TY - JOUR
T1 - Higher versus lower blood pressure targets after cardiac arrest
T2 - systematic review with individual patient data meta-analysis
AU - Niemelä, Ville
AU - Siddiqui, Faiza
AU - Ameloot, Koen
AU - Reinikainen, Matti
AU - Grand, Johannes
AU - Hästbacka, Johanna
AU - Hassager, Christian
AU - Kjaergard, Jesper
AU - Åneman, Anders
AU - Tiainen, Marjaana
AU - Nielsen, Niklas
AU - Harboe Olsen, Markus
AU - Kamp Jorgensen, Caroline
AU - Juul Petersen, Johanne
AU - Dankiewicz, Josef
AU - Saxena, Manoj
AU - Jakobsen, Janus C
AU - Skrifvars, Markus B
N1 - Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/8
Y1 - 2023/8
N2 - PURPOSE: Guidelines recommend targeting mean arterial pressure (MAP) > 65 mmHg in patients after cardiac arrest (CA). Recent trials have studied the effects of targeting a higher MAP as compared to a lower MAP after CA. We performed a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the effects of higher versus lower MAP targets on patient outcome.METHOD: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, BIOSIS, CINAHL, Scopus, the Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, Google Scholar and the Turning Research into Practice database to identify trials randomizing patients to higher (≥ 71 mmHg) or lower (≤70 mmHg) MAP targets after CA and resuscitation. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, version 2 (RoB 2) to assess for risk of bias. The primary outcomes were 180-day all-cause mortality and poor neurologic recovery defined by a modified Rankin score of 4-6 or a cerebral performance category score of 3-5.RESULTS: Four eligible clinical trials were identified, randomizing a total of 1,087 patients. All the included trials were assessed as having a low risk for bias. The risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval for 180-day all-cause mortality for a higher versus a lower MAP target was 1.08 (0.92-1.26) and for poor neurologic recovery 1.01 (0.86-1.19). Trial sequential analysis showed that a 25% or higher treatment effect, i.e., RR<0.75, can be excluded. No difference in serious adverse events was found between the higher and lower MAP groups.CONCLUSIONS: Targeting a higher MAP compared to a lower MAP is unlikely to reduce mortality or improve neurologic recovery after CA. Only a large treatment effect above 25% (RR<0.75) could be excluded, and future studies are needed to investigate if relevant but lower treatment effect exists. Targeting a higher MAP was not associated with any increase in adverse effects.
AB - PURPOSE: Guidelines recommend targeting mean arterial pressure (MAP) > 65 mmHg in patients after cardiac arrest (CA). Recent trials have studied the effects of targeting a higher MAP as compared to a lower MAP after CA. We performed a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the effects of higher versus lower MAP targets on patient outcome.METHOD: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, BIOSIS, CINAHL, Scopus, the Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, Google Scholar and the Turning Research into Practice database to identify trials randomizing patients to higher (≥ 71 mmHg) or lower (≤70 mmHg) MAP targets after CA and resuscitation. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, version 2 (RoB 2) to assess for risk of bias. The primary outcomes were 180-day all-cause mortality and poor neurologic recovery defined by a modified Rankin score of 4-6 or a cerebral performance category score of 3-5.RESULTS: Four eligible clinical trials were identified, randomizing a total of 1,087 patients. All the included trials were assessed as having a low risk for bias. The risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval for 180-day all-cause mortality for a higher versus a lower MAP target was 1.08 (0.92-1.26) and for poor neurologic recovery 1.01 (0.86-1.19). Trial sequential analysis showed that a 25% or higher treatment effect, i.e., RR<0.75, can be excluded. No difference in serious adverse events was found between the higher and lower MAP groups.CONCLUSIONS: Targeting a higher MAP compared to a lower MAP is unlikely to reduce mortality or improve neurologic recovery after CA. Only a large treatment effect above 25% (RR<0.75) could be excluded, and future studies are needed to investigate if relevant but lower treatment effect exists. Targeting a higher MAP was not associated with any increase in adverse effects.
KW - Blood Pressure/physiology
KW - Heart Arrest
KW - Humans
KW - Target
KW - Cardiac arrest
KW - Systematic review
KW - Blood pressure
KW - Meta-analysis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85162110362&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2023.109862
DO - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2023.109862
M3 - Review
C2 - 37295549
SN - 0300-9572
VL - 189
JO - Resuscitation
JF - Resuscitation
M1 - 109862
ER -