A Randomized Trial of Drug Route in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

In patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the effectiveness of drugs such as epinephrine is highly time-dependent. An intraosseous route of drug administration may enable more rapid drug administration than an intravenous route; however, its effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain. We conduc...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	The New England journal of medicine
Main Authors:	Couper, Keith, Ji, Chen, Deakin, Charles D, Fothergill, Rachael T, Nolan, Jerry P, Long, John B, Mason, James M, Michelet, Felix, Norman, Chloe, Nwankwo, Henry, Quinn, Tom, Slowther, Anne-Marie, Smyth, Michael A, Starr, Kath R, Walker, Alison, Wood, Sara, Bell, Steve, Bradley, Gemma, Brown, Martina, Brown, Shona, Burrow, Emma, Charlton, Karl, Claxton Dip, Andrew, Dra'gon, Victoria, Evans, Christine, Falloon, Jakob, Foster, Theresa, Kearney, Justin, Lang, Nigel, Limmer, Matthew, Mellett-Smith, Adam, Miller, Joshua, Mills, Carla, Osborne, Ria, Rees, Nigel, Spaight, Robert E S, Squires, Gemma L, Tibbetts, Belinda, Waddington, Michelle, Whitley, Gregory A, Wiles, Jason V, Williams, Julia, Wiltshire, Sarah, Wright, Adam, Lall, Ranjit, Perkins, Gavin D
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	United States 31-10-2024
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	In patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, the effectiveness of drugs such as epinephrine is highly time-dependent. An intraosseous route of drug administration may enable more rapid drug administration than an intravenous route; however, its effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain. We conducted a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial across 11 emergency medical systems in the United Kingdom that involved adults in cardiac arrest for whom vascular access for drug administration was needed. Patients were randomly assigned to receive treatment from paramedics by means of an intraosseous-first or intravenous-first vascular access strategy. The primary outcome was survival at 30 days. Key secondary outcomes included any return of spontaneous circulation and favorable neurologic function at hospital discharge (defined by a score of 3 or less on the modified Rankin scale, on which scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability). No adjustment for multiplicity was made. A total of 6082 patients were assigned to a trial group: 3040 to the intraosseous group and 3042 to the intravenous group. At 30 days, 137 of 3030 patients (4.5%) in the intraosseous group and 155 of 3034 (5.1%) in the intravenous group were alive (adjusted odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 1.32; P = 0.74). At the time of hospital discharge, a favorable neurologic outcome was observed in 80 of 2994 patients (2.7%) in the intraosseous group and in 85 of 2986 (2.8%) in the intravenous group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.47); a return of spontaneous circulation at any time occurred in 1092 of 3031 patients (36.0%) and in 1186 of 3035 patients (39.1%), respectively (adjusted odds ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.97). During the trial, one adverse event, which occurred in the intraosseous group, was reported. Among adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest requiring drug therapy, the use of an intraosseous-first vascular access strategy did not result in higher 30-day survival than an intravenous-first strategy. (Funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research; PARAMEDIC-3 ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN14223494.).
Bibliography:	ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23
ISSN:	0028-4793 1533-4406 1533-4406
DOI:	10.1056/NEJMoa2407780