The association of tibial vs. humeral intraosseous vascular access with patient outcomes in adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrests

Abstract

AimHumeral and tibial intraosseous (IO) vascular access can deliver resuscitative medications for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), however the optimal site is unclear. We examined the association between IO tibia vs. humerus as the first-attempted vascular access site with OHCA outcomes. MethodsWe used prospectively-collected data from the British Columbia Cardiac Arrest registry, including adult OHCAs treated with IO humerus or IO tibia as the first-attempted intra-arrest vascular access. We fit logistic regression models on the full study cohort and a propensity-matched cohort, to estimate the association between IO site and both favorable neurological outcomes (Cerebral Performance Category 1–2) and survival at hospital discharge. ResultsWe included 1041 (43%) and 1404 (57%) OHCAs for whom IO humerus and tibia, respectively, were the first-attempted intra-arrest vascular access. Among humerus and tibia cases, 1010 (97%) and 1369 (98%) had first-attempt success, and the median paramedic arrival-to-successful access interval was 6.7 minutes (IQR 4.4–9.4) and 6.1 minutes (IQR 4.1–8.9), respectively. In the propensity-matched cohort (n = 2052), 31 (3.0%) and 44 (4.3%) cases had favourable neurological outcomes in the IO humerus and IO tibia groups, respectively; compared to IO humerus, we did not detect an association between IO tibia with favorable neurological outcomes (OR 1.44; 95% CI 0.90–2.29) or survival to hospital discharge (OR 1.29; 95% CI 0.83–2.01). Results using the full cohort were similar. ConclusionsWe did not detect an association between the first-attempted intra-arrest IO site (tibia vs. humerus) and clinical outcomes. Clinical trials are warranted to test differences between vascular access strategies.