Clinical Significance of Initial and Converted Cardiac Rhythms in Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Patients with Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Nationwide Observational Study
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design and Settings
2.2. Data Source
2.3. Study Population
- Initial SR group: Patients who presented with ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia.
- Initial NSR converted to SR group: Patients whose initial rhythm was asystole or pulseless electrical activity but who converted to SR during resuscitation.
- Refractory NSR group: Patients who remained in a persistent non-shockable rhythm without conversion.
2.4. Variables
2.5. Outcome Measure
2.6. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Patient Characteristics
3.2. Survival and Neurological Outcome at Hospital Discharge Before Propensity Score Matching
3.3. Propensity Score Matching for Outcomes at Hospital Discharge Between the Three Groups
- Initial SR vs. initial NSR converted to SR group (n = 322):Survival to hospital discharge was slightly higher in the initial SR group compared to the converted group (21.1% vs. 19.9%), but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.782). Similarly, a favorable neurological outcome (CPC 1–2) was observed in 15.5% of the initial SR group vs. 13.7% of the converted group (p = 0.636) (Table 2 and Figure 2).
- Initial NSR converted to SR group vs. refractory NSR group (n = 322):Survival to hospital discharge was higher in the initial NSR converted to SR group (16.1%) than in the refractory NSR group (8.7%), but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.063). However, favorable neurological outcomes occurred more frequently in the initial NSR converted to SR group (9.3%) than in the initial NSR group (3.7%), with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.042) (Table 3 and Figure 2).
- Initial SR vs. refractory NSR group (n = 236):Survival to discharge was higher in the initial SR group (17.8%) compared to the refractory NSR group (11.0%), though the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.138). However, the initial SR group had a significantly better neurological outcome (CPC 1–2) than the refractory NSR group (14.4% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.016) (Table 4 and Figure 2).
3.4. Multivariable Logistic Analysis of Outcomes in the Patient Groups After Propensity Score Matching
- Compared with the initial SR group, the refractory NSR group had an AOR of 0.337 (95% CI: 0.121–0.937; p = 0.037).
4. Discussion
Limitations
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
AOR | Adjusted Odds Ratio |
CPC | Cerebral Performance Category |
CPR | Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation |
ECPR | Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation |
ECMO | Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation |
NSR | Non-Shockable Rhythm |
OHCA | Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest |
OHCAS | Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Surveillance |
SR | Shockable Rhythm |
TTM | Targeted Temperature Management |
VF | Ventricular Fibrillation |
References
