Intraosseous or Intravenous Vascular Access for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Mikael F. Vallentin, Asger Granfeldt, Thomas L. Klitgaard, Søren Mikkelsen, Fredrik Folke, Helle Collatz Christensen, Amalie L. Povlsen, Alberthe H. Petersen, Sofie Winther, Lea W. Frilund, Carsten Meilandt, Mathias J. Holmberg, Kristian B. Winther, Allan Bach, Thomas H. Dissing, Christian J. Terkelsen, Steffen Christensen, Line Kirkegaard Rasmussen, Lone R. Mortensen, Mads L. LoldrupThomas Elkmann, Anders G. Nielsen, Charlotte Runge, Elise Klæstrup, Jimmy H. Holm, Mikkel Bak, Lars-Gustav R. Nielsen, Mette Pedersen, Gunhild Kjærgaard-Andersen, Peter M. Hansen, Anne C. Brøchner, Erika F. Christensen, Frederik M. Nielsen, Christian G. Nissen, Jeppe W. Bjørn, Peter Burholt, Laust E.R. Obling, Sarah L.D. Holle, Lene Russell, Henrik Alstrøm, Søren Hestad, Tanja H. Fogtmann, Jens U.H. Buciek, Karina Jakobsen, Mette Krag, Michael Sandgaard, Birthe Sindberg, Lars W. Andersen*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a leading cause of death worldwide. Establishing vascular access is critical for administering guideline-recommended drugs during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Both the intraosseous route and the intravenous route are used routinely, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear. Methods We conducted a randomized clinical trial to compare the effectiveness of initial attempts at intraosseous or intravenous vascular access in adults who had nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The primary outcome was a sustained return of spontaneous circulation. Key secondary outcomes were survival at 30 days and survival at 30 days with a favorable neurologic outcome, defined by a score of 0 to 3 on the modified Rankin scale (scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability). Results Among 1506 patients who underwent randomization, 1479 were included in the primary analysis (731 in the intraosseous-access group and 748 in the intravenous-access group). The successful establishment of vascular access within two attempts occurred in 669 patients (92%) assigned to the intraosseous-access group and in 595 patients (80%) assigned to the intravenous-access group. Sustained return of spontaneous circulation occurred in 221 patients (30%) in the intraosseous-access group and in 214 patients (29%) in the intravenous-access group (risk ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.24; P=0.49). At 30 days, 85 patients (12%) in the intraosseous-access group and 75 patients (10%) in the intravenous-access group were alive (risk ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.56); a favorable neurologic outcome at 30 days occurred in 67 patients (9%) and 59 patients (8%), respectively (risk ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.62). Prespecified adverse events were uncommon. Conclusions There was no significant difference in sustained return of spontaneous circulation between initial intraosseous and intravenous vascular access in adults who had out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Original languageEnglish
JournalThe New England Journal of Medicine
Volume392
Issue number4
Pages (from-to)349-360
Number of pages12
ISSN0028-4793
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 23 Jan 2025

Keywords

  • Cardiac Arrest
  • Cardiology
  • Clinical Medicine
  • Clinical Medicine General
  • Critical Care
  • Emergency Medicine
  • Emergency Medicine General
  • Pulmonary/Critical Care

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Intraosseous or Intravenous Vascular Access for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this