Effects of endovascular and surface cooling on resuscitation in patients with cardiac arrest and a comparison of effectiveness, stability, and safety: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES: This study conducted a meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness, stability, and safety of mild therapeutic hypothermia (TH) induced by endovascular cooling (EC) and surface cooling (SC) and its effect on ICU, survival rate, and neurological function integrity in adult CA patients. METHODS: We developed inclusion criteria, intervention protocols, results, and data collection. The results included outcomes during target temperature management as well as ICU stay, survival rate, and neurological functional integrity. The characteristics of the included population and each study were analyzed. RESULTS: Four thousand nine hundred thirteen participants met the inclusion criteria. Those receiving EC had a better cooling efficiency (cooling rates MD = 0.31[0.13, 0.50], p < 0.01; induced cooling times MD = − 90.45[− 167.57, − 13.33], p = 0.02; patients achieving the target temperature RR = 1.60[1.19, 2.15], p < 0.01) and thermal stability during the maintenance phase (maintenance time MD = 2.35[1.22, 3.48], p < 0.01; temperature fluctuation MD = − 0.68[− 1.03, − 0.33], p < 0.01; overcooling RR = 0.33[0.23, 0.49], p < 0.01). There were no differences in ICU survival rate (RR = 1.22[0.98, 1.52], p = 0.07, I(2) = 0%) and hospital survival rate (RR = 1.02 [0.96, 1.09], p = 0.46, I(2) = 0%), but EC reduced the length of stay in ICU (MD = − 1.83[− 3.45, − 0.21], p = 0.03, I(2) = 49%) and improved outcome of favorable neurological function at discharge (RR = 1.15[1.04, 1.28], p < 0.01, I(2) = 0%). EC may delay the hypothermia initiation time, and there was no significant difference between the two cooling methods in the time from the start of patients’ cardiac arrest to achieve the target temperature (MD = − 46.64[− 175.86, 82.58]). EC was superior to non-ArcticSun in terms of cooling efficiency. Although there was no statistical difference in ICU survival rate, ICU length of stay, and hospitalization survival rate, in comparison to non-ArcticSun, EC improved rates of neurologically intact survival (RR = 1.16 [1.01, 1.35], p = 0.04, I(2) = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Among adult patients receiving cardiopulmonary resuscitation, although there is no significant difference between the two cooling methods in the time from the start of cardiac arrest to achieve the target temperature, the faster cooling rate and more stable cooling process in EC shorten patients’ ICU hospitalization time and help more patients obtain good neurological prognosis compared with patients receiving SC. Meanwhile, although EC has no significant difference in patient outcomes compared with ArcticSun, EC has improved rates of neurologically intact survival.