- Jentzer, J.C.; Clements, C.M.; Wright, R.S.; White, R.D.; Jaffe, A.S. Improving survival from cardiac arrest: A review of contemporary practice and challenges. Ann. Emerg. Med. 2016, 68, 678–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Weisfeldt, M.L.; Sitlani, C.M.; Ornato, J.P.; Rea, T.; Aufderheide, T.P.; Davis, D.; Dreyer, J.; Hess, E.P.; Jui, J.; Maloney, J.; et al. Survival after application of automatic external defibrillators before arrival of the emergency medical system: Evaluation in the resuscitation outcomes consortium population of 21 million. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2010, 55, 1713–1720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Andersen, L.W.; Granfeldt, A.; Callaway, C.W.; Bradley, S.M.; Soar, J.; Nolan, J.P.; Kurth, T.; Donnino, M.W.; American Heart Association’s Get With The Guidelines–Resuscitation Investigators. Association between tracheal intubation during adult in-hospital cardiac arrest and survival. JAMA 2017, 317, 494–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sakamoto, T.; Morimura, N.; Nagao, K.; Asai, Y.; Yokota, H.; Nara, S.; Hase, M.; Tahara, Y.; Atsumi, T.; SAVE-J Study Group. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A prospective observational study. Resuscitation 2014, 85, 762–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Low, C.J.W.; Ling, R.R.; Ramanathan, K.; Chen, Y.; Rochwerg, B.; Kitamura, T.; Iwami, T.; Ong, M.E.H.; Okada, Y. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus conventional CPR in cardiac arrest: An updated meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Crit. Care 2024, 28, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kandori, K.; Nakajima, S.; Matsuyama, T.; Kitamura, T.; Narumiya, H.; Hitosugi, M.; Okada, Y. Association between no-flow time, prehospital low-flow time, and conversion to nonshockable rhythm in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest presenting with initial shockable rhythm: A nationwide prospective study in Japan. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2025, 14, e038725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lovaković, J.; Šantek, P.; Mahečić, L.M.; Rožić, I.; Marić, J.; Čučević, Đ.; Tarnovski, L.; Martinić, D.; Rašić, F.; Rašić, Ž. Rhythm conversion in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and influence on the return of spontaneous circulation at the hospital arrival: A 10-year retrospective study in Croatia. Int. J. Emerg. Med. 2024, 17, 157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nakashima, T.; Noguchi, T.; Tahara, Y.; Nishimura, K.; Ogata, S.; Yasuda, S.; Onozuka, D.; Morimura, N.; Nagao, K.; Gaieski, D.F.; et al. Patients with refractory out-of-cardiac arrest and sustained ventricular fibrillation as candidates for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation—Prospective multi-center observational study. Circ. J. 2019, 83, 1011–1018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Otani, T.; Hifumi, T.; Inoue, A.; Abe, T.; Sakamoto, T.; Kuroda, Y.; SAVE-J II study group. Transient return of spontaneous circulation related to favourable outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients resuscitated with extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A secondary analysis of the SAVE-J II study. Resusc. Plus 2022, 12, 100300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rob, D.; Farkasovska, K.; Kavalkova, P.; Dusík, M.; Havranek, S.; Pudil, J.; Mockova, E.; Macoun, J.; Belohlavek, J. Heart rhythm at hospital admission: A factor for survival and neurological outcome among ECPR recipients? Resuscitation 2024, 204, 110412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Luo, S.