Association between low pH and unfavorable neurological outcome among out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients treated by extracorporeal CPR: a prospective observational cohort study in Japan.
Blood gas assessment
Extracorporeal life support
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)
Percutaneous cardiopulmonary support (PCPS)
Ventricular fibrillation
Journal
Journal of intensive care
ISSN: 2052-0492
Titre abrégé: J Intensive Care
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101627304
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
04
02
2020
accepted:
22
04
2020
entrez:
20
5
2020
pubmed:
20
5
2020
medline:
20
5
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
We aimed to identify the association of pH value in blood gas assessment with neurological outcome among out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients treated by extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). We retrospectively analyzed the database of a multicenter prospective observational study on OHCA patients in Osaka prefecture, Japan (CRITICAL study), from July 1, 2012 to December 31, 2016. We included adult OHCA patients treated by ECPR. Patients with OHCA from external causes such as trauma were excluded. We conducted logistic regression analysis to identify the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the pH value for 1 month favorable neurological outcome adjusted for potential confounders including sex, age, witnessed by bystander, CPR by bystander, pre-hospital initial cardiac rhythm, and cardiac rhythm on hospital arrival. Among the 9822 patients in the database, 260 patients were finally included in the analysis. The three groups were Tertile 1: pH ≥ 7.030, Tertile 2: pH 6.875-7.029, and Tertile 3: pH < 6.875. The adjusted OR of Tertiles 2 and 3 compared with Tertile 1 for 1 month favorable neurological outcome were 0.26 (95% CI 0.10-0.63) and 0.24 (95% CI 0.09-0.61), respectively. This multi-institutional observational study showed that low pH value (< 7.03) before the implementation of ECPR was associated with 1 month unfavorable neurological outcome among OHCA patients treated with ECPR. It may be helpful to consider the candidate for ECPR.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
We aimed to identify the association of pH value in blood gas assessment with neurological outcome among out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients treated by extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR).
METHODS
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed the database of a multicenter prospective observational study on OHCA patients in Osaka prefecture, Japan (CRITICAL study), from July 1, 2012 to December 31, 2016. We included adult OHCA patients treated by ECPR. Patients with OHCA from external causes such as trauma were excluded. We conducted logistic regression analysis to identify the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the pH value for 1 month favorable neurological outcome adjusted for potential confounders including sex, age, witnessed by bystander, CPR by bystander, pre-hospital initial cardiac rhythm, and cardiac rhythm on hospital arrival.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Among the 9822 patients in the database, 260 patients were finally included in the analysis. The three groups were Tertile 1: pH ≥ 7.030, Tertile 2: pH 6.875-7.029, and Tertile 3: pH < 6.875. The adjusted OR of Tertiles 2 and 3 compared with Tertile 1 for 1 month favorable neurological outcome were 0.26 (95% CI 0.10-0.63) and 0.24 (95% CI 0.09-0.61), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This multi-institutional observational study showed that low pH value (< 7.03) before the implementation of ECPR was associated with 1 month unfavorable neurological outcome among OHCA patients treated with ECPR. It may be helpful to consider the candidate for ECPR.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32426140
doi: 10.1186/s40560-020-00451-6
pii: 451
pmc: PMC7212572
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
34Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2020.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Références
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Aug 29;70(9):1109-1117
pubmed: 28838358
JAMA Neurol. 2018 Jul 1;75(7):818-826
pubmed: 29554187
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 10;12(3):e0173239
pubmed: 28282398
Circulation. 2015 Nov 3;132(18 Suppl 2):S436-43
pubmed: 26472994
Acute Med Surg. 2017 Jan;4(1):25-30
pubmed: 28163922
J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 Jan 8;8(1):e011189
pubmed: 30590977
Am J Emerg Med. 1985 Mar;3(2):120-4
pubmed: 3970767
Resuscitation. 2019 Jun;139:49-56
pubmed: 30922936
Cleve Clin J Med. 2015 Sep;82(9):615-24
pubmed: 26366959
Int J Epidemiol. 2019 Aug 1;48(4):1294-1304
pubmed: 30879056
Crit Care. 2017 Dec 21;21(1):322
pubmed: 29268775
Resuscitation. 2019 Feb;135:212-220
pubmed: 30452939
Ann Intensive Care. 2018 May 8;8(1):62
pubmed: 29740777
Emerg Med J. 2007 Aug;24(8):569-71
pubmed: 17652681
Resuscitation. 2017 Feb;111:116-126
pubmed: 27697606
Ann Intern Med. 2007 Oct 16;147(8):573-7
pubmed: 17938396
Resuscitation. 2014 Jun;85(6):762-8
pubmed: 24530251
Resuscitation. 2007 Jun;73(3):394-9
pubmed: 17289244
Circulation. 2004 Nov 23;110(21):3385-97
pubmed: 15557386
Resuscitation. 2016 Apr;101:12-20
pubmed: 26836946
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Nov;97(48):e13257
pubmed: 30508912
Resuscitation. 2018 Nov;132:73-77
pubmed: 30142399
J Intensive Care. 2016 Jan 26;4:10
pubmed: 26819708
Resuscitation. 2015 Oct;95:148-201
pubmed: 26477412
N Engl J Med. 2016 Oct 27;375(17):1649-1659
pubmed: 27783922
Emerg Med J. 2001 Sep;18(5):340-2
pubmed: 11559602
Resuscitation. 2017 Apr;113:e25
pubmed: 28185922
J Emerg Med. 2013 Jul;45(1):57-64
pubmed: 23623286
N Engl J Med. 2010 Mar 18;362(11):994-1004
pubmed: 20237345
BMJ. 2013 Jan 16;346:f16
pubmed: 23325867
Resuscitation. 2019 Jul;140:74-80
pubmed: 31108120