Sang Hoon Oh, Joo Suk Oh, Young-Min Kim, Kyu Nam Park, Seung Pill Choi, Gi Woon Kim, Kyung Woon Jeung, Tae Chang Jang, Yoo Seok Park, Yeon Young Kyong
Abstract
Various methods and devices have been described for cooling after cardiac arrest, but the ideal cooling method remains unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the neurological outcomes, efficacies and adverse events of surface and endovascular cooling techniques in cardiac arrest patients.
We performed a multicenter, retrospective, registry-based study of adult cardiac arrest patients treated with therapeutic hypothermia presenting to 24 hospitals across South Korea from 2007 to 2012. We included patients who received therapeutic hypothermia using overall surface or endovascular cooling devices and compared the neurological outcomes, efficacies and adverse events of both cooling techniques. To adjust for differences in the baseline characteristics of each cooling method, we performed one-to-one matching by the propensity score.
In total, 803 patients were included in the analysis. Of these patients, 559 underwent surface cooling, and the remaining 244 patients underwent endovascular cooling. In the unmatched cohort, a greater number of adverse events occurred in the surface cooling group. Surface cooling was significantly associated with a poor neurological outcome (cerebral performance category 3-5) at hospital discharge (p = 0.01). After propensity score matching, surface cooling was not associated with poor neurological outcome and hospital mortality [odds ratio (OR): 1.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.81-1.96, p = 0.31 and OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.55-1.30, p = 0.44, respectively]. Although surface cooling was associated with an increased incidence of adverse events (such as overcooling, rebound hyperthermia, rewarming related hypoglycemia and hypotension) compared with endovascular cooling, these complications were not associated with surface cooling using hydrogel pads.
In the overall matched cohort, no significant difference in neurological outcomes and hospital morality was observed between the surface and endovascular cooling methods.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
2
3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
1
1%
Other
4
5%
Unknown
24
33%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2015.
All research outputs
#4,887,536
of 26,485,427 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,285
of 6,723 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,289
of 399,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#265
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,485,427 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,723 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 399,056 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 466 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
