏骤停中治疗难治性 VF 或无脉性室性心动过速(pVT)患者的效果。
在院外心脏骤停中出现难治性 VF 或无脉性室性心动过速(pVT)的成年(≥18 岁)患者中,与标准除颤相比,DSED 或 VC 除颤是否能提高存活率至出院?
这将是一项在加拿大安大略省六个地区(皮尔、哈尔顿、多伦多、锡姆科、伦敦和渥太华)进行的为期 3 年的三臂、集群随机试验,采用重复交叉设计。所有成年(≥18 岁)患者在院外心脏骤停中出现难治性 VF(定义为在心脏原因假定的院外心脏骤停中,连续三次标准除颤后仍处于 VF/pVT),将接受以下三种策略之一的治疗:(1)继续使用标准除颤进行复苏;(2)DSED 复苏;或(3)VC(除颤垫从前外侧位置改为前-后位置)除颤复苏。主要结局将是存活至出院。次要结局将包括自主循环恢复(ROSC)、首次介入性电击后的 VF 终止、所有介入性电击后的 VF 终止以及获得 ROSC 的除颤次数。我们还将进行一项事先亚组分析,比较接受“早期 DSED”(首次 DSED 电击是电击 4-6)和接受“晚期 DSED”(首次 DSED 电击是电击 7 或之后)的患者的存活率。
迫切需要一项精心设计的随机对照试验,采用标准化方法早期治疗难治性 VF 的替代除颤策略,以确定 DSED 或 VC 除颤治疗是否影响临床结局。
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04080986。2019 年 9 月 6 日注册。