MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1097/md.0000000000048624

Медицинская библиотека · Medicine · 2026

Comparing intraosseous versus intravenous access for resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and GRADE meta-analysis.

Waseem Muhammad Hassan, Abideen Zain Ul, Kashif Muhammad Arham Bin, Jamil Marium, Amer Amina, Hussain Maryam Altaf, Anwar Khadija, Nouman Muhammad, Qamar Hafsah, Sultan Mahrukh, Insharah F N U, Thada Pawan Kumar, Rehman Alishba, Arshad Ayesha, Fiza Kashaf

СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализСравнительное исследованиеПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, which poses a severe challenge due to high mortality rates in emergency cases, warrants the need for effective resuscitation measures. This meta-analysis evaluated survival outcomes for intraosseous (IO) versus intravenous (IV) drug administration.

METHODS

Electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Central, and ScienceDirect, were searched from inception until September 2024. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using Review Manager version 5.4.1 under a random-effects model for dichotomous outcomes. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2.0) and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Certainty of evidence was assessed through the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluations assessment.

RESULTS

The quantitative analysis included 18 studies comprising a total sample size of 245,132 patients. IO route was associated with a significantly lower return of spontaneous circulation (RR = 0.77, 95% CI: [0.71-0.83]; P < .00001; I2 = 84%), sustained return of spontaneous circulation (RR = 0.87, 95% CI: [0.77-0.97]; P = .02; I2 = 53%) and favorable neurological outcomes at hospital discharge (RR = 0.58, 95% CI: [0.45-0.73]; P < .00001; I2 = 81%) compared to IV route. It also showed a significantly lower survival at hospital arrival (RR = 0.79; 95% CI: [0.72-0.86]; P < .00001; I2 = 49%) and at hospital discharge (RR = 0.59; 95% CI: [0.45-0.78]; P < .0002; I2 = 95%) and short-term survival (RR = 0.52; 95% CI: [0.32-0.86]; P = .010; I2 = 72%). No publication bias was detected.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that IV access is superior to IO in terms of favorable neurological outcomes and survival to hospital arrival and discharge in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients. This suggests that when feasible, the IV route should be preferred in emergency resuscitation protocols.

Для цитирования: Waseem Muhammad Hassan, Abideen Zain Ul, Kashif Muhammad Arham Bin, Jamil Marium, Amer Amina, Hussain Maryam Altaf, Anwar Khadija, Nouman Muhammad, Qamar Hafsah, Sultan Mahrukh, Insharah F N U, Thada Pawan Kumar, Rehman Alishba, Arshad Ayesha, Fiza Kashaf. Comparing intraosseous versus intravenous access for resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and GRADE meta-analysis.. Medicine. 2026. DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000048624.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.