Prehospital intubation in cardiac arrest: The debate continues

Effects of advanced life support on patients who suffered cardiac arrest outside of hospital and were defibrillated

BACKGROUND

The effects and relative benefits of advanced airway management and epinephrine on patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) who were defibrillated are not well understood.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study. Using data of all out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases occurring between 2005 and 2013 in Japan, hierarchical logistic regression and conditional logistic regression along with time-dependent propensity matching were performed. Outcome measures were survival and minimal neurological impairment [cerebral performance category (CPC) 1 or 2] at 1month after the event.

RESULTS

We analyzed 37,873 cases that met the inclusion criteria. Among propensity-matched patients, advanced airway management and/or prehospital epinephrine use was related to decreased rates of 1-month survival (adjusted odds ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.97) and CPC (1, 2) (adjusted odds ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 0.66). Advanced airway management was related to decreased rates of 1-month survival (adjusted odds ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.81to 0.98) and CPC (1, 2) (adjusted odds ratio 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.64) in patients who did not receive epinephrine, whereas epinephrine use was not related to the outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

In defibrillated patients with OHCA, advanced airway management and/or epinephrine are related to reduced long-term survival, and advanced airway management is less beneficial than epinephrine. However, the proportion of patients with OHCA who responded to an initial shock was very low in the study subjects, and the external validity of our findings might be limited.

Does pre-hospital endotracheal intubation improve survival in adults with non-traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest? A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Endotracheal intubation (ETI) is currently considered superior to supraglottic airway devices (SGA) for survival and other outcomes among adults with non-traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We aimed to determine if the research supports this conclusion by conducting a systematic review.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, Scopus and CINAHL databases for studies published between January 1, 1980, and 30 April 30, 2013, which compared pre-hospital use of ETI with SGA for outcomes of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC); survival to hospital admission; survival to hospital discharge; and favorable neurological or functional status. We selected studies using pre-specified criteria. Included studies were independently screened for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We did not pool results because of study variability. Study outcomes were extracted and results presented as summed odds ratios with 95% CI.

RESULTS

We identified five eligible studies: one quasi-randomized controlled trial and four cohort studies, involving 303,348 patients in total. Only three of the five studies reported a higher proportion of ROSC with ETI versus SGA with no difference reported in the remaining two. None found significant differences between ETI and SGA for survival to hospital admission or discharge. One study reported better functional status at discharge for ETI versus SGA. Two studies reported no significant difference for favorable neurological status between ETI and SGA.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence does not conclusively support the superiority of ETI over SGA for multiple outcomes among adults with OHCA.

Airways in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the differences in survival for out-of-hospital advanced airway intervention (AAI) compared with basic airway intervention (BAI) in cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND

AAI is commonly utilized in cardiac arrest in the out-of-hospital setting as a means to secure the airway. Observational studies and clinical trials of AAI suggest that AAI is associated with worse outcomes in terms of survival. No controlled trials exist that compares AAI to BAI.

METHODS

We conducted a bias-adjusted meta-analysis on 17 observational studies. The outcomes were survival, short-term (return of spontaneous circulation and to hospital admission), and longer-term (to discharge, to one month survival). We undertook sensitivity analyses by analyzing patients separately: those who were 16 years and older, nontrauma only, and attempted versus successful AAI.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 388,878 patients. The short-term survival for AAI compared to BAI were overall OR 0.84(95% CI 0.62 to 1.13), for endotracheal intubation (ETI) OR 0.79 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.16), and for supraglottic airways (SGA) OR 0.59 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.89). Long-term survival for AAI were overall OR 0.49 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.65), for ETI OR 0.48 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.64), and for SGA OR 0.35 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.44). Sensitivity analyses shows that limiting analyses to adults, non-trauma victims, and instances where AAI was both attempted and successful did not alter results meaningfully. A third of all studies did not adjust for any other confounding factors that could impact on survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis shows decreased survival for AAIs used out-of-hospital in cardiac arrest, but are likely biased due to confounding, especially confounding by indication. A properly conducted prospective study or a controlled trial is urgently needed and are possible to do.