Effect of intra-arrest transport, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation and immediate invasive assessment in refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a long-term follow-up of the Prague OHCA trial.

BACKGROUND: Randomized data evaluating the impact of the extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) approach on long-term clinical outcomes in patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) are lacking. The objective of this follow-up study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes of the ECPR-based versus CCPR approach. METHODS: The Prague OHCA trial was a single-center, randomized, open-label trial. Patients with witnessed refractory OHCA of presumed cardiac origin, without return of spontaneous circulation, were randomized during ongoing resuscitation on scene to conventional CPR (CCPR) or an ECPR-based approach (intra-arrest transport, ECPR if ROSC is not achieved prehospital and immediate invasive assessment). RESULTS: From March 2013 to October 2020, 264 patients were randomized during ongoing resuscitation on scene, and 256 patients were enrolled. Long-term follow-up was performed 5.3 (interquartile range 3.8-7.2) years after initial randomization and was completed in 255 of 256 patients (99.6%). In total, 34/123 (27.6%) patients in the ECPR-based group and 26/132 (19.7%) in the CCPR group were alive (log-rank P = 0.01). There were no significant differences between the treatment groups in the neurological outcome, survival after hospital discharge, risk of hospitalization, major cardiovascular events and quality of life. Of long-term survivors, 1/34 (2.9%) in the ECPR-based arm and 1/26 (3.8%) in the CCPR arm had poor neurological outcome (both patients had a cerebral performance category score of 3). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with refractory OHCA, the ECPR-based approach significantly improved long-term survival. There were no differences in the neurological outcome, major cardiovascular events and quality of life between the groups, but the trial was possibly underpowered to detect a clinically relevant difference in these outcomes. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01511666, Registered 19 January 2012.

Effect of Intra-arrest Transport, Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, and Immediate Invasive Assessment and Treatment on Functional Neurologic Outcome in Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) has poor outcome. Whether intra-arrest transport, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR), and immediate invasive assessment and treatment (invasive strategy) is beneficial in this setting remains uncertain. Objective: To determine whether an early invasive approach in adults with refractory OHCA improves neurologically favorable survival. Design, Setting, and Participants: Single-center, randomized clinical trial in Prague, Czech Republic, of adults with a witnessed OHCA of presumed cardiac origin without return of spontaneous circulation. A total of 256 participants, of a planned sample size of 285, were enrolled between March 2013 and October 2020. Patients were observed until death or day 180 (last patient follow-up ended on March 30, 2021). Interventions: In the invasive strategy group (n = 124), mechanical compression was initiated, followed by intra-arrest transport to a cardiac center for ECPR and immediate invasive assessment and treatment. Regular advanced cardiac life support was continued on-site in the standard strategy group (n = 132). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was survival with a good neurologic outcome (defined as Cerebral Performance Category [CPC] 1-2) at 180 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes included neurologic recovery at 30 days (defined as CPC 1-2 at any time within the first 30 days) and cardiac recovery at 30 days (defined as no need for pharmacological or mechanical cardiac support for at least 24 hours). Results: The trial was stopped at the recommendation of the data and safety monitoring board when prespecified criteria for futility were met. Among 256 patients (median age, 58 years; 44 [17%] women), 256 (100%) completed the trial. In the main analysis, 39 patients (31.5%) in the invasive strategy group and 29 (22.0%) in the standard strategy group survived to 180 days with good neurologic outcome (odds ratio [OR], 1.63 [95% CI, 0.93 to 2.85]; difference, 9.5% [95% CI, -1.3% to 20.1%]; P = .09). At 30 days, neurologic recovery had occurred in 38 patients (30.6%) in the invasive strategy group and in 24 (18.2%) in the standard strategy group (OR, 1.99 [95% CI, 1.11 to 3.57]; difference, 12.4% [95% CI, 1.9% to 22.7%]; P = .02), and cardiac recovery had occurred in 54 (43.5%) and 45 (34.1%) patients, respectively (OR, 1.49 [95% CI, 0.91 to 2.47]; difference, 9.4% [95% CI, -2.5% to 21%]; P = .12). Bleeding occurred more frequently in the invasive strategy vs standard strategy group (31% vs 15%, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the bundle of early intra-arrest transport, ECPR, and invasive assessment and treatment did not significantly improve survival with neurologically favorable outcome at 180 days compared with standard resuscitation. However, the trial was possibly underpowered to detect a clinically relevant difference. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01511666.

Hyperinvasive approach to out-of hospital cardiac arrest using mechanical chest compression device, prehospital intraarrest cooling, extracorporeal life support and early invasive assessment compared to standard of care. A randomized parallel groups comparative study proposal. "Prague OHCA study".

BACKGROUND: Out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) has a poor outcome. Recent non-randomized studies of ECLS (extracorporeal life support) in OHCA suggested further prospective multicenter studies to define population that would benefit from ECLS. We aim to perform a prospective randomized study comparing prehospital intraarrest hypothermia combined with mechanical chest compression device, intrahospital ECLS and early invasive investigation and treatment in all patients with OHCA of presumed cardiac origin compared to a standard of care. METHODS: This paper describes methodology and design of the proposed trial. Patients with witnessed OHCA without ROSC (return of spontaneous circulation) after a minimum of 5 minutes of ACLS (advanced cardiac life support) by emergency medical service (EMS) team and after performance of all initial procedures (defibrillation, airway management, intravenous access establishment) will be randomized to standard vs. hyperinvasive arm. In hyperinvasive arm, mechanical compression device together with intranasal evaporative cooling will be instituted and patients will be transferred directly to cardiac center under ongoing CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation). After admission, ECLS inclusion/exclusion criteria will be evaluated and if achieved, veno-arterial ECLS will be started. Invasive investigation and standard post resuscitation care will follow. Patients in standard arm will be managed on scene. When ROSC achieved, they will be transferred to cardiac center and further treated as per recent guidelines. PRIMARY OUTCOME: 6 months survival with good neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Category 1-2). Secondary outcomes will include 30 day neurological and cardiac recovery. DISCUSSION: Authors introduce and offer a protocol of a proposed randomized study comparing a combined "hyperinvasive approach" to a standard of care in refractory OHCA. The protocol is opened for sharing by other cardiac centers with available ECLS and cathlab teams trained to admit patients with refractory cardiac arrest under ongoing CPR. A prove of concept study will be started soon. The aim of the authors is to establish a net of centers for a multicenter trial initiation in future. ETHICS AND REGISTRATION: The protocol has been approved by an Institutional Review Board, will be supported by a research grant from Internal Grant Agency of the Ministry of Health, Czech Republic NT 13225-4/2012 and has been registered under ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01511666.