Cardiac arrest & resuscitation
Does Time to Achieve a Targeted Body Temperature Matter for Survivors of Cardiac Arrest? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Pooled resultResult — go to the resultRelative risk 1.01 95% CI 0.94–1.14Authors' conclusion
Early HTC showed no neurologic nor survival benefit in cardiac arrest survivors. Nasal evaporative cooling during CPR may benefit those with shockable rhythms.
Study context
- Population
- Comatose adult cardiac arrest patients11 RCTs
- Comparison
- Early cooling vs late cooling
- Outcome
- Neurologic outcomes
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Relative risk
1.01
95% CI 0.94–1.14
Early cooling vs Late cooling
RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.94–1.14)
Further pooled results
| Outcome | RR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Survival | 1.01 (0.92–1.11) | |
| 0.512Relative risk (log scale) |
Neurologic outcomes, nasal evaporative cooling during resuscitation, shockable rhythms (subgroup)
| RR (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Nasal evaporative coolingMay benefit | 1.40 (1.00–1.96) | |
| 0.512Relative risk (log scale) |
Target temperature (32-34°C) achievement
- Median time to reach target temperature ranged
- 38 to 360 minutes
- Cooling initiated prehospital in 10 studies; 9 failed to achieve target temperature by hospital admission
Safety
- Cold fluid during CPR associated with higher risk of rearrest
Original publication
Does Time to Achieve a Targeted Body Temperature Matter for Survivors of Cardiac Arrest? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Crit Care Med. Published 11 November 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →