Sekhon Mypinder S, Taccone Fabio Silvio, Skrifvars Markus B, Griesdale Donald E, Elmer Jonathan, Velly Lionel, Robba Chiara
Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Division of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Intensive Care Med. 2025 Jul 16. doi: 10.1007/s00134-025-08012-x.
Post-cardiac arrest brain injury (PCABI) emanates from the injurious pathophysiologic sequelae that take place during and after resuscitation from cardiac arrest. Regrettably, identification of efficacious management strategies to mitigate PCABI has been disappointing with numerous well-conducted randomized control trials yielding neutral results. The reasons for this observation are likely multifactorial, however, increasingly patient and disease-specific heterogeneity is recognized as a crucial factor in clinical decision-making. Traditionally, PCABI has been stratified based upon simple historical characteristics (e.g. location of cardiac arrest, initial rhythm, witnessed vs. unwitnessed) that inadequately reflect in vivo PCABI severity or responses to clinical interventions within individual patients. It is therefore increasingly clear that this approach to PCABI is insufficient. In other syndromes, such as sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome, attempts to identify early "phenotypes" of patients reflect growing recognition of considerable between-patient heterogeneity in the disease mechanisms and response to therapeutic interventions. A similar approach should be taken with PCABI. In this review, we described the clinical heterogeneity and phenotypes of PCABI as related to the underlying pathophysiology, selective anatomical vulnerability and electrographic patterns. The overarching aim of the review is the propose a shift to expeditious phenotyping of PCABI severity that focuses on assessing in vivo severity and patterns of injury that could be used for future targeted therapies. We will also discuss potential causes of heterogeneous clinical responses to interventions and highlight future research areas for PCABI that focus on phenotyping and incorporating these considerations into clinical trials.
心脏骤停后脑损伤(PCABI)源于心脏骤停复苏期间及之后发生的有害病理生理后遗症。遗憾的是,众多精心开展的随机对照试验均得出中性结果,在确定减轻PCABI的有效管理策略方面令人失望。造成这种情况的原因可能是多方面的,然而,患者和疾病特异性异质性日益被视为临床决策中的关键因素。传统上,PCABI是根据简单的病史特征(如心脏骤停的位置、初始心律、是否有目击者)进行分层的,这些特征并不能充分反映个体患者体内PCABI的严重程度或对临床干预的反应。因此,越来越明显的是,这种PCABI的处理方法是不够的。在其他综合征中,如脓毒症或急性呼吸窘迫综合征,识别患者早期“表型”的尝试反映出人们越来越认识到疾病机制和对治疗干预反应方面患者之间存在相当大的异质性。对于PCABI也应采取类似的方法。在本综述中,我们描述了与潜在病理生理学、选择性解剖易损性和脑电图模式相关的PCABI的临床异质性和表型。本综述的总体目标是提议转向对PCABI严重程度进行快速表型分析,重点是评估体内严重程度和损伤模式,以便用于未来的靶向治疗。我们还将讨论干预措施临床反应异质性的潜在原因,并强调PCABI未来的研究领域,这些领域侧重于表型分析并将这些考虑因素纳入临床试验。