[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: A recent out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) clinical trial showed improved survival to hospital discharge (HD) with favorable neurologic function for patients with cardiac arrest of cardiac origin treated with active compression decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) plus an impedance threshold device (ACD+ICD) versus standard (S) CPR. The current analysis examined whether treatment with ACD+ITD is more effective than standard (S-CPR) for all cardiac arrests of non-traumatic origin, regardless of the aetiology. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized, prospective, multicenter, intention-to-treat, OHCA clinical trial. Adults with presumed non-traumatic cardiac arrest were enrolled and followed for one year post arrest. The primary endpoint was survival to hospital discharge (HD) with favorable neurologic function (modified Rankin Scale score ≤3). RESULTS: Between October 2005 to July 2009, 2738 patients were enrolled (S-CPR=1335; ACD+ITD =1403). Survival to HD with favorable neurologic function was greater with ACD+ITD compared with S-CPR: 7.9% versus 5.7%, (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.04, 1.95, p=0.027). One-year survival was also greater: 7.9% versus 5.7%, (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.04, 1.96, p=0.026). Nearly all survivors in both groups had returned to their baseline neurological function by one year. Major adverse event rates were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of out-of-hospital non-traumatic cardiac arrest patients with ACD+ITD resulted in a significant increase in survival to hospital discharge with favorable neurological function when compared with S-CPR. A significant increase survival rates was observed up to one year after arrest in subjects treated with ACD+ITD, regardless of the etiology of the cardiac arrest.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with decreased intrathoracic pressure in the decompression phase can lead to improved haemodynamics compared with standard CPR. We aimed to assess effectiveness and safety of this intervention on survival with favourable neurological function after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
In our randomised trial of 46 emergency medical service agencies (serving 2·3 million people) in urban, suburban, and rural areas of the USA, we assessed outcomes for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest according to Utstein guidelines. We provisionally enrolled patients to receive standard CPR or active compression-decompression CPR with augmented negative intrathoracic pressure (via an impedance-threshold device) with a computer-generated block randomisation weekly schedule in a one-to-one ratio. Adults (presumed age or age ≥18 years) who had a non-traumatic arrest of presumed cardiac cause and met initial and final selection criteria received designated CPR and were included in the final analyses. The primary endpoint was survival to hospital discharge with favourable neurological function (modified Rankin scale score of ≤3). All investigators apart from initial rescuers were masked to treatment group assignment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00189423.
2470 provisionally enrolled patients were randomly allocated to treatment groups. 813 (68%) of 1201 patients assigned to the standard CPR group (controls) and 840 (66%) of 1269 assigned to intervention CPR received designated CPR and were included in the final analyses. 47 (6%) of 813 controls survived to hospital discharge with favourable neurological function compared with 75 (9%) of 840 patients in the intervention group (odds ratio 1·58, 95% CI 1·07-2·36; p=0·019]. 74 (9%) of 840 patients survived to 1 year in the intervention group compared with 48 (6%) of 813 controls (p=0·03), with equivalent cognitive skills, disability ratings, and emotional-psychological statuses in both groups. The overall major adverse event rate did not differ between groups, but more patients had pulmonary oedema in the intervention group (94 [11%] of 840) than did controls (62 [7%] of 813; p=0·015).
On the basis of our findings showing increased effectiveness and generalisability of the study intervention, active compression-decompression CPR with augmentation of negative intrathoracic pressure should be considered as an alternative to standard CPR to increase long-term survival after cardiac arrest.
US National Institutes of Health grant R44-HL065851-03, Advanced Circulatory Systems.
The Lancet 01/2011; 377(9762):301-11. · 39.06 Impact Factor