Survival for Nonshockable Cardiac Arrests Treated with Noninvasive Circulatory Adjuncts and Head/Thorax Elevation∗

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Cardiac arrests remain a leading cause of death worldwide. Most patients have nonshockable electrocardiographic presentations (asystole/pulseless electrical activity). Despite well-performed basic and advanced cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) interventions, patients with these presentations have always faced unlikely chances of survival. The primary objective was to determine if, in addition to conventional CPR (C-CPR), expeditious application of noninvasive circulation-enhancing adjuncts, and then gradual elevation of head and thorax, would be associated with higher likelihoods of survival following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) with nonshockable presentations. DESIGN: Using a prospective observational study design (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05588024), patient data from the national registry of emergency medical services (EMS) agencies deploying the CPR-enhancing adjuncts and automated head/thorax-up positioning (AHUP-CPR) were compared with counterpart reference control patient data derived from the two National Institutes of Health clinical trials that closely monitored quality CPR performance. Beyond unadjusted comparisons, propensity score matching and matching of time to EMS-initiated CPR (TCPR) were used to assemble cohorts with corresponding best-fit distributions of the well-established characteristics associated with OHCA outcomes. SETTING: North American 9-1-1 EMS agencies. PATIENTS: Adult nontraumatic OHCA patients receiving 9-1-1 responses. INTERVENTIONS: In addition to C-CPR, study patients received the CPR adjuncts and AHUP (all U.S. Food and Drug Administration-cleared). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The median TCPRfor both AHUP-CPR and C-CPR groups was 8 minutes. Median time to AHUP initiation was 11 minutes. Combining all patients irrespective of lengthier response intervals, the collective unadjusted likelihood of AHUP-CPR group survival to hospital discharge was 7.4% (28/380) vs. 3.1% (58/1,852) for C-CPR (odds ratio [OR], 2.46 [95% CI, 1.55-3.92]) and, after propensity score matching, 7.6% (27/353) vs. 2.8% (10/353) (OR, 2.84 [95% CI, 1.35-5.96]). Faster AHUP-CPR application markedly amplified odds of survival and neurologically favorable survival. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that, compared with C-CPR, there are strong associations between rapid AHUP-CPR treatment and greater likelihood of patient survival, as well as survival with good neurological function, in cases of nonshockable OHCA.