Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Sep 23:6:34208.
doi: 10.1038/srep34208.

Efficacy of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation compared to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation for adult cardiac arrest patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Chiwon Ahn  1 , Wonhee Kim  2 , Youngsuk Cho  2 , Kyu-Sun Choi  3 , Bo-Hyoung Jang  4 , Tae Ho Lim  1
Affiliations

Efficacy of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation compared to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation for adult cardiac arrest patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Chiwon Ahn et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

We performed a meta-analysis to compare the impact of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) to that of conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR) in adult patients who experience cardiac arrest of cardiac origin. A literature search was performed using criteria set forth in a predefined protocol. Report inclusion criteria were that ECPR was compared to CCPR in adult patients with cardiac arrest of cardiac origin, and that survival and neurological outcome data were available. Exclusion criteria were reports describing non-cardiac origin arrest, review articles, editorials, and nonhuman studies. The efficacies of ECPR and CCPR were compared in terms of survival and neurological outcome. A total of 38,160 patients from 7 studies were ultimately included. ECPR showed similar survival (odds ratio [OR] 2.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-11.20) and neurologic outcomes (OR 3.14, 95% CI 0.66-14.85) to CCPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients. For in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) patients, however, ECPR was associated with significantly better survival (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.44-3.98) and neurologic outcomes (OR 2.63, 95% CI 1.38-5.02) than CCPR. Hence, ECPR may be more effective than CCPR as an adjuvant therapy for survival and neurologic outcome in cardiac-origin IHCA patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flow chart of the study selection process for this meta-analysis.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Survival to discharge from hospital or to 28 days post-cardiac arrest.
CI: confidence interval, SE: standard error.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Good neurologic outcome (Cerebral Performance Category 1–2 or Glasgow Outcome Scale 1) to discharge from hospital, or for 28 or 90 days post-cardiac arrest.
CI: confidence interval, SE: standard error.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kouwenhoven W. B., Jude J. R. & Knickerbocker G. G. Closed-chest cardiac massage. JAMA. 173, 1064–1067 (1960). - PubMed
    1. Acosta P., Varon J., Sternbach G. L. & Baskett P. Resuscitation great. Kouwenhoven, Jude and Knickerbocker: The introduction of defibrillation and external chest compressions into modern resuscitation. Resuscitation 64, 139–143 (2005). - PubMed
    1. Chan P. S., McNally B., Tang F. & Kellermann A. Recent trends in survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the United States. Circulation 130, 1876–1882 (2014). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chen Y. S. et al. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation with assisted extracorporeal life-support versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults with in-hospital cardiac arrest: an observational study and propensity analysis. Lancet 372, 554–561 (2008). - PubMed
    1. Younger J. G. et al. Extracorporeal resuscitation of cardiac arrest. Acad. Emerg. Med. 6, 700–707 (1999). - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources