TY - JOUR
T1 - Prehospital Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
AU - Kruit, Natalie
AU - Rattan, Nevidita
AU - Tian, David
AU - Dieleman, Stefan
AU - Burrell, Aidan
AU - Dennis, Mark
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr Dennis is supported by a Post-Doctoral Scholarship (Ref: 105849) from the National Heart Foundation of Australia. The National Heart Foundation had no role in the study design, collection, analysis, or interpretation of the data nor in writing of the data and submission of the article. All authors take responsibility for all aspects of the reliability and freedom from bias of the data presented and their discussed interpretation.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2023/5
Y1 - 2023/5
N2 - Objectives: To evaluate the available published evidence of the effects of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) in the prehospital setting on clinical outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis designed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews an Meta-Analyses guidelines. Setting: In the prehospital setting. Participants: All randomized control trials (RCTs) and observational trials using pre-hospital ECPR in adult patients (>17 years). Interventions: Prehospital ECPR. Measurements and Main Results: The study authors searched Medline, Embase, and PUBMED for all RCTs and observational trials. The studies were assessed for clinical, methodologic, and statistical heterogeneity. The primary outcome was survival at hospital discharge. The study outcomes were aggregated using random-effects meta-analysis of means or proportions as appropriate. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was used to assess the quality of evidence. Four studies were included, with a total of 222 patients receiving prehospital ECPR (mean age = 51 years [95% CI 44-57], 81% of patients were male (CI 74-87), and 60% patients had a cardiac cause for their arrest (95% CI 43-76). Overall survival at discharge was 23.4% (95% CI 15.5-33.7; I2 = 62%). The pooled low-flow time was 61.1 minutes (95% CI 45.2-77.0; I2 = 97%). The quality of evidence was assessed to be low, and the overall risk of bias was assessed to be serious, with confounding being the primary source of bias. Conclusion: No definitive conclusions can be made as to the efficacy of prehospital ECPR in refractory cardiac arrest. Higher quality evidence is required.
AB - Objectives: To evaluate the available published evidence of the effects of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) in the prehospital setting on clinical outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis designed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews an Meta-Analyses guidelines. Setting: In the prehospital setting. Participants: All randomized control trials (RCTs) and observational trials using pre-hospital ECPR in adult patients (>17 years). Interventions: Prehospital ECPR. Measurements and Main Results: The study authors searched Medline, Embase, and PUBMED for all RCTs and observational trials. The studies were assessed for clinical, methodologic, and statistical heterogeneity. The primary outcome was survival at hospital discharge. The study outcomes were aggregated using random-effects meta-analysis of means or proportions as appropriate. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was used to assess the quality of evidence. Four studies were included, with a total of 222 patients receiving prehospital ECPR (mean age = 51 years [95% CI 44-57], 81% of patients were male (CI 74-87), and 60% patients had a cardiac cause for their arrest (95% CI 43-76). Overall survival at discharge was 23.4% (95% CI 15.5-33.7; I2 = 62%). The pooled low-flow time was 61.1 minutes (95% CI 45.2-77.0; I2 = 97%). The quality of evidence was assessed to be low, and the overall risk of bias was assessed to be serious, with confounding being the primary source of bias. Conclusion: No definitive conclusions can be made as to the efficacy of prehospital ECPR in refractory cardiac arrest. Higher quality evidence is required.
KW - advanced cardiopulmonary resuscitation
KW - E-CPR
KW - extracorporeal life support
KW - OHCA
KW - pre-hospital
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85146462528&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1053/j.jvca.2022.12.004
DO - 10.1053/j.jvca.2022.12.004
M3 - Article
C2 - 36641307
AN - SCOPUS:85146462528
SN - 1053-0770
VL - 37
SP - 748
EP - 754
JO - Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia
JF - Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia
IS - 5
ER -