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, W.; Zheng, R.; Tao, J.; Xiong, Y. Prognostic significance of spontaneous shockable rhythm conversion in adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with initial non-shockable heart rhythms: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Resuscitation 2017, 121, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yoshida, T.; Yoshida, M.; Masui, Y.; Naito, T.; Tsukuda, J.; Morisawa, K.; Fujitani, S. Effectiveness of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for non-shockable out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: An analysis from the SOS-KANTO 2017 study. Cureus 2024, 16, e69305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Han, K.S.; Lee, S.W.; Lee, E.J.; Kim, S.J. Prognostic value of the conversion to a shockable rhythm in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with initial non-shockable rhythm. J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8, 644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, J.G.; Shin, H.; Cho, J.H.; Choi, H.Y.; Kim, W.; Kim, J.; Moon, S.; Ahn, C.; Lee, J.; Cho, Y.; et al. Prognostic value of changes in the cardiac arrest rhythms from the prehospital stage to the emergency department in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients without prehospital returns of spontaneous circulation: A nationwide observational study. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0257883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Crespo-Diaz, R.; Wolfson, J.; Yannopoulos, D.; Bartos, J.A. Machine learning identifies higher survival profile in extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation*. Crit. Care Med. 2024, 52, 1065–1076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cournoyer, A.; Cossette, S.; Potter, B.J.; Daoust, R.; de Montigny, L.; Londei-Leduc, L.; Lamarche, Y.; Ross, D.; Morris, J.; Chauny, J.M.; et al. Prognostic impact of the conversion to a shockable rhythm from a non-shockable rhythm for patients suffering from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 2019, 140, 43–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Variables | Total | Initial SR | Initial NSR Converted to SR | Refractory NSR | p |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
(N = 681) | (N = 161) | (N = 345) | (N = 175) | ||
Sex, male, n (%) | 570 (83.7%) | 139 (86.3%) | 301 (87.2%) | 130 (74.3%) | <0.001 |
Age, years [median (IQR)] | 56 [46–64] | 54 [46–63] | 55 [45–62] | 60 [47–68] | 0.004 |
Bystander CPR | 453 (66.5%) | 99 (61.5%) | 239 (69.3%) | 115 (65.7%) | 0.217 |
Witnessed arrest | 563 (82.7%) | 133 (82.6%) | 288 (83.5%) | 142 (81.1%) | 0.801 |
Cardiac origin | 638 (93.7%) | 154 (95.7%) | 328 (95.1%) | 156 (89.1%) | 0.016 |
Pre-existing comorbidity, n (%) | |||||
HTN | 249 (36.6%) | 53 (32.9%) | 134 (38.8%) | 62 (35.4%) | 0.409 |
DM | 165 (24.2%) | 35 (21.7%) | 82 (23.8%) | 48 (27.4%) | 0.459 |
Heart disease | 135 (19.8%) | 33 (20.5%) | 68 (19.7%) | 34 (19.4%) | 0.968 |
Respiratory disease | 19 (2.8%) | 6 (3.7%) | 12 (3.5%) | 1 (0.6%) | 0.091 |
CKD | 20 (2.9%) | 3 (1.9%) | 9 (2.6%) | 8 (4.6%) | 0.345 |
Stroke | 23 (3.4%) | 5 (3.1%) | 9 (2.6%) | 9 (5.1%) | 0.312 |
Mechanical CPR | 223 (32.7%) | 40 (24.8%) | 121 (35.1%) | 62 (35.4%) | 0.456 |
Post-cardiac arrest care | |||||
Reperfusion treatment a | 447 (65.6%) | 116 (72.0%) | 241 (69.9%) | 90 (51.4%) | <0.001 |
TTM | 114 (16.7%) | 33 (20.5%) | 67 (19.4%) | 14 (8.0%) | 0.002 |
Transient pre-ECPR ROSC b | 102 (15.0%) | 23 (14.3%) | 52 (15.1%) | 27 (15.4%) | 0.956 |
Time interval, mins | |||||
Call or witness to ED * | 42.0 [23.0–74.0] | 65.5 [25.0–74.0] | 38.0 [22.0–72.5] | 40.0 [22.0–75.5] | 0.182 |
From ED to ECPR $ | 80.5 [43.0–99.0] | 75.0 [35.0–97.0] | 82.0 [52.5–99.0] | 82.0 [49.0–102.5] | 0.045 |
Outcome at hospital discharge | |||||
Survival to discharge | 118 (17.3%) | 34 (21.1%) | 67 (19.4%) | 17 (9.7%) | 0.008 |
Survival with CPC 1–2 | 72 (10.6%) | 25 (15.5%) | 40 (11.6%) | 7 (4.0%) | 0.002 |
Variables | Total | Initial SR | Initial NSR Converted to SR | p |
---|---|---|---|---|
(N = 322) | (N = 161) | (N = 161) | ||
Sex, male, n (%) | 271 (84.2%) | 139 (86.3%) | 132 (82.0%) | 0.285 |
Age, years (IQR) | 54.0 [44.0–63.0] | 54.0 [46.0–63.0] | 54.0 [42.0–62.0] | 0.469 |
Bystander CPR | 200 (62.1%) | 99 (61.5%) | 101 (62.7%) | 0.818 |
Witnessed arrest | 268 (83.2%) | 133 (82.6%) | 135 (83.9%) | 0.765 |
Cardiac origin | 306 (95.0%) | 154 (95.7%) | 152 (94.4%) | 0.608 |
Pre-existing comorbidity, n (%) | ||||
HTN | 114 (35.4%) | 53 (32.9%) | 61 (37.9%) | 0.351 |
DM | 79 (24.5%) | 35 (21.7%) | 44 (27.3%) | 0.244 |
Heart disease | 61 (18.9%) | 33 (20.5%) | 28 (17.4%) | 0.477 |
Respiratory disease | 9 (2.8%) | 6 (3.7%) | 3 (1.9%) | 0.310 |
CKD | 6 (1.9%) | 3 (1.9%) | 3 (1.9%) | 1.000 |
Stroke | 8 (2.5%) | 5 (3.1%) | 3 (1.9%) | 0.474 |
Mechanical CPR | 90 (28.0%) | 40 (24.8%) | 50 (31.1%) | 0.214 |
Post-cardiac arrest care | ||||
Reperfusion treatment a | 228 (70.8%) | 116 (72.0%) | 112 (69.6%) | 0.624 |
TTM | 72 (22.4%) | 33 (20.5%) | 39 (24.2%) | 0.422 |
Transient Pre-ECPR ROSC b | 49 (15.2%) | 23 (14.3%) | 26 (16.1%) | 0.642 |
Time interval, mins | ||||
Call or witness to ED * | 57.0 [24.0–74.0] | 65.5 [25.0–74.0] | 42.0 [23.0–73.0] | 0.153 |
From ED to ECPR $ | 78.0 [38.0–99.0] | 75.0 [35.0–97.0] | 81.0 [48.0–101.0] | 0.054 |
Outcome at hospital discharge | ||||
Survival to discharge | 66 (20.5%) | 34 (21.1%) | 32 (19.9%) | 0.782 |
Survival with CPC 1–2 | 47 (14.6%) | 25 (15.5%) | 22 (13.7%) | 0.636 |
Variables | Total | Initial NSR Converted to SR | Refractory NSR | p |
---|---|---|---|---|
(N = 322) | (N = 161) | (N = 161) | ||
Sex, male, n (%) | 254 (78.9%) | 125 (77.6%) | 129 (80.1%) | 0.585 |
Age, years (IQR) | 58.0 [47.0–65.0] | 58.0 [48.0–64.0] | 59.0 [46.0–67.0] | 0.411 |
Bystander CPR | 214 (66.5%) | 107 (66.5%) | 107 (66.5%) | 1.000 |
Witnessed arrest | 262 (81.4%) | 131 (81.4%) | 131 (81.4%) | 1.000 |
Cardiac origin | 298 (92.5%) | 149 (92.5%) | 149 (92.5%) | 1.000 |
Pre-existing comorbidity, n (%) | ||||
HTN | 111 (34.5%) | 53 (32.9%) | 58 (36.0%) | 0.558 |
DM | 80 (24.8%) | 37 (23.0%) | 43 (26.7%) | 0.439 |
Heart disease | 64 (19.9%) | 31 (19.3%) | 33 (20.5%) | 0.780 |
Respiratory disease | 3 (0.9%) | 2 (1.2%) | 1 (0.6%) | 0.562 |
CKD | 13 (4.0%) | 5 (3.1%) | 8 (5.0%) | 0.396 |
Stroke | 18 (5.6%) | 9 (5.6%) | 9 (5.6%) | 1.000 |
Mechanical CPR | 117 (36.3%) | 60 (37.3%) | 57 (35.4%) | 0.728 |
Post-cardiac arrest care | ||||
Reperfusion treatment a | 178 (55.3%) | 89 (55.3%) | 89 (55.3%) | 1.000 |
TTM | 29 (9.0%) | 15 (9.3%) | 14 (8.7%) | 0.846 |
Transient Pre-ECPR ROSC b | 42 (13.0%) | 18 (11.2%) | 24 (14.9%) | 0.321 |
Time interval, mins | ||||
Call or witness to ED * | 36.0 [20.0–73.0] | 30.0 [18.0–68.0] | 40.0 [24.0–76.0] | 0.010 |
From ED to ECPR $ | 81.0 [49.5–101.0] | 80.0 [55.0–99.0] | 81.5 [49.0–102.0] | 0.932 |
Outcome at hospital discharge | ||||
Survival to discharge | 40 (12.4%) | 26 (16.1%) | 14 (8.7%) | 0.063 |
Survival with CPC1–2 | 21 (6.5%) | 15 (9.3%) | 6 (3.7%) | 0.042 |
Variables | Total | Initial SR | Refractory NSR | p |
---|---|---|---|---|
(N = 236) | (N = 118) | (N = 118) | ||
Sex, male, n (%) | 193 (81.8%) | 97 (82.2%) | 96 (81.4%) | 0.866 |
Age, years (IQR) | 58.0 [47.0–65.5] | 57.5 [48.0–65.0] | 58.5 [45.0–66.0] | 0.579 |
Bystander CPR | 149 (63.1%) | 74 (62.7%) | 75 (63.6%) | 0.893 |
Witnessed arrest | 194 (82.2%) | 96 (81.4%) | 98 (83.1%) | 0.734 |
