Higher versus lower blood pressure targets after cardiac arrest: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

A few mostly underpowered randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been used to study the impact of blood pressure (BP) targets in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients. We aimed to perform an updated meta-analysis to compare the outcomes between the higher BP target and the lower BP target groups following OHCA. A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library until December 2022. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using RevMan 5.4. Our search yielded four RCTs with a total of 1114 patients. Regarding our primary outcome of all-cause mortality, there was no significant difference between higher versus lower BP target goals in post-OHCA patients (OR 1.12, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.45). Furthermore, there were no significant differences between the two groups in good neurological outcome, the incidence of arrhythmia, need for renal replacement therapy, and the levels of neuron-specific enolase at 48 h. The length of ICU stay of patients treated with the higher BP target was significantly lower but by a small margin. These findings do not support the use of a higher BP target but are subject to confirmation by large-scale RCTs investigating homogenous BP goals

Oxygen targets following cardiac arrest: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction: The appropriate oxygen target post-resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients is uncertain. We sought to compare lower versus higher oxygen targets in patients following OHCA. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov until January 2023 to include all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated conservative vs. liberal oxygen therapy in OHCA patients. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 90 days while our secondary outcomes were the level of neuron-specific enolase (NSE) at 48 h, ICU length of stay (LOS), and favorable neurological outcome (the proportion of patients with Cerebral Performance Category scores of 1–2 at end of follow-up). We used RevMan 5.4 to pool risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs). Results: Nine trials with 1971 patients were included in our review. There was no significant difference between the conservative and liberal oxygen target groups regarding the rate of all-cause mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.13; I2 = 55%). There were no significant differences between the two groups when assessing favorable neurological outcome (RR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.10; I2 = 4%), NSE at 48 h (MD 0.04, 95% CI: −0.67 to 0.76; I2 = 0%), and ICU length of stay (MD −2.86 days, 95% CI: −8.00 to 2.29 days; I2 = 0%). Conclusions: Conservative oxygen therapy did not decrease mortality, improve neurologic recovery, or decrease ICU LOS as compared to a liberal oxygen regimen. Future large-scale RCTs comparing homogenous oxygen targets are needed to confirm these findings