Defibrillation strategies for refractory ventricular fibrillation out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis

Abstract

AbstractBackground and ObjectiveDouble sequential external defibrillation (DSED) and vector‐change defibrillation (VCD) have been suggested to enhance clinical outcomes for patients with ventricular fibrillation (VF) refractory of standard defibrillation (SD). Therefore, this network meta‐analysis aims to evaluate the comparative efficacy of DSED, VCD, and SD for refractory VF.MethodsA systematic review and network meta‐analysis synthesizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative observational studies retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, WOS, SCOPUS, and Cochrane through November 15th, 2022. R software netmeta and netrank package (R version 4.2.0) and meta‐insight software were used to pool dichotomous outcomes using odds ratio (OR) presented with the corresponding confidence interval (CI). Our protocol was prospectively published in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022378533.ResultsWe included seven studies with a total of 1632 participants. DSED was similar to SD in survival to hospital discharge (OR: 1.14 with 95% CI [0.55, 2.83]), favorable neurological outcome (modified Rankin scale ≤2 or cerebral performance category ≤2) (OR: 1.35 with 95% CI [0.46, 3.99]), and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) (OR: 0.81 with 95% CI [0.43; 1.5]). In addition, VCD was similar to SD in survival to hospital discharge (OR: 1.12 with 95% CI [0.27, 4.57]), favorable neurological outcome (OR: 1.01 with 95% CI [0.18, 5.75]), and ROSC (OR: 0.88 with 95% CI [0.24; 3.15]).ConclusionDouble sequential external defibrillation and VCD were not associated with enhanced outcomes in patients with refractory VF out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest, compared to SD. However, the current evidence is still inconclusive, warranting further large‐scale RCTs.