Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation for patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A retrospective propensity matching analysis

Abstract

Objective

The incidence of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is high. Though extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) has been considered a potential treatment for refractory cardiac arrest after failure of conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR), the benefit of ECPR in refractory OHCA remains uncertain.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, we included patients with refractory OHCA who visited the Emergency Department of the Aerospace Center Hospital between January 2018 and April 2023. We divided the patients into the ECPR Group and the CCPR Group. The primary endpoint of the study was the neurological function of the patients in both groups 3 months after the cardiac arrest. We used propensity score matching to reduce selection bias and identified factors associated with good neurological function when OHCA was treated with ECPR by performing univariate and multivariate correlation analyses on surviving patients with good neurological function in the ECPR group.

Results

During the study period, we enrolled 133 patients, consisting of 33 in the ECPR group and 100 in the CCPR group. The survival rate of patients with good neurological function at discharge was 18.2% (6/33 cases) in the ECPR group and 9% (9/100 cases) in the CCPR group, p = .20. Three months after discharge, the survival rate of patients with good neurological function was 15.2% (5/33 cases) in the ECPR group and 8% (8/100 cases) in the CCPR group, p = .31. Using propensity score matching, we identified 22 pairs of patients for further analysis. Among these, 3 months after discharge, the survival rate of patients with good neurological function was 13.6% (3/22 cases) in the ECPR group and 4.5% (1/22 cases) in the CCPR group, p = .61, and the survival rate at discharge was 18.2% (4/22 cases) in the ECPR group and 4.5% (1/22 cases) in the CCPR group, p = .34. The univariate analysis of patients with good neurological function in the ECPR group showed that time without perfusion, hypoperfusion time, and PCI treatment were associated factors affecting the prognosis of neurological function in patients, while multivariate analysis showed that hypoperfusion time was independently associated with good neurological function, with an OR (95% CI) of 1.06 (1.00–1.14) and p = .05.

Conclusion

Our findings suggested that ECPR failed to significantly improve neurological outcome in patients with refractory OHCA; however, the small sample size in this study may be insufficient to detect clinically relevant differences. In addition, hypoperfusion time may be a key predictive factor in identifying candidates for ECPR.

Keywords

conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation propensity matching analysis refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival rate with good neurological function

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Virani

Alonso

Benjamin

, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2020 update: a report from the American heart association. Circulation 2020; 141(9): e139–e596. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000757.

Dankiewicz

Cronberg

Lilja

, et al. Hypothermia versus normothermia after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med 2021; 384(24): 2283–2294. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2100591.

Otani

Sawano

Oyama

, et al. Resistance to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation in witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with shockable initial cardiac rhythm. J Cardiol 2016; 68(2): 161–167. DOI: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2015.08.020.

Grunau

Kime

Leroux

, et al. Association of intra-arrest transport vs continued on-scene resuscitation with survival to hospital discharge among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. JAMA 2020; 324(11): 1058–1067. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.14185.

Schober

Sterz

Herkner

, et al. Emergency extracorporeal life support and ongoing resuscitation: a retrospective comparison for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Emerg Med J 2017; 34(5): 277–281. DOI: 10.1136/emermed-2015-205232.

Ortega-Deballon

Hornby

Shemie

, et al. Extracorporeal resuscitation for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in adults: a systematic review of international practices and outcomes. Resuscitation 2016; 101: 12–20. DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.01.018.

Bartos

Frascone

Conterato

, et al. The Minnesota mobile extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation consortium for treatment of out-of-hospital refractory ventricular fibrillation: program description, performance, and outcomes. EClinicalMedicine 2020; 30: 1–30. Published 2020 Nov 13. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100632.

Ahn

Kim

Cho

, et al. Efficacy of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation compared to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation for adult cardiac arrest patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2016; 6: 34208. DOI: 10.1038/srep34208

Yannopoulos

Bartos

Raveendran

, et al. Advanced reperfusion strategies for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and refractory ventricular fibrillation (ARREST): a phase 2, single centre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2020; 396(10265): 1807–1816. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32338-2.

10.

Prohl

Röther

Kluge

, et al. Prediction of short-term and long-term outcomes after cardiac arrest: a prospective multivariate approach combining biochemical, clinical, electrophysiological, and neuropsychological investigations. Crit Care Med 2007; 35(5): 1230–1237. DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000261892.10559.85.

11.

Stub

Bernard

Pellegrino

, et al. Refractory cardiac arrest treated with mechanical CPR, hypothermia, ECMO and early reperfusion (the CHEER trial). Resuscitation 2015; 86: 88–94. DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.09.010.

12.

Lunz

Calabrò

Belliato

, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory cardiac arrest: a retrospective multicenter study. Intensive Care Med 2020; 46(5): 973–982. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-020-05926-6.

13.

Maekawa

Tanno

Hase

, et al. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of cardiac origin: a propensity-matched study and predictor analysis. Crit Care Med 2013; 41(5): 1186–1196. DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31827ca4c8.

14.

Choi

Kim

, et al. Extracorporeal life support and survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in a nationwide registry: a propensity score-matched analysis. Resuscitation 2016; 99: 26–32. DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.11.013.

15.

Suverein

Delnoij

TSR

Lorusso

, et al. Early extracorporeal CPR for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med 2023; 388(4): 299–309. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2204511.

16.

Yannopoulos

Bartos

Martin

, et al. Minnesota resuscitation consortium's advanced perfusion and reperfusion cardiac life support strategy for out-of-hospital refractory ventricular fibrillation. J Am Heart Assoc 2016; 5(6): e003732. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.116.003732

17.

Pozzi

Koffel

Armoiry

, et al. Extracorporeal life support for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: should we still fight for? A single-centre, 5-year experience. Int J Cardiol 2016; 204: 70–76. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.11.165.

18.

Bartos

Grunau

Carlson

, et al. Improved survival with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation despite progressive metabolic derangement associated with prolonged resuscitation. Circulation 2020; 141(11): 877–886.