Improved Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (ECPR) Outcomes are Associated with a Restrictive Patient Selection Algorithm

Introduction: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a leading cause of mortality. Despite decades of intensive research and several technological advancements, survival rates remain low. The integration of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) has been recognized as a promising approach in refractory OHCA. However, evidence from recent randomized controlled trials yielded contradictory results, and the criteria for selecting eligible patients are still a subject of debate. Methods: This study is a retrospective analysis of refractory OHCA patients treated with ECPR. All adult patients who received ECPR, according to the hospital algorithm, from 2013 to 2021 were included. Two different algorithms were used during this period. A “permissive” algorithm was used from 2013 to mid-2016. Subsequently, a revised algorithm, more “restrictive”, based on international guidelines, was implemented from mid-2016 to 2021. Key differences between the two algorithms included reducing the no-flow time from less than three minutes to zero minutes (implying that the cardiac arrests must occur in the presence of a witness with immediate CPR initiation), reducing low-flow duration from 100 to 60 min, and lowering the age limit from 65 to 55 years. The aim of this study is to compare these two algorithms (permissive (1) and restrictive (2)) to determine if the use of a restrictive algorithm was associated with higher survival rates. Results: A total of 48 patients were included in this study, with 23 treated under Algorithm 1 and 25 under Algorithm 2. A significant difference in survival rate was observed in favor of the restrictive algorithm (9% vs. 68%, p < 0.05). Moreover, significant differences emerged between algorithms regarding the no-flow time (0 (0–5) vs. 0 (0–0) minutes, p < 0.05). Survivors had a significantly shorter no-flow and low-flow time (0 (0–0) vs. 0 (0–3) minutes, p < 0.01 and 40 (31–53) vs. 60 (45–80) minutes, p < 0.05), respectively. Conclusion: The present study emphasizes that a stricter selection of OHCA patients improves survival rates in ECPR.

[1]  J. Maessen,et al.  Early Extracorporeal CPR for Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest. , 2023, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  C. Terkelsen,et al.  Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A National Study on the Association Between Favorable Neurological Status and Biomarkers of Hypoperfusion, Inflammation, and Organ Injury. , 2022, European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care.

[3]  Takayuki Ogura,et al.  Low-Flow Duration and Outcomes of Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Adults With In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Nationwide Inpatient Database Study* , 2022, Critical care medicine.

[4]  M. Huptych,et al.  Effect of Intra-arrest Transport, Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, and Immediate Invasive Assessment and Treatment on Functional Neurologic Outcome in Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Randomized Clinical Trial. , 2022, JAMA.

[5]  C. Banfi,et al.  ECMO in Cardiac Arrest: A Narrative Review of the Literature , 2021, Journal of clinical medicine.

[6]  T. Aufderheide,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 , 2020, The Lancet.

[7]  J. Christenson,et al.  The relationship between no-flow interval and survival with favourable neurological outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: Implications for outcomes and ECPR eligibility. , 2020, Resuscitation.

[8]  Y. Gan,et al.  The global survival rate among adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2020, Critical Care.

[9]  Felix Achana,et al.  Extracorporeal Life Support for Refractory Cardiac Arrest: A 10-Year Comparative Analysis. , 2019, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[10]  É. Marijon,et al.  A Pre-Hospital Extracorporeal Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation (ECPR) strategy for treatment of refractory out hospital cardiac arrest: An observational study and propensity analysis. , 2017, Resuscitation.

[11]  C. Bode,et al.  Influence of low-flow time on survival after extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) , 2017, Critical Care.

[12]  O. Chavanon,et al.  Prognostic factors for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation recipients following out-of-hospital refractory cardiac arrest. A systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2017, Resuscitation.

[13]  T. Aufderheide,et al.  Abstract 17563: The Minnesota Resuscitation Consortium’s Advanced Perfusion and Reperfusion Cardiac Life Support Strategy for Out-of-Hospital Refractory Ventricular Fibrillation , 2016 .

[14]  Roger D. White,et al.  Part 7: Adult Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support: 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. , 2015, Circulation.

[15]  E. Sinz,et al.  Part 3: Ethical Issues: 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. , 2015, Circulation.

[16]  Yen-Wen Wu,et al.  Monitoring of serum lactate level during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adult in-hospital cardiac arrest , 2015, Critical Care.

[17]  J. Soar,et al.  European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2015: Section 3. Adult advanced life support. , 2015, Resuscitation.

[18]  K. Ejiri,et al.  Assessment of outcomes and differences between in- and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients treated with cardiopulmonary resuscitation using extracorporeal life support. , 2010, Resuscitation.

[19]  N. Chi,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 , 2008, The Lancet.

[20]  S. H. Ralston,et al.  Venous and arterial blood gases during and after cardiopulmonary resuscitation in dogs. , 1985, The American journal of emergency medicine.

[21]  Prashanthan Sanders,et al.  Epidemiology of Sudden Cardiac Death: Global and Regional Perspectives. , 2019, Heart, lung & circulation.

[22]  A. Kalangos,et al.  The LUCAS 2 chest compression device is not always efficient: an echographic confirmation. , 2015, Annals of emergency medicine.

[23]  B. Mourvillier,et al.  Predicting survival with good neurological recovery at hospital admission after successful resuscitation of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the OHCA score. , 2006, European heart journal.