Cardiac arrest & resuscitation
Intraosseous versus intravenous vascular access in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Pooled result · Survival (30 days or until discharge)Result — go to the resultOR for survival 0.99 95% CI 0.84–1.18Authors' conclusion
IO access had a higher first-attempt success rate and faster establishment than IV access, but no significant differences were found in survival or favorable neurological outcomes in adults with OHCA.
Study context
- Population
- Adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA)
- Participants
- 9,475 adults · 4 RCTs
- Comparison
- Intraosseous (IO) vs intravenous (IV) vascular access
- Outcome
- Survival (30 days or until discharge)
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
OR for survival
0.99
95% CI 0.84–1.18
By group
IO vs IV
OR for survival 0.99 (95% CI 0.84–1.18)
Further pooled results
| Outcome | IO | IV | Estimate | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Favorable neurological outcome | 4.7% | 4.6% | OR for favorable neurological outcome 1.07 (95% CI 0.88–1.30) | |
| Sustained ROSCNumerically, but not significantly, lower with IO | 24.6% | 27.0% | OR for sustained ROSC 0.92 (95% CI 0.80–1.06) | |
| Successful first-attempt vascular access | 92.3% | 62.3% | OR for first-attempt success 6.18 (95% CI 3.50–10.91) | |
| 0.050.21520Ratio (log scale) |
Time from EMS arrival to vascular access · IO 15 s faster
MD (min) - 0.25 (- 0.48 to - 0.01)
Original publication
Intraosseous versus intravenous vascular access in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Crit Care. Published 19 March 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →