Cheema Huzaifa Ahmad, Shafiee Arman, Akhondi Amirhossein, Seighali Niloofar, Shahid Abia, Rehman Mohammad Ebad Ur, Almas Talal, Hadeed Sebastian, Nashwan Abdulqadir J, Ahmad Soban
Department of Cardiology, King Edward Medical University, Lahore, Pakistan.
Clinical Research Development Unit, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran.
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2023 Jul 5;47:101243. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2023.101243. eCollection 2023 Aug.
The appropriate oxygen target post-resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients is uncertain. We sought to compare lower versus higher oxygen targets in patients following OHCA.
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov until January 2023 to include all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated conservative vs. liberal oxygen therapy in OHCA patients. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 90 days while our secondary outcomes were the level of neuron-specific enolase (NSE) at 48 h, ICU length of stay (LOS), and favorable neurological outcome (the proportion of patients with Cerebral Performance Category scores of 1-2 at end of follow-up). We used RevMan 5.4 to pool risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs).
Nine trials with 1971 patients were included in our review. There was no significant difference between the conservative and liberal oxygen target groups regarding the rate of all-cause mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.13; I = 55%). There were no significant differences between the two groups when assessing favorable neurological outcome (RR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.10; I = 4%), NSE at 48 h (MD 0.04, 95% CI: -0.67 to 0.76; I = 0%), and ICU length of stay (MD -2.86 days, 95% CI: -8.00 to 2.29 days; I = 0%).
Conservative oxygen therapy did not decrease mortality, improve neurologic recovery, or decrease ICU LOS as compared to a liberal oxygen regimen. Future large-scale RCTs comparing homogenous oxygen targets are needed to confirm these findings.
院外心脏骤停(OHCA)患者复苏后的合适氧目标尚不确定。我们试图比较OHCA患者较低氧目标与较高氧目标的效果。
我们检索了MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane图书馆和ClinicalTrials.gov直至2023年1月,以纳入所有评估OHCA患者保守与宽松氧疗的随机对照试验(RCT)。我们的主要结局是90天时的全因死亡率,次要结局是48小时时神经元特异性烯醇化酶(NSE)水平、重症监护病房(ICU)住院时间(LOS)以及良好的神经功能结局(随访结束时脑功能分类评分1 - 2分的患者比例)。我们使用RevMan 5.4汇总风险比(RRs)和平均差(MDs)。
我们的综述纳入了9项试验共1971例患者。保守氧目标组与宽松氧目标组在全因死亡率方面无显著差异(RR 0.95,95%可信区间:0.80至1.13;I² = 55%)。在评估良好神经功能结局(RR 1.01,95%可信区间:0.92至1.10;I² = 4%)、48小时时的NSE(MD 0.04,95%可信区间: - 0.67至0.76;I² = 0%)以及ICU住院时间(MD - 2.86天,95%可信区间: - 8.00至2.29天;I² = 0%)时,两组之间均无显著差异。
与宽松氧疗方案相比,保守氧疗并未降低死亡率、改善神经功能恢复或缩短ICU住院时间。未来需要进行比较同质氧目标的大规模RCT来证实这些发现。