A comparison of intravascular and surface cooling devices for targeted temperature management after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A nationwide observational study

院外心脏骤停后靶向体温管理中血管内冷却装置与体表冷却装置的比较:一项全国性观察研究

阅读:1

Abstract

This study aimed to compare prognostic difference between intravascular cooling devices (ICDs) and surface cooling devices (SCDs) in targeted temperature management (TTM) recipients.Adult TTM recipients using ICD or SCD during 2012 to 2016 were included in this nationwide observational study. The outcome was survival to hospital discharge and good neurological outcome at hospital discharge.Among 142,905 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients, 1159 patients (SCD, n = 998; ICD, n = 161) were investigated. After propensity score matching for all patients, 161 matched pairs of patients were available for analysis (SCD, n = 161; ICD, n = 161). We observed no significant differences in the survival to hospital discharge (SCD, n = 144 [89.4%] vs ICD, n = 150 [93.2%], P = .32) and the good neurological outcomes (SCD, n = 86 [53.4%] vs ICD, n = 91 [56.5%], P = .65). TTM recipients were categorized by age groups (elderly [age >65 years] vs nonelderly [age ≤65 years]) to compare prognostic difference between ICD and SCD according to the age groups. In the nonelderly group, the use of ICD or SCD was not a significant factor for survival to hospital discharge or good neurologic outcome. Whereas, the use of ICD was significantly associated with good neurological outcome (odds ratio, 3.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.19 - 13.23, P = .02) compared with SCD in the elderly group.There were no significant differences in the survival to hospital discharge and the good neurological outcomes between SCD and ICD recipients. However, the use of ICD might be more beneficial than SCD in elderly patients.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。