Intraosseous or Intravenous Vascular Access for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

IF 96.2 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Mikael F Vallentin, Asger Granfeldt, Thomas L Klitgaard, Søren Mikkelsen, Fredrik Folke, Helle C Christensen, Amalie L Povlsen, Alberthe H Petersen, Sofie Winther, Lea W Frilund, Carsten Meilandt, Mathias J Holmberg, Kristian B Winther, Allan Bach, Thomas H Dissing, Christian J Terkelsen, Steffen Christensen, Line Kirkegaard Rasmussen, Lone R Mortensen, Mads L Loldrup, Thomas Elkmann, Anders G Nielsen, Charlotte Runge, Elise Klæstrup, Jimmy H Holm, Mikkel Bak, Lars-Gustav R Nielsen, Mette Pedersen, Gunhild Kjærgaard-Andersen, Peter M Hansen, Anne C Brøchner, Erika F Christensen, Frederik M Nielsen, Christian G Nissen, Jeppe W Bjørn, Peter Burholt, Laust E R Obling, Sarah L D Holle, Lene Russell, Henrik Alstrøm, Søren Hestad, Tanja H Fogtmann, Jens U H Buciek, Karina Jakobsen, Mette Krag, Michael Sandgaard, Birthe Sindberg, Lars W Andersen
{"title":"Intraosseous or Intravenous Vascular Access for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.","authors":"Mikael F Vallentin, Asger Granfeldt, Thomas L Klitgaard, Søren Mikkelsen, Fredrik Folke, Helle C Christensen, Amalie L Povlsen, Alberthe H Petersen, Sofie Winther, Lea W Frilund, Carsten Meilandt, Mathias J Holmberg, Kristian B Winther, Allan Bach, Thomas H Dissing, Christian J Terkelsen, Steffen Christensen, Line Kirkegaard Rasmussen, Lone R Mortensen, Mads L Loldrup, Thomas Elkmann, Anders G Nielsen, Charlotte Runge, Elise Klæstrup, Jimmy H Holm, Mikkel Bak, Lars-Gustav R Nielsen, Mette Pedersen, Gunhild Kjærgaard-Andersen, Peter M Hansen, Anne C Brøchner, Erika F Christensen, Frederik M Nielsen, Christian G Nissen, Jeppe W Bjørn, Peter Burholt, Laust E R Obling, Sarah L D Holle, Lene Russell, Henrik Alstrøm, Søren Hestad, Tanja H Fogtmann, Jens U H Buciek, Karina Jakobsen, Mette Krag, Michael Sandgaard, Birthe Sindberg, Lars W Andersen","doi":"10.1056/NEJMoa2407616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a leading cause of death worldwide. Establishing vascular access is critical for administering guideline-recommended drugs during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Both the intraosseous route and the intravenous route are used routinely, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a randomized clinical trial to compare the effectiveness of initial attempts at intraosseous or intravenous vascular access in adults who had nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The primary outcome was a sustained return of spontaneous circulation. Key secondary outcomes were survival at 30 days and survival at 30 days with a favorable neurologic outcome, defined by a score of 0 to 3 on the modified Rankin scale (scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 1506 patients who underwent randomization, 1479 were included in the primary analysis (731 in the intraosseous-access group and 748 in the intravenous-access group). The successful establishment of vascular access within two attempts occurred in 669 patients (92%) assigned to the intraosseous-access group and in 595 patients (80%) assigned to the intravenous-access group. Sustained return of spontaneous circulation occurred in 221 patients (30%) in the intraosseous-access group and in 214 patients (29%) in the intravenous-access group (risk ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.24; P = 0.49). At 30 days, 85 patients (12%) in the intraosseous-access group and 75 patients (10%) in the intravenous-access group were alive (risk ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.56); a favorable neurologic outcome at 30 days occurred in 67 patients (9%) and 59 patients (8%), respectively (risk ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.62). Prespecified adverse events were uncommon.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no significant difference in sustained return of spontaneous circulation between initial intraosseous and intravenous vascular access in adults who had out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and others; IVIO EU Clinical Trials Register number, 2022-500744-38-00; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05205031.).</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":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New England Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2407616","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: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a leading cause of death worldwide. Establishing vascular access is critical for administering guideline-recommended drugs during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Both the intraosseous route and the intravenous route are used routinely, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear.

Methods: We conducted a randomized clinical trial to compare the effectiveness of initial attempts at intraosseous or intravenous vascular access in adults who had nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The primary outcome was a sustained return of spontaneous circulation. Key secondary outcomes were survival at 30 days and survival at 30 days with a favorable neurologic outcome, defined by a score of 0 to 3 on the modified Rankin scale (scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability).

Results: Among 1506 patients who underwent randomization, 1479 were included in the primary analysis (731 in the intraosseous-access group and 748 in the intravenous-access group). The successful establishment of vascular access within two attempts occurred in 669 patients (92%) assigned to the intraosseous-access group and in 595 patients (80%) assigned to the intravenous-access group. Sustained return of spontaneous circulation occurred in 221 patients (30%) in the intraosseous-access group and in 214 patients (29%) in the intravenous-access group (risk ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.24; P = 0.49). At 30 days, 85 patients (12%) in the intraosseous-access group and 75 patients (10%) in the intravenous-access group were alive (risk ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.56); a favorable neurologic outcome at 30 days occurred in 67 patients (9%) and 59 patients (8%), respectively (risk ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.62). Prespecified adverse events were uncommon.

Conclusions: There was no significant difference in sustained return of spontaneous circulation between initial intraosseous and intravenous vascular access in adults who had out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and others; IVIO EU Clinical Trials Register number, 2022-500744-38-00; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05205031.).

院外心脏骤停时采用骨内还是静脉血管通路?
背景:院外心脏骤停是全球死亡的主要原因。在心肺复苏过程中,建立血管通路对于应用指南推荐的药物至关重要。鞘内途径和静脉途径都被常规使用,但它们的比较效果仍不明确:我们进行了一项随机临床试验,比较了对非外伤性院外心脏骤停的成人初次尝试采用骨内或静脉血管通路的效果。主要结果是自主循环持续恢复。主要的次要结果是 30 天后的存活率和 30 天后神经功能良好的存活率,神经功能良好的定义是改良的兰金量表评分为 0 到 3 分(评分范围为 0 到 6 分,分数越高表示残疾程度越严重):在接受随机分组的 1506 名患者中,有 1479 名患者被纳入主要分析(731 名患者被纳入骨内通路组,748 名患者被纳入静脉通路组)。669 名(92%)被分配到鞘内入路组的患者和 595 名(80%)被分配到静脉入路组的患者在两次尝试中成功建立了血管通路。骨内入路组 221 名患者(30%)和静脉入路组 214 名患者(29%)出现了持续的自主循环恢复(风险比为 1.06;95% 置信区间 [CI],0.90 至 1.24;P = 0.49)。30天时,鞘内入路组和静脉入路组分别有85名(12%)和75名(10%)患者存活(风险比为1.16;95% CI为0.87至1.56);30天时,分别有67名(9%)和59名(8%)患者出现良好的神经功能预后(风险比为1.16;95% CI为0.83至1.62)。预设的不良事件并不常见:结论:在院外心脏骤停的成人患者中,最初的骨内血管通路和静脉血管通路在持续恢复自主循环方面没有明显差异。(由诺和诺德基金会等资助;IVIO欧盟临床试验注册号:2022-500744-38-00;ClinicalTrials.gov号:NCT05205031)。
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