Effect of prehospital physician presence on Out-of-Hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients undergoing extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR): A secondary analysis of the SAVE-J II study

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Resuscitation plus Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100859
Futoshi Nagashima , Satoshi Inoue , Tomohiro Oda , Tomohiro Hamagami , Tomoya Matsuda , Makoto Kobayashi , Akihiko Inoue , Toru Hifumi , Tetsuya Sakamoto , Yasuhiro Kuroda , The SAVE-J II study group
{"title":"Effect of prehospital physician presence on Out-of-Hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients undergoing extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR): A secondary analysis of the SAVE-J II study","authors":"Futoshi Nagashima ,&nbsp;Satoshi Inoue ,&nbsp;Tomohiro Oda ,&nbsp;Tomohiro Hamagami ,&nbsp;Tomoya Matsuda ,&nbsp;Makoto Kobayashi ,&nbsp;Akihiko Inoue ,&nbsp;Toru Hifumi ,&nbsp;Tetsuya Sakamoto ,&nbsp;Yasuhiro Kuroda ,&nbsp;The SAVE-J II study group","doi":"10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100859","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) has been increasingly utilized for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). However, the impact of prehospital physician presence on the outcomes of ECPR-treated OHCA patients remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate whether the presence of prehospital physicians improves 30-day survival and favorable neurological outcomes in this population.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This retrospective study analyzed data from the SAVE-J II study, a nationwide multicenter cohort of OHCA patients treated with ECPR in Japan. Patients were divided into two groups: prehospital physician absence and prehospital physician presence. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed using six covariates (age, sex, witness status, presence of bystander CPR, initial heart rhythm, and location of cardiac arrest) to adjust for baseline differences. Sensitivity analyses included PSM with additional covariates (prehospital time and Low flow time), inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), and varying matching ratios. Primary and secondary outcomes were 30-day survival and favorable neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Category [CPC] 1–2), respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 1,641 patients included, 448 were in the prehospital physician presence group and 1,193 in the prehospital physician absence group. Before PSM, 30-day survival rates were 28.2% (prehospital physician presence) vs. 25.7% (prehospital physician absence) (p = 0.350). After 1:1 PSM (6 covariates), the 30-day survival rate was significantly higher in the prehospital physician presence group (29.6%) compared to the prehospital physician absence group (22.7%) (p = 0.028), while favorable neurological outcomes showed no significant difference (prehospital physician presence: 14.5% vs. prehospital physician absence: 11.0%, p = 0.092). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the findings, with 30-day survival consistently higher in the prehospital physician presence group across models, including 7-covariate PSM (31.8% vs. 23.0%, p = 0.009) and IPTW with 8 covariates (35.6% vs. 25.1%, p = 0.026). However, the 8-covariate IPTW model exhibited residual imbalance (SMD &gt; 0.1 in four covariates). Favorable neurological outcomes did not show significant differences in any analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Prehospital physician presence was associated with improved 30-day survival in OHCA patients undergoing ECPR. However, favorable neurological outcomes did not show significant improvement. These findings highlight the need for strategies to optimize low-flow time and explore the potential role of prehospital ECPR initiation. Further prospective studies are required to validate these findings and improve outcomes in this critical population.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":94192,"journal":{"name":"Resuscitation plus","volume":"21 ","pages":"Article 100859"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resuscitation plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666520424003102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) has been increasingly utilized for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). However, the impact of prehospital physician presence on the outcomes of ECPR-treated OHCA patients remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate whether the presence of prehospital physicians improves 30-day survival and favorable neurological outcomes in this population.

Methods

This retrospective study analyzed data from the SAVE-J II study, a nationwide multicenter cohort of OHCA patients treated with ECPR in Japan. Patients were divided into two groups: prehospital physician absence and prehospital physician presence. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed using six covariates (age, sex, witness status, presence of bystander CPR, initial heart rhythm, and location of cardiac arrest) to adjust for baseline differences. Sensitivity analyses included PSM with additional covariates (prehospital time and Low flow time), inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), and varying matching ratios. Primary and secondary outcomes were 30-day survival and favorable neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Category [CPC] 1–2), respectively.

Results

Of the 1,641 patients included, 448 were in the prehospital physician presence group and 1,193 in the prehospital physician absence group. Before PSM, 30-day survival rates were 28.2% (prehospital physician presence) vs. 25.7% (prehospital physician absence) (p = 0.350). After 1:1 PSM (6 covariates), the 30-day survival rate was significantly higher in the prehospital physician presence group (29.6%) compared to the prehospital physician absence group (22.7%) (p = 0.028), while favorable neurological outcomes showed no significant difference (prehospital physician presence: 14.5% vs. prehospital physician absence: 11.0%, p = 0.092). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the findings, with 30-day survival consistently higher in the prehospital physician presence group across models, including 7-covariate PSM (31.8% vs. 23.0%, p = 0.009) and IPTW with 8 covariates (35.6% vs. 25.1%, p = 0.026). However, the 8-covariate IPTW model exhibited residual imbalance (SMD > 0.1 in four covariates). Favorable neurological outcomes did not show significant differences in any analysis.

Conclusions

Prehospital physician presence was associated with improved 30-day survival in OHCA patients undergoing ECPR. However, favorable neurological outcomes did not show significant improvement. These findings highlight the need for strategies to optimize low-flow time and explore the potential role of prehospital ECPR initiation. Further prospective studies are required to validate these findings and improve outcomes in this critical population.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Resuscitation plus
Resuscitation plus Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
52 days
期刊最新文献
“All sorts of colours of emotions”: Ambulance call-handlers’ perceptions of the barriers to CPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest Temporal trends in the incidence and outcomes of cardiopulmonary arrest events treated in the emergency department at a tertiary hospital in Jordan Characteristics of patients requiring tracheostomy following extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest Assessment of heart and lung morphology in a single case during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A virtual simulation Healthcare provider bystander CPR and AED rates for cardiac arrest in U.S. nursing homes
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1