Cardiac arrest & resuscitation
Intraosseous and intravenous vascular access during adult cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis
An erratum to this article was published (Resuscitation, Jun 2026 ↗)
Pooled result · 30-day survivalResult — go to the resultOdds ratio 0.99 95% CI 0.84–1.17Authors' conclusion
Initial vascular access attempts via the intraosseous, compared with intravenous, route in adult cardiac arrest did not improve 30-day survival and may reduce the odds of a sustained return of spontaneous circulation.
Study context
- Population
- Adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
- Participants
- 9,332 adults · 3 RCTs
- Comparison
- Intraosseous vs intravenous initial vascular access
- Outcome
- 30-day survival
- Follow-up
- 30 days
Methodological detailsfixed-effect model, GRADE, Risk of bias assessed with Cochrane RoB-2 tool
- Fixed-effect model
- GRADE
- Risk of bias assessed with Cochrane RoB-2 tool
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Odds ratio
0.99
95% CI 0.84–1.17
Intraosseous vs Intravenous
OR 0.99 (95% CI 0.84–1.17)
Further pooled results
| Outcome | OR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Favourable neurological outcome at 30 days/hospital discharge9,186 participants; 3 trials; low-certainty evidence | 1.07 (0.88–1.30) | |
| Sustained ROSC7,518 participants; 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence | 0.89 (0.80–0.99) | |
| 0.512Odds ratio (log scale) |
Original publication
Intraosseous and intravenous vascular access during adult cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Resuscitation. Published 30 December 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →