According to international guidelines, mild therapeutic hypothermia is recommended for resuscitated patients after cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation. Whether external or internal cooling is superior in terms of prognosis or security remains unknown. The aim of this study is to evaluate in a randomized trial the clinical and economical interests of the endovascular cooling versus the conventional external cooling for the management of hypothermia after cardiac arrest.
According to international guidelines, mild therapeutic hypothermia is recommended for resuscitated patients after experiencing cardiac arrest from cardiac origin: "unconscious adult patients with spontaneous circulation after cardiac arrest should be cooled to 32-34°C for 12-24 hours when the initial rhythm was ventricular fibrillation" or pulseless ventricular tachycardia. "Such cooling may also be beneficial for other rhythm or in-hospital cardiac arrest". "External or internal cooling techniques can be used to initiate cooling within minutes to hours". The two main randomized and positive studies dealing with the efficiency of hypothermia after cardiac arrest have used external cooling systems. However, several animal studies documented the importance of initiating hypothermia as soon as possible after cardiac arrest. Intravascular cooling enables more rapid induction of hypothermia compared with external cooling method after brain injury. Although several human studies have also documented that intravascular cooling provides more precise control of core temperature than external methods and although an endovascular method has been used safely in pilot studies in those experiencing hypothermia after cardiac arrest, the superiority of such a cooling on the prognosis after cardiac arrest remains unknown, as well as its cost efficiency. The aim of this study is to evaluate in a randomized trial the potential clinical and economical interests of the endovascular cooling versus the conventional external cooling for the management of cardiac arrest from cardiac origin. With a clinical primary endpoint (survival without major neurological sequels), this study will also focus on important secondary endpoints, as the burden of nurse work and the economical costs induced by these 2 different methods of cooling.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
389
Comparison of 2 cooling procedures
Teaching Lariboisière Hospital
Paris, France
Clinical interest of endovascular cooling versus conventional external cooling for the management of cardiac arrest from cardiac origin
Time frame: 28 days
Cost/efficiency ratio (endovascular versus conventional cooling)
Time frame: at 28 days
Evaluation of the paramedical burden of work
Time frame: at 28 days
Evaluation of the nurse's satisfaction index
Time frame: at 28 days
Evaluation of treatment costs: global costs and costs within the first 48 hours of hospitalization
Time frame: at 28 days
Time necessary to reach the target temperature (33°C): mean speed of temperature decrease
Time frame: at 28 days
deviations of more than 1°C compared with the target temperature during the 24 hours (24H) after reaching that target temperature
Time frame: at 28 days
mean speed of rewarming
Time frame: at 28 days
Safety of the method (type of adverse events)
Time frame: at 28 days
Analysis according to the type and the cause of the cardiac arrest, duration of resuscitation maneuvers, success of coronary angioplasty, number of organ failures (Logistic Organ Dysfunction System [LODS]
Time frame: at 28 days
Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA]
Time frame: at 28 days
and Organ Dysfunctions and/or Infection [ODIN] scores
Time frame: at 28 days
Simplified Acute Physiology [SAPS II]), duration of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stay and duration of mechanical ventilation
Time frame: at 28 days
The efficiency is measured on survival and on better neurological outcome, as defined by CPC 1 or 2 on the Pittsburgh cerebral performance categories (CPC), with an expected 12% improvement of the survival without major sequels at day 28 after inclusion.
Time frame: at 28 days and 90 days
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.