Biomarkers for neuroprognostication after standard versus extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation – A sub-analysis of Prague-OHCA study

Abstract

BackgroundLimited evidence exists for prognostic performance of biomarkers in patients resuscitated from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) with extracorporeal CPR (ECPR). We hypothesized that (1) the time course and (2) prognostic performance of biomarkers might differ between CPR and ECPR in a sub-analysis of Prague-OHCA study. MethodsPatients received either CPR (n = 164) or ECPR (n = 92). The primary outcome was favorable neurologic survival at 180 days [cerebral performance category (CPC) 1–2]. Secondary outcomes included biomarkers of neurologic injury, inflammation and hemocoagulation. ResultsFavorable neurologic outcome was not different between groups: CPR 29.3% vs. ECPR 21.7%; p = 0.191. Biomarkers exhibited similar trajectories in both groups, with better values in patients with CPC 1–2. Procalcitonin (PCT) was higher in ECPR group at 24–72 h (all p < 0.01). Neuron-specific enolase (NSE), C-reactive protein and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio did not differ between groups. Platelets, D-dimers and fibrinogen were lower in ECPR vs. CPR groups at 24–72 h (all p < 0.001). ROC analysis (24–48–72 h) showed the best performance of NSE in both CPR and ECPR groups (AUC 0.89 vs. 0.78; 0.9 vs. 0.9; 0.91 vs. 0.9). PCT showed good performance specifically in ECPR (0.72 vs. 0.84; 0.73 vs. 0.87; 0.73 vs. 0.86). Optimal cutoff points of NSE and PCT were higher in ECPR vs. CPR. ConclusionsBiomarkers exhibited similar trajectories although absolute values tended to be higher in ECPR. NSE had superior performance in both groups. PCT showed a good performance specifically in ECPR. Additional biomarkers may have modest incremental value. Prognostication algorithms should reflect the resuscitation method.