Effect of Trans-Nasal Evaporative Intra-arrest Cooling on Functional Neurologic Outcome in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest : The PRINCESS Randomized Clinical Trial

© 2019 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.Importance: Therapeutic hypothermia may increase survival with good neurologic outcome after cardiac arrest. Trans-nasal evaporative cooling is a method used to induce cooling, primarily of the brain, during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ie, intra-arrest). Objective: To determine whether prehospital trans-nasal evaporative intra-arrest cooling improves survival with good neurologic outcome compared with cooling initiated after hospital arrival. Design, Setting, and Participants: The PRINCESS trial was an investigator-initiated, randomized, clinical, international multicenter study with blinded assessment of the outcome, performed by emergency medical services in 7 European countries from July 2010 to January 2018, with final follow-up on April 29, 2018. In total, 677 patients with bystander-witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were enrolled. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to receive trans-nasal evaporative intra-arrest cooling (n = 343) or standard care (n = 334). Patients admitted to the hospital in both groups received systemic therapeutic hypothermia at 32°C to 34°C for 24 hours. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was survival with good neurologic outcome, defined as Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 1-2, at 90 days. Secondary outcomes were survival at 90 days and time to reach core body temperature less than 34°C. Results: Among the 677 randomized patients (median age, 65 years; 172 [25%] women), 671 completed the trial. Median time to core temperature less than 34°C was 105 minutes in the intervention group vs 182 minutes in the control group (P < .001). The number of patients with CPC 1-2 at 90 days was 56 of 337 (16.6%) in the intervention cooling group vs 45 of 334 (13.5%) in the control group (difference, 3.1% [95% CI, -2.3% to 8.5%]; relative risk [RR], 1.23 [95% CI, 0.86-1.72]; P = .25). In the intervention group, 60 of 337 patients (17.8%) were alive at 90 days vs 52 of 334 (15.6%) in the control group (difference, 2.2% [95% CI, -3.4% to 7.9%]; RR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.81-1.57]; P = .44). Minor nosebleed was the most common device-related adverse event, reported in 45 of 337 patients (13%) in the intervention group. The adverse event rate within 7 days was similar between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, trans-nasal evaporative intra-arrest cooling compared with usual care did not result in a statistically significant improvement in survival with good neurologic outcome at 90 days. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01400373.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

The design of the PRINCESS 2 trial: A randomized trial to study the impact of ultrafast hypothermia on complete neurologic recovery after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with initial shockable rhythm

Background: Delayed hypothermia, initiated after hospital arrival, several hours after cardiac arrest with 8-10 hours to reach the target temperature, is likely to have limited impact on overall survival. However, the effect of ultrafast hypothermia, i.e. delivered intra-arrest or immediately after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), on functional neurologic outcome after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is unclear. In two prior trials, prehospital trans-nasal evaporative intra-arrest cooling was safe, feasible and reduced time to target temperature compared to delayed cooling. Both studies showed trends towards improved neurologic recovery in patients with shockable rhythms. The aim of the PRINCESS2-study is to assess whether cooling, initiated either intra-arrest or immediately after ROSC, followed by in-hospital hypothermia, significantly increases survival with complete neurologic recovery as compared to standard normothermia care, in OHCA patients with shockable rhythms. Methods/design: In this investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled trial, the emergency medical services (EMS) will randomize patients at the scene of cardiac arrest to either trans-nasal cooling within 20 minutes from EMS arrival with subsequent hypothermia at 33°C for 24 hours after hospital admission (intervention), or to standard of care with no prehospital or in-hospital cooling (control). Fever (>37,7°C) will be avoided for the first 72 hours in both groups. All patients will receive post resuscitation care and withdrawal of life support procedures according to current guidelines. Primary outcome is survival with complete neurologic recovery at 90 days, defined as modified Rankin scale (mRS) 0-1. Key secondary outcomes include survival to hospital discharge, survival at 90 days and mRS 0-3 at 90 days. In total, 1022 patients are required to detect an absolute difference of 9% (from 45 to 54%) in survival with neurologic recovery (80% power and one-sided α=0,025, β=0,2) and assuming 2,5% lost to follow-up. Recruitment starts in Q1 2024 and we expect maximum enrolment to be achieved during Q4 2024 at 20-25 European and US sites. Discussion: This trial will assess the impact of ultrafast hypothermia applied on the scene of cardiac arrest, as compared to normothermia, on 90-day survival with complete neurologic recovery in OHCA patients with initial shockable rhythm. Trial registration: NCT06025123.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Effect of intra-arrest trans-nasal evaporative cooling in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a pooled individual participant data analysis

Background: Randomized trials have shown that trans-nasal evaporative cooling initiated during CPR (i.e. intra-arrest) effectively lower core body temperature in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients. However, these trials may have been underpowered to detect significant differences in neurologic outcome, especially in patients with initial shockable rhythm. Methods: We conducted a post hoc pooled analysis of individual data from two randomized trials including 851 patients who eventually received the allocated intervention and with available outcome (“as-treated” analysis). Primary outcome was survival with favourable neurological outcome at hospital discharge (Cerebral Performance Category [CPC] of 1–2) according to the initial rhythm (shockable vs. non-shockable). Secondary outcomes included complete neurological recovery (CPC 1) at hospital discharge. Results: Among the 325 patients with initial shockable rhythms, favourable neurological outcome was observed in 54/158 (34.2%) patients in the intervention and 40/167 (24.0%) in the control group (RR 1.43 [confidence intervals, CIs 1.01–2.02]). Complete neurological recovery was observed in 40/158 (25.3%) in the intervention and 27/167 (16.2%) in the control group (RR 1.57 [CIs 1.01–2.42]). Among the 526 patients with initial non-shockable rhythms, favourable neurological outcome was in 10/259 (3.8%) in the intervention and 13/267 (4.9%) in the control group (RR 0.88 [CIs 0.52–1.29]; p = 0.67); survival and complete neurological recovery were also similar between groups. No significant benefit was observed for the intervention in the entire population. Conclusions: In this pooled analysis of individual data, intra-arrest cooling was associated with a significant increase in favourable neurological outcome in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with initial shockable rhythms. Future studies are needed to confirm the potential benefits of this intervention in this subgroup of patients.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe