Cardiac arrest & resuscitation
Temperature control after adult cardiac arrest: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis
An erratum to this article was published (Resuscitation, Jan 2024 ↗)
Authors' conclusion
This updated systematic review showed no benefit of temperature control at 32-34 °C compared to normothermia or 36 °C, although the 95% confidence intervals cannot rule out a potential beneficial effect.
Study context
- Population
- Adults with cardiac arrest7 trials
- Comparison
- Temperature control at 32-34 °C vs normothermia or 36 °C
- Outcome
- Survival and favorable neurological outcome
- Follow-up
- 90-180 days after the cardiac arrest
Methodological detailsupdated systematic review, random-effects models, GRADE, Risk of bias intermediate for most outcomes, Search of PubMed, Embase and CENTRAL on May 31, 2023; six new trials identified
- Updated systematic review
- Random-effects models
- GRADE
- Risk of bias intermediate for most outcomes
- Search of PubMed, Embase and CENTRAL on May 31, 2023; six new trials identified
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
32-34 °C vs Normothermia or 36 °CRelative risk (95% CI)
Survival
1.06(0.91–1.23)
Favorable neurological outcome
1.27(0.89–1.81)
Further pooled results
| Outcome | RR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Favorable neurological outcome at any time point (sensitivity analysis, 9 trials) | 1.14 (0.98–1.34) | |
| 0.512Relative risk (log scale) |
Survival and neurological outcome by location of cardiac arrest (in-hospital vs out-of-hospital) (subgroup)
- Similar results
Target 31-34 °C, duration 12-24 vs 36 hours, rewarming 0.25-0.5 °C/hour, fever prevention (new individual trials)
- No differences in outcomes
Original publication
Temperature control after adult cardiac arrest: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Resuscitation. Published 7 August 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →