A Randomized Trial of Drug Route in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

IF 96.2 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Keith Couper, Chen Ji, Charles D Deakin, Rachael T Fothergill, Jerry P Nolan, John B Long, James M Mason, Felix Michelet, Chloe Norman, Henry Nwankwo, Tom Quinn, Anne-Marie Slowther, Michael A Smyth, Kath R Starr, Alison Walker, Sara Wood, Steve Bell, Gemma Bradley, Martina Brown, Shona Brown, Emma Burrow, Karl Charlton, Andrew Claxton Dip, Victoria Dra'gon, Christine Evans, Jakob Falloon, Theresa Foster, Justin Kearney, Nigel Lang, Matthew Limmer, Adam Mellett-Smith, Joshua Miller, Carla Mills, Ria Osborne, Nigel Rees, Robert E S Spaight, Gemma L Squires, Belinda Tibbetts, Michelle Waddington, Gregory A Whitley, Jason V Wiles, Julia Williams, Sarah Wiltshire, Adam Wright, Ranjit Lall, Gavin D Perkins
{"title":"A Randomized Trial of Drug Route in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.","authors":"Keith Couper, Chen Ji, Charles D Deakin, Rachael T Fothergill, Jerry P Nolan, John B Long, James M Mason, Felix Michelet, Chloe Norman, Henry Nwankwo, Tom Quinn, Anne-Marie Slowther, Michael A Smyth, Kath R Starr, Alison Walker, Sara Wood, Steve Bell, Gemma Bradley, Martina Brown, Shona Brown, Emma Burrow, Karl Charlton, Andrew Claxton Dip, Victoria Dra'gon, Christine Evans, Jakob Falloon, Theresa Foster, Justin Kearney, Nigel Lang, Matthew Limmer, Adam Mellett-Smith, Joshua Miller, Carla Mills, Ria Osborne, Nigel Rees, Robert E S Spaight, Gemma L Squires, Belinda Tibbetts, Michelle Waddington, Gregory A Whitley, Jason V Wiles, Julia Williams, Sarah Wiltshire, Adam Wright, Ranjit Lall, Gavin D Perkins","doi":"10.1056/NEJMoa2407780","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the effectiveness of drugs such as epinephrine is highly time-dependent. An intraosseous route of drug administration may enable more rapid drug administration than an intravenous route; however, its effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial across 11 emergency medical systems in the United Kingdom that involved adults in cardiac arrest for whom vascular access for drug administration was needed. Patients were randomly assigned to receive treatment from paramedics by means of an intraosseous-first or intravenous-first vascular access strategy. The primary outcome was survival at 30 days. Key secondary outcomes included any return of spontaneous circulation and favorable neurologic function at hospital discharge (defined by a score of 3 or less on the modified Rankin scale, on which scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability). No adjustment for multiplicity was made.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 6082 patients were assigned to a trial group: 3040 to the intraosseous group and 3042 to the intravenous group. At 30 days, 137 of 3030 patients (4.5%) in the intraosseous group and 155 of 3034 (5.1%) in the intravenous group were alive (adjusted odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 1.32; P = 0.74). At the time of hospital discharge, a favorable neurologic outcome was observed in 80 of 2994 patients (2.7%) in the intraosseous group and in 85 of 2986 (2.8%) in the intravenous group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.47); a return of spontaneous circulation at any time occurred in 1092 of 3031 patients (36.0%) and in 1186 of 3035 patients (39.1%), respectively (adjusted odds ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.97). During the trial, one adverse event, which occurred in the intraosseous group, was reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Among adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest requiring drug therapy, the use of an intraosseous-first vascular access strategy did not result in higher 30-day survival than an intravenous-first strategy. (Funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research; PARAMEDIC-3 ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN14223494.).</p>","PeriodicalId":54725,"journal":{"name":"New England Journal of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":96.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7616768/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New England Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2407780","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the effectiveness of drugs such as epinephrine is highly time-dependent. An intraosseous route of drug administration may enable more rapid drug administration than an intravenous route; however, its effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain.

Methods: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial across 11 emergency medical systems in the United Kingdom that involved adults in cardiac arrest for whom vascular access for drug administration was needed. Patients were randomly assigned to receive treatment from paramedics by means of an intraosseous-first or intravenous-first vascular access strategy. The primary outcome was survival at 30 days. Key secondary outcomes included any return of spontaneous circulation and favorable neurologic function at hospital discharge (defined by a score of 3 or less on the modified Rankin scale, on which scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability). No adjustment for multiplicity was made.

Results: A total of 6082 patients were assigned to a trial group: 3040 to the intraosseous group and 3042 to the intravenous group. At 30 days, 137 of 3030 patients (4.5%) in the intraosseous group and 155 of 3034 (5.1%) in the intravenous group were alive (adjusted odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 1.32; P = 0.74). At the time of hospital discharge, a favorable neurologic outcome was observed in 80 of 2994 patients (2.7%) in the intraosseous group and in 85 of 2986 (2.8%) in the intravenous group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.47); a return of spontaneous circulation at any time occurred in 1092 of 3031 patients (36.0%) and in 1186 of 3035 patients (39.1%), respectively (adjusted odds ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.97). During the trial, one adverse event, which occurred in the intraosseous group, was reported.

Conclusions: Among adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest requiring drug therapy, the use of an intraosseous-first vascular access strategy did not result in higher 30-day survival than an intravenous-first strategy. (Funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research; PARAMEDIC-3 ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN14223494.).

院外心脏骤停患者用药途径随机试验。
背景:在院外心脏骤停患者中,肾上腺素等药物的疗效与时间密切相关。与静脉注射途径相比,鞘内给药途径可以更快速地给药,但其对临床结果的影响尚不确定:我们在英国的 11 个急救医疗系统开展了一项多中心、开放标签、随机试验,涉及需要通过血管给药的成人心脏骤停患者。患者被随机分配到先接受辅助医务人员的治疗还是先接受静脉血管通路治疗。主要结果是 30 天后的存活率。主要的次要结果包括自发循环的恢复情况和出院时良好的神经功能(定义为改良的兰金量表评分 3 分或更低,兰金量表的评分范围为 0 到 6 分,评分越高表示残疾程度越严重)。未对多重性进行调整:共有 6082 名患者被分配到试验组:3040名患者被分配到骨内组,3042名患者被分配到静脉组。30 天后,3030 名骨内组患者中有 137 人(4.5%)存活,3034 名静脉组患者中有 155 人(5.1%)存活(调整后的几率比为 0.94;95% 置信区间 [CI],0.68 至 1.32;P = 0.74)。出院时,鞘内组 2994 例患者中有 80 例(2.7%)观察到良好的神经功能预后,静脉组 2986 例患者中有 85 例(2.8%)观察到良好的神经功能预后(调整后的几率比为 0.91;95% CI,0.57 至 1.47);3031 例患者中有 1092 例(36.0%)和 3035 例患者中有 1186 例(39.1%)分别在任何时间出现自发性循环恢复(调整后的几率比为 0.86;95% CI,0.76 至 0.97)。试验期间,骨内组发生了一起不良事件:结论:在需要药物治疗的院外心脏骤停成人患者中,采用鞘内先行血管通路策略并不比静脉先行策略的 30 天存活率高。(由美国国家健康与护理研究所资助;PARAMEDIC-3 ISRCTN 注册号:ISRCTN14223494)。
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
New England Journal of Medicine
New England Journal of Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
145.40
自引率
0.60%
发文量
1839
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) stands as the foremost medical journal and website worldwide. With an impressive history spanning over two centuries, NEJM boasts a consistent publication of superb, peer-reviewed research and engaging clinical content. Our primary objective revolves around delivering high-caliber information and findings at the juncture of biomedical science and clinical practice. We strive to present this knowledge in formats that are not only comprehensible but also hold practical value, effectively influencing healthcare practices and ultimately enhancing patient outcomes.
×
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