Schäfer Andreas, Bauersachs Johann, Akin Muharrem
Cardiac Arrest Centre, Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Cardiac Arrest Centre, Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Curr Probl Cardiol. 2023 Mar;48(3):101046. doi: 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2021.101046. Epub 2021 Nov 12.
For almost 20 years, therapeutic hypothermia has been a cornerstone of modern post-cardiac arrest care lowering mortality, and improvin neurologic outcome compared to conventional therapy. This was challenged by the first TTM-trial in 2013, which did not show a benefit for hypothermia at 33°C compared to controlled normothermia at 36°C. Now, the TTM2 trial showed no benefit of hypothermia compared to fever prevention alone. While TTM1 and TTM2 suggest that hypothermia might not be helpful, a deep dive into the trials reveals that this conclusion does not hold true. Here, we focus on patient selection, suboptimal application of hypothermia, interaction of standard sedation with hypothermia, high incidence of post-arrest fever, and withdrawal of life support based on per-protocol neurologic prognostication in the TTM2-trial. Of particular interest, contemporary trials and registries using intravascular cooling in TTM-like patients repeatedly reported much lower mortality rates than those described in both TTM1 and TTM2.
近20年来,治疗性低温一直是现代心脏骤停后护理的基石,与传统治疗相比,它可降低死亡率并改善神经学预后。2013年的首次目标温度管理(TTM)试验对这一点提出了挑战,该试验表明,与36°C的控制性正常体温相比,33°C的低温治疗并无益处。现在,TTM2试验表明,与单纯预防发热相比,低温治疗并无益处。虽然TTM1和TTM2表明低温治疗可能并无帮助,但深入研究这些试验会发现这一结论并不成立。在此,我们聚焦于TTM2试验中的患者选择、低温治疗的应用不充分、标准镇静与低温治疗的相互作用、心脏骤停后发热的高发生率以及基于方案规定的神经学预后评估而撤除生命支持等问题。特别值得关注的是,在类似TTM的患者中使用血管内降温的当代试验和登记研究反复报告的死亡率远低于TTM1和TTM2中所描述的死亡率。