Comparison of extracorporeal and conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A meta-analysis of 2 260 patients with cardiac arrest.

Abstract

This meta-analysis aimed to determine whether extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR), compared with conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR), improves outcomes in adult patients with cardiac arrest (CA). PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and China Biological Medicine Database were searched for relevant articles. The baseline information and outcome data (survival, good neurological outcome at discharge, at 3-6 months, and at 1 year after CA) were collected and extracted by two authors. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Review Manager 5.3. In six studies 2 260 patients were enrolled to study the survival rate to discharge and long-term neurological outcome published since 2000. A significant effect of ECPR was observed on survival rate to discharge compared to CCPR in CA patients (RR 2.37, 95%CI 1.63-3.45, P<0.001), and patients who underwent ECPR had a better long-term neurological outcome than those who received CCPR (RR 2.79, 95%CI 1.96-3.97, P<0.001). In subgroup analysis, there was a significant difference in survival to discharge favoring ECPR over CCPR group in OHCA patients (RR 2.69, 95%CI 1.48-4.91, P=0.001). However, no significant difference was found in IHCA patients (RR 1.84, 95%CI 0.91-3.73, P=0.09). ECPR showed a beneficial effect on survival rate to discharge and long-term neurological outcome over CCPR in adult patients with CA.