Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2022
Nifekalant versus Amiodarone for Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest with Refractory Shockable Rhythms; a Post Hoc Analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Funakoshi Hiraku, Aso Shotaro, Homma Yosuke, Onodera Ryuta, Tahara Yoshio
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: It is still unclear that which anti-arrhythmics are adequate for treating refractory dysrhythmia. This study aimed to compare amiodarone and nifekalant in management of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases with refractory shockable rhythm.
METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of cases registered in a nationwide, multicentre, prospective registry that includes 288 critical care medical centres in Japan. From June 2014 to December 2017, we included all out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients aged ≥18 years who presented with refractory arrhythmia (sustained ventricular fibrillation or ventricular tachycardia following delivery of at least two defibrillator shocks) and treated with nifekalant or amiodarone after arrival to hospital. Overlap weight was performed to address potential confounding factors.
RESULTS: 1,317 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with refractory arrhythmia were enrolled and categorized into amiodarone (n = 1,275) and nifekalant (n = 42) groups. After overlap weight was performed, there were no significant intergroup differences in increased the rate of admission after return of spontaneous circulation [-5.9% (95%CI: -7.1 to 22.4); p = 0.57], 30-day favourable neurological outcome [0.1% (95%CI: -14 to 13.9); p = 0.99], and 30-day survival [-3.9% (95% CI: -19.8 to 12.0); p = 0.63].
CONCLUSION: This nationwide study showed that nifekalant was not associated with improved outcomes regarding admission after return of spontaneous circulation, 30-day survival, and 30-day favourable neurological outcome compared with amiodarone.
METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of cases registered in a nationwide, multicentre, prospective registry that includes 288 critical care medical centres in Japan. From June 2014 to December 2017, we included all out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients aged ≥18 years who presented with refractory arrhythmia (sustained ventricular fibrillation or ventricular tachycardia following delivery of at least two defibrillator shocks) and treated with nifekalant or amiodarone after arrival to hospital. Overlap weight was performed to address potential confounding factors.
RESULTS: 1,317 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with refractory arrhythmia were enrolled and categorized into amiodarone (n = 1,275) and nifekalant (n = 42) groups. After overlap weight was performed, there were no significant intergroup differences in increased the rate of admission after return of spontaneous circulation [-5.9% (95%CI: -7.1 to 22.4); p = 0.57], 30-day favourable neurological outcome [0.1% (95%CI: -14 to 13.9); p = 0.99], and 30-day survival [-3.9% (95% CI: -19.8 to 12.0); p = 0.63].
CONCLUSION: This nationwide study showed that nifekalant was not associated with improved outcomes regarding admission after return of spontaneous circulation, 30-day survival, and 30-day favourable neurological outcome compared with amiodarone.