Article

Effect of Prehospital Induction of Mild Hypothermia on Survival and Neurological Status Among Adults With Cardiac Arrest A Randomized Clinical Trial

Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 30.39). 11/2013; 311(1). DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.282173
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT IMPORTANCE Hospital cooling improves outcome after cardiac arrest, but prehospital cooling immediately after return of spontaneous circulation may result in better outcomes. OBJECTIVE To determine whether prehospital cooling improves outcomes after resuscitation from cardiac arrest in patients with ventricular fibrillation (VF) and without VF. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A randomized clinical trial that assigned adults with prehospital cardiac arrest to standard care with or without prehospital cooling, accomplished by infusing up to 2 L of 4°C normal saline as soon as possible following return of spontaneous circulation. Adults in King County, Washington, with prehospital cardiac arrest and resuscitated by paramedics were eligible and 1359 patients (583 with VF and 776 without VF) were randomized between December 15, 2007, and December 7, 2012. Patient follow-up was completed by May 1, 2013. Nearly all of the patients resuscitated from VF and admitted to the hospital received hospital cooling regardless of their randomization. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomes were survival to hospital discharge and neurological status at discharge. RESULTS The intervention decreased mean core temperature by 1.20°C (95% CI, -1.33°C to -1.07°C) in patients with VF and by 1.30°C (95% CI, -1.40°C to -1.20°C) in patients without VF by hospital arrival and reduced the time to achieve a temperature of less than 34°C by about 1 hour compared with the control group. However, survival to hospital discharge was similar among the intervention and control groups among patients with VF (62.7% [95% CI, 57.0%-68.0%] vs 64.3% [95% CI, 58.6%-69.5%], respectively; P = .69) and among patients without VF (19.2% [95% CI, 15.6%-23.4%] vs 16.3% [95% CI, 12.9%-20.4%], respectively; P = .30). The intervention was also not associated with improved neurological status of full recovery or mild impairment at discharge for either patients with VF (57.5% [95% CI, 51.8%-63.1%] of cases had full recovery or mild impairment vs 61.9% [95% CI, 56.2%-67.2%] of controls; P = .69) or those without VF (14.4% [95% CI, 11.3%-18.2%] of cases vs 13.4% [95% CI,10.4%-17.2%] of controls; P = .30). Overall, the intervention group experienced rearrest in the field more than the control group (26% [95% CI, 22%-29%] vs 21% [95% CI, 18%-24%], respectively; P = .008), as well as increased diuretic use and pulmonary edema on first chest x-ray, which resolved within 24 hours after admission. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE Although use of prehospital cooling reduced core temperature by hospital arrival and reduced the time to reach a temperature of 34°C, it did not improve survival or neurological status among patients resuscitated from prehospital VF or those without VF. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00391469.

3 Followers
 · 
91 Views
  • 03/2015; 5(1):9-12. DOI:10.1089/ther.2015.1502
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mild therapeutic hypothermia (MTH) is being used after cardiac arrest for its expected improvement in neurological outcome. Safety of MTH concerning inducibility of malignant arrhythmias has not been satisfactorily demonstrated. This study compares inducibility of ventricular fibrillation (VF) before and after induction of MTH in a whole body swine model and evaluates possible interaction with changing potassium plasma levels. The extracorporeal cooling was introduced in fully anesthetized swine (n = 6) to provide MTH. Inducibility of VF was studied by programmed ventricular stimulation three times in each animal under the following: during normothermia (NT), after reaching the core temperature of 32°C (HT) and after another 60 minutes of stable hypothermia (HT60). Inducibility of VF, effective refractory period of the ventricles (ERP), QTc interval and potassium plasma levels were measured. Starting at normothermia of 38.7 (IQR 38.2; 39.8)°C, HT was achieved within 54 (39; 59) minutes and the core temperature was further maintained constant. Overall, the inducibility of VF was 100% (18/18 attempts) at NT, 83% (15/18) after reaching HT (P = 0.23) and 39% (7/18) at HT60 (P = 0.0001) using the same protocol. Similarly, ERP prolonged from 140 (130; 150) ms at NT to 206 (190; 220) ms when reaching HT (P < 0.001) and remained 206 (193; 220) ms at HT60. QTc interval was inversely proportional to the core temperature and extended from 376 (362; 395) at NT to 570 (545; 599) ms at HT. Potassium plasma level changed spontaneously: decreased during cooling from 4.1 (3.9; 4.8) to 3.7 (3.4; 4.1) mmol/L at HT (P < 0.01), then began to increase and returned to baseline level at HT60 (4.6 (4.4; 5.0) mmol/L, P = NS). According to our swine model, MTH does not increase the risk of VF induction by ventricular pacing in healthy hearts. Moreover, when combined with normokalemia, MTH exerts an antiarrhythmic effect despite prolonged QTc interval.
    Journal of Translational Medicine 12/2015; 13(1). DOI:10.1186/s12967-015-0429-9 · 3.99 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Various methods and devices have been described for cooling after cardiac arrest, but the ideal cooling method remains unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the neurological outcomes, efficacies and adverse events of surface and endovascular cooling techniques in cardiac arrest patients. We performed a multicenter, retrospective, registry-based study of adult cardiac arrest patients treated with therapeutic hypothermia presenting to 24 hospitals across South Korea from 2007 to 2012. We included patients who received therapeutic hypothermia using overall surface or endovascular cooling devices and compared the neurological outcomes, efficacies and adverse events of both cooling techniques. To adjust for differences in the baseline characteristics of each cooling method, we performed one-to-one matching by the propensity score. In total, 803 patients were included in the analysis. Of these patients, 559 underwent surface cooling, and the remaining 244 patients underwent endovascular cooling. In the unmatched cohort, a greater number of adverse events occurred in the surface cooling group. Surface cooling was significantly associated with a poor neurological outcome (cerebral performance category 3-5) at hospital discharge (p = 0.01). After propensity score matching, surface cooling was not associated with poor neurological outcome and hospital mortality [odds ratio (OR): 1.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.81-1.96, p = 0.31 and OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.55-1.30, p = 0.44, respectively]. Although surface cooling was associated with an increased incidence of adverse events (such as overcooling, rebound hyperthermia, rewarming related hypoglycemia and hypotension) compared with endovascular cooling, these complications were not associated with surface cooling using hydrogel pads. In the overall matched cohort, no significant difference in neurological outcomes and hospital morality was observed between the surface and endovascular cooling methods.
    Critical care (London, England) 12/2015; 19(1):819. DOI:10.1186/s13054-015-0819-7