OPEN IN READ APP
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Endovascular Versus External Targeted Temperature Management for Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Randomized, Controlled Study

Nicolas Deye, Alain Cariou, Patrick Girardie, Nicolas Pichon, Bruno Megarbane, Philippe Midez, Jean-Marie Tonnelier, Thierry Boulain, Hervé Outin, Arnaud Delahaye, Aurélie Cravoisy, Alain Mercat, Pascal Blanc, Charles Santré, Hervé Quintard, François Brivet, Julien Charpentier, Delphine Garrigue, Bruno Francois, Jean-Pierre Quenot, François Vincent, Pierre-Yves Gueugniaud, Jean-Paul Mira, Pierre Carli, Eric Vicaut, Frédéric J Baud
Circulation 2015 July 21, 132 (3): 182-93
26092673

BACKGROUND: Targeted temperature management is recommended after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Whether advanced internal cooling is superior to basic external cooling remains unknown. The aim of this multicenter, controlled trial was to evaluate the benefit of endovascular versus basic surface cooling.

METHODS AND RESULTS: Inclusion criteria were the following: age of 18 to 79 years, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest related to a presumed cardiac cause, time to return of spontaneous circulation <60 minutes, delay between return of spontaneous circulation and inclusion <240 minutes, and unconscious patient after return of spontaneous circulation and before the start of cooling. Exclusion criteria were terminal disease, pregnancy, known coagulopathy, uncontrolled bleeding, temperature on admission <30°C, in-hospital cardiac arrest, immediate need for extracorporeal life support or hemodialysis. Patients were randomized between 2 cooling strategies: endovascular femoral devices (Icy catheter, Coolgard, Zoll, formerly Alsius; n=203) or basic external cooling using fans, a homemade tent, and ice packs (n=197). The primary end point, that is, favorable outcome evaluated by survival without major neurological damage (Cerebral Performance Categories 1-2) at day 28, was not significantly different between groups (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.93-2.16; P=0.107). Improvement in favorable outcome at day 90 in favor of the endovascular group did not reach significance (odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-2.35; P=0.07). Time to target temperature (33°C) was significantly shorter and target hypothermia was more strictly maintained in the endovascular than in the surface group (P<0.001). Minor side effects directly related to the cooling method were observed more frequently in the endovascular group (P=0.009).

CONCLUSION: Despite better hypothermia induction and maintenance, endovascular cooling was not significantly superior to basic external cooling in terms of favorable outcome.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00392639.

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Available on the App Store

Available on the Play Store
Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
26092673
×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"