Prognostic impact of no-flow time on 30-day neurological outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who received extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation

31Citations
Citations of this article
37Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: How the time sequence of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) procedures is related to clinical outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains unclear. This study examined the impact of the time interval from collapse to start of CPR (no-flow time, NF time) and the time interval from start of CPR to implementation of extracorporeal CPR (ECPR) (low-flow time, LF time) on neurological outcomes. Methods and Results: During the period from 2010 to 2015, we enrolled 85 patients who received ECPR. Fourteen patients (16.5%) showed favorable 30-day neurological recovery. NF time was shorter in the favorable neurological recovery group than in the unfavorable recovery group (1.4±3.0 vs. 5.2±5.8 min, P<0.05), though combined NF+LF times were similar in the 2 groups (50.1±13.2 vs. 55.1±14.8 min, P=0.25). Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that pupil diameter at arrival and NF time were independently associated with favorable neurological recovery. The optimal cut-off value of NF time to predict favorable neurological recovery was 5 min (area under curve: 0.70, P<0.05; sensitivity, 85.7%; specificity, 52.1%). Conclusions: The results suggest that NF time is a better predictor than NF+LF time for neurological outcomes in OHCA patients who received ECPR, and that start of CPR within 5 min after collapse is crucial for improving neurological outcomes followed by use of ECPR.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Murakami, N., Kokubu, N., Nagano, N., Nishida, J., Nishikawa, R., Nakata, J., … Miura, T. (2020). Prognostic impact of no-flow time on 30-day neurological outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who received extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Circulation Journal, 84(7), 1097–1104. https://doi.org/10.1253/circj.CJ-19-1177

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free