Cardiac origin | 224 (94.9%) | 113 (95.8%) | 111 (94.1%) | 0.553 |
Pre-existing comorbidity, n (%) | ||||
HTN | 79 (33.5%) | 36 (30.5%) | 43 (36.4%) | 0.334 |
DM | 59 (25.0%) | 30 (25.4%) | 29 (24.6%) | 0.881 |
Heart disease | 51 (21.6%) | 24 (20.3%) | 27 (22.9%) | 0.635 |
Respiratory disease | 2 (0.8%) | 1 (0.8%) | 1 (0.8%) | 1.000 |
CKD | 7 (3.0%) | 3 (2.5%) | 4 (3.4%) | 0.701 |
Stroke | 9 (3.8%) | 5 (4.2%) | 4 (3.4%) | 0.734 |
Mechanical CPR | 66 (28.0%) | 33 (28.0%) | 33 (28.0%) | 1.000 |
Post-cardiac arrest care | ||||
Reperfusion treatment a | 146 (61.9%) | 76 (64.4%) | 70 (59.3%) | 0.421 |
TTM | 29 (12.3%) | 17 (14.4%) | 12 (10.2%) | 0.321 |
Transient pre-ECPR ROSC b | 32 (13.6%) | 16 (13.6%) | 16 (13.6%) | 1.000 |
Time interval, mins | ||||
Call or witness to ED * | 57.0 [24.0–76.0] | 65.5 [27.0–74.0] | 40.0 [21.0–78.0] | 0.749 |
From ED to ECPR $ | 77.0 [37.0–103.0] | 73.0 [35.5–101.5] | 79.0 [46.0–106.0] | 0.102 |
Outcome at hospital discharge | ||||
Survival to discharge | 34 (14.4%) | 21 (17.8%) | 13 (11.0%) | 0.138 |
Survival with CPC1–2 | 23 (9.7%) | 17 (14.4%) | 6 (5.1%) | 0.016 |
Outcomes | Groups | Initial SR (Ref.) vs. Initial NSR Converted to SR (Test) | Initial SR (Ref.) vs. Refractory NSR (Test) | Initial NSR Converted to SR (Ref.) vs. Refractory NSR (Test) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AOR | 95% CI | p | AOR | 95% CI | p | AOR | 95% CI | p | ||
Survival to discharge * | Reference | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||||
Test | 1.067 | 0.574–1.985 | 0.837 | 0.627 | 0.277–1.421 | 0.263 | 0.823 | 0.577–1.624 | 0.102 | |
Survival with CPC 1–2 * | Reference | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||||
Test | 1.009 | 0.503–2.023 | 0.980 | 0.337 | 0.121–0.938 | 0.037 | 0.283 | 0.097–0.822 | 0.020 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kim, S.; Kim, J.-G.; Kang, G.-H.; Jang, Y.-S.; Kim, W.; Choi, H.-Y.; Ahn, C. Clinical Significance of Initial and Converted Cardiac Rhythms in Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Patients with Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Nationwide Observational Study. J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14, 5066. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14145066
Kim S, Kim J-G, Kang G-H, Jang Y-S, Kim W, Choi H-Y, Ahn C. Clinical Significance of Initial and Converted Cardiac Rhythms in Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Patients with Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Nationwide Observational Study. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2025; 14(14):5066. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14145066
Chicago/Turabian StyleKim, Sola, Jae-Guk Kim, Gu-Hyun Kang, Yong-Soo Jang, Wonhee Kim, Hyun-Young Choi, and Chiwon Ahn. 2025. "Clinical Significance of Initial and Converted Cardiac Rhythms in Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Patients with Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Nationwide Observational Study" Journal of Clinical Medicine 14, no. 14: 5066. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14145066
APA StyleKim, S., Kim, J.-G., Kang, G.-H., Jang, Y.-S., Kim, W., Choi, H.-Y., & Ahn, C. (2025). Clinical Significance of Initial and Converted Cardiac Rhythms in Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Patients with Refractory Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Nationwide Observational Study. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14(14), 5066. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14145066