Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.
Department of Respiratory Medicine, Paracelsus Medical University, Nuremberg, Germany.
Artif Organs. 2023 May;47(5):806-816. doi: 10.1111/aor.14516. Epub 2023 Mar 16.
In adults with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, when conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) alone does not achieve return of spontaneous circulation, extracorporeal CPR is attempted to restore perfusion and improve outcomes. Considering the contrasting findings of recent studies, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to ascertain the effect of extracorporeal CPR on survival and neurological outcome.
Pubmed via MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to February 3, 2023, for randomized controlled trials comparing extracorporeal CPR versus conventional CPR in adults with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Survival with a favorable neurological outcome at the longest follow-up available was the primary outcome.
Among four randomized controlled trials included, extracorporeal CPR compared with conventional CPR increased survival with favorable neurological outcome at the longest follow-up available for all rhythms (59/220 [27%] vs. 39/213 [18%]; OR = 1.72; 95% CI, 1.09-2.70; p = 0.02; I = 26%; number needed to treat of 9), for initial shockable rhythms only (55/164 [34%] vs. 38/165 [23%]; OR = 1.90; 95% CI, 1.16-3.13; p = 0.01; I = 23%; number needed to treat of 7), and at hospital discharge or 30 days (55/220 [25%] vs. 34/212 [16%]; OR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.13-2.92; p = 0.01; I = 0.0%). Overall survival at the longest follow-up available was similar (61/220 [25%] vs. 34/212 [16%]; OR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.13-2.92; p = 0.59; I = 58%).
Extracorporeal CPR compared with conventional CPR increased survival with favorable neurological outcome in adults with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, especially when the initial rhythm was shockable.
PROSPERO CRD42023396482.
在难治性院外心脏骤停的成人患者中,当常规心肺复苏(CPR)单独无法恢复自主循环时,尝试使用体外 CPR 来恢复灌注并改善预后。鉴于最近研究结果的差异,我们对随机对照试验进行了荟萃分析,以确定体外 CPR 对生存和神经结局的影响。
通过 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库检索截至 2023 年 2 月 3 日的随机对照试验,比较难治性院外心脏骤停成人患者中体外 CPR 与常规 CPR。可获得的最长随访时的存活且具有良好神经结局是主要结局。
纳入的四项随机对照试验中,体外 CPR 与常规 CPR 相比,在所有节律(59/220[27%]与 39/213[18%];OR=1.72;95%CI,1.09-2.70;p=0.02;I²=26%;需要治疗的病例数为 9)、初始可电击节律(55/164[34%]与 38/165[23%];OR=1.90;95%CI,1.16-3.13;p=0.01;I²=23%;需要治疗的病例数为 7)和出院或 30 天(55/220[25%]与 34/212[16%];OR=1.82;95%CI,1.13-2.92;p=0.01;I²=0.0%)时,存活且具有良好神经结局的比例更高。可获得的最长随访时的总体生存率相似(61/220[25%]与 34/212[16%];OR=1.82;95%CI,1.13-2.92;p=0.59;I²=58%)。
与常规 CPR 相比,体外 CPR 可提高难治性院外心脏骤停成人患者的存活且具有良好神经结局,尤其是初始节律为可电击时。
PROSPERO CRD42023396482。