Extracorporeal life support during cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 19 September 2016
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Intensive Care Medicine
- Vol. 42 (12), 1922-1934
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-016-4536-8
Abstract
Purpose Veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is increasingly used in patients during cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock, to support both cardiac and pulmonary function. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies comparing mortality in patients treated with and without ECLS support in the setting of refractory cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. Methods We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the publisher subset of PubMed updated to December 2015. Thirteen studies were included of which nine included cardiac arrest patients (n = 3098) and four included patients with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction (n = 235). Data were pooled by a Mantel-Haenzel random effects model and heterogeneity was examined by the I 2 statistic. Results In cardiac arrest, the use of ECLS was associated with an absolute increase of 30 days survival of 13 % compared with patients in which ECLS was not used [95 % CI 6–20 %; p < 0.001; number needed to treat (NNT) 7.7] and a higher rate of favourable neurological outcome at 30 days (absolute risk difference 14 %; 95 % CI 7–20 %; p < 0.0001; NNT 7.1). Propensity matched analysis, including 5 studies and 438 patients (219 in both groups), showed similar results. In cardiogenic shock, ECLS showed a 33 % higher 30-day survival compared with IABP (95 % CI, 14–52 %; p < 0.001; NNT 13) but no difference when compared with TandemHeart/Impella (−3 %; 95 % CI −21 to 14 %; p = 0.70; NNH 33). Conclusions In cardiac arrest, the use of ECLS was associated with an increased survival rate as well as an increase in favourable neurological outcome. In the setting of cardiogenic shock there was an increased survival with ECLS compared with IABP.Keywords
This publication has 37 references indexed in Scilit:
- An observational study of extracorporeal CPR for in-hospital cardiac arrest secondary to myocardial infarctionEmergency Medicine Journal, 2013
- Two-year survival and neurological outcome of in-hospital cardiac arrest patients rescued by extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitationInternational Journal of Cardiology, 2013
- Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest of Cardiac OriginCritical Care Medicine, 2013
- Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiac Arrest?Circulation, 2012
- Percutaneous cardiac support devices for cardiogenic shock: current indications and recommendationsHeart, 2012
- Emergency circulatory support in refractory cardiogenic shock patients in remote institutions: a pilot study (the cardiac-RESCUE program)European Heart Journal, 2012
- Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in patients with inhospital cardiac arrest: A comparison with conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation*Critical Care Medicine, 2011
- Early extracorporeal membrane oxygenator-assisted primary percutaneous coronary intervention improved 30-day clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction complicated with profound cardiogenic shockCritical Care Medicine, 2010
- Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices vs. intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation for treatment of cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis of controlled trialsEuropean Heart Journal, 2009
- Thirty-Year Trends (1975 to 2005) in the Magnitude of, Management of, and Hospital Death Rates Associated With Cardiogenic Shock in Patients With Acute Myocardial InfarctionCirculation, 2009