Does targeted temperature management at 33 °C improve outcome after cardiac arrest?

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Current Opinion in Critical Care Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-21 DOI:10.1097/MCC.0000000000001214
Markus B Skrifvars, Benjamin S Abella
{"title":"Does targeted temperature management at 33 °C improve outcome after cardiac arrest?","authors":"Markus B Skrifvars, Benjamin S Abella","doi":"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Following successful resuscitation from cardiac arrest, a complex set of pathophysiologic processes are acutely triggered, leading to substantial morbidity and mortality. Postarrest management remains a major challenge to critical care providers, with few proven therapeutic strategies to improve outcomes. One therapy that has received substantial focus is the intentional lowering of core body temperature for a discrete period of time following resuscitation. In this review, we will discuss the key trials and other evidence surrounding TTM and present opposing arguments, one 'against' the use of postarrest TTM and another 'for' the use of this therapeutic approach.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Targeted temperature management, has been a topic of enormous controversy, as recently a number of clinical trials show conflicting results on the effect of TTM. Fundamental questions, about the dosing of TTM (e.g. use at 33 °C versus higher temperatures), or the use of TTM at all (as opposed to passive fever avoidance), remain active topics of global discussion. Systematic reviews on this topic also show variable results.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>There are several arguments for and against the use of TTM targeting 33 °C for alleviating brain injury after cardiac arrest. More studies are on the way that will hopefully provide more robust evidence and hopefully allow for consensus on this important topic.</p>","PeriodicalId":10851,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","volume":" ","pages":"618-623"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11540270/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001214","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: Following successful resuscitation from cardiac arrest, a complex set of pathophysiologic processes are acutely triggered, leading to substantial morbidity and mortality. Postarrest management remains a major challenge to critical care providers, with few proven therapeutic strategies to improve outcomes. One therapy that has received substantial focus is the intentional lowering of core body temperature for a discrete period of time following resuscitation. In this review, we will discuss the key trials and other evidence surrounding TTM and present opposing arguments, one 'against' the use of postarrest TTM and another 'for' the use of this therapeutic approach.

Recent findings: Targeted temperature management, has been a topic of enormous controversy, as recently a number of clinical trials show conflicting results on the effect of TTM. Fundamental questions, about the dosing of TTM (e.g. use at 33 °C versus higher temperatures), or the use of TTM at all (as opposed to passive fever avoidance), remain active topics of global discussion. Systematic reviews on this topic also show variable results.

Summary: There are several arguments for and against the use of TTM targeting 33 °C for alleviating brain injury after cardiac arrest. More studies are on the way that will hopefully provide more robust evidence and hopefully allow for consensus on this important topic.

33 °C的目标体温管理能否改善心脏骤停后的预后?
回顾的目的:心脏骤停复苏成功后,一系列复杂的病理生理过程会被迅速触发,导致大量的发病率和死亡率。心脏骤停后的管理仍然是重症监护提供者面临的一大挑战,几乎没有经过验证的治疗策略可以改善预后。其中一种受到广泛关注的疗法是在复苏后的一段时间内有意降低核心体温。在这篇综述中,我们将讨论有关定向体温管理的主要试验和其他证据,并提出对立的观点,一种是 "反对 "使用复苏后定向体温管理,另一种是 "支持 "使用这种治疗方法:有针对性的体温管理一直是一个极具争议的话题,因为最近的一些临床试验显示,TTM 的效果存在相互矛盾的结果。关于定向体温管理的剂量(如在 33 °C 温度下使用与在更高温度下使用)或定向体温管理的使用(相对于被动退热)等基本问题,仍是全球讨论的热门话题。总结:对于在心脏骤停后使用以 33 °C 为目标的 TTM 缓解脑损伤,支持和反对的观点各有不同。更多的研究正在进行中,有望提供更有力的证据,并有望就这一重要课题达成共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Critical Care
Current Opinion in Critical Care 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
172
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​​​Current Opinion in Critical Care delivers a broad-based perspective on the most recent and most exciting developments in critical care from across the world. Published bimonthly and featuring thirteen key topics – including the respiratory system, neuroscience, trauma and infectious diseases – the journal’s renowned team of guest editors ensure a balanced, expert assessment of the recently published literature in each respective field with insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信