BMC Research Notes (Mar 2020)

Exploratory analysis of myocardial function after extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation vs conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation

  • Joseph E. Tonna,
  • Stephen H. McKellar,
  • Craig H. Selzman,
  • Stavros Drakos,
  • Antigone G. Koliopoulou,
  • Iosif Taleb,
  • Gregory J. Stoddard,
  • Josef Stehlik,
  • Frederick G. P. Welt,
  • James F. Fair,
  • Kathleen Stoddard,
  • Scott T. Youngquist

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-020-04982-x
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 1
pp. 1 – 6

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Objective Ventricular unloading is associated with myocardial recovery. We sought to evaluate the association of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) on myocardial function after cardiac arrest. We conducted a retrospective exploratory analysis, comparing ejection fraction (EF) after adult cardiac arrest, between ECPR and conventional CPR. Results Among 1119 cases of cardiac arrest, 116 had an echocardiogram post-return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and were included. Thirty-eight patients had ≥ 2 echocardiograms. ECPR patients had differences in age, hypertension and chronic heart failure. ECPR patients had a lower EF post-ROSC (24% vs 45%; p < 0.01) and were more likely to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (25% vs 3%; p < 0.01). In multivariate analysis, only ECPR use (β-coeff: 10.4 [95% CI 3.68–17.13]; p < 0.01) independently predicted improved myocardial function. In this exploratory study, EF after cardiac arrest may be more likely to improve among ECPR patients than CCPR patients. Our methodology should be replicated to confirm or refute the validity of our findings.

Keywords