Cardiac arrest & resuscitation
Long-term health-related quality of life in survivors of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation compared to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation- A cohort study using Australian and New Zealand extracorporeal membrane oxygenation registry and the Victorian Ambulance Cardiac Arrest Registry
Authors' conclusion
Despite significant baseline differences between ECPR and CCPR, there were no differences in HRQoL at 12 months.
Study context
- Population
- Adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) surviving to 12 months with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data, July 2019–July 2023survivors with HRQoL data
- Participants
- 24 vs 754
- Exposure
- Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) vs conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR) for OHCA
- ECPRn = 24
- CCPRn = 754reference
- Outcome
- EQ-5D-5L utility score and EQ-VAS
- Follow-up
- 12 months
Methodological detailsregistry-based
- Registry-based
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
| Group | Value | EuroQol visual analogue score (EQ-VAS) median (IQR) |
|---|---|---|
| ECPR | median 0.95 (IQR 0.72–1) | 80 (64.5-90) |
| CCPR | median 0.96 (IQR 0.86–1) | 75 (60-85) |
Value
ECPRmedian 0.95 (IQR 0.72–1)
CCPRmedian 0.96 (IQR 0.86–1)
EuroQol visual analogue score (EQ-VAS) median (IQR)
ECPR80 (64.5-90)
CCPR75 (60-85)
- ECPR vs CCPR: P = 0.64
- ECPR vs CCPR: P = 0.39
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Survival at 12 months
Arrest to ROSC/ECMO time
P < 0.001
- Survival at 12 months: 33/122 ECPR; 1,074/8,990 CCPR
Original publication
Long-term health-related quality of life in survivors of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation compared to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation- A cohort study using Australian and New Zealand extracorporeal membrane oxygenation registry and the Victorian Ambulance Cardiac Arrest Registry. Resuscitation. Published 3 April 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →