Systematic review shows targeted temperature management improves survival and neurological outcomes in pediatric patients, suggesting therapeutic hypothermia may be beneficial.
Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in children is a rare but catastrophic event, often resulting in significant neurological injury. Targeted temperature management (TTM), including therapeutic hypothermia (TH), has been proposed as a neuroprotective strategy. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effects of different TTM strategies on survival and neurological outcomes in pediatric patients after OHCA. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Pooled outcomes were synthesized using odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and the certainty of evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. A total of nine studies encompassing 2107 pediatric patients were included. TH was associated with significantly higher odds of survival (OR: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.36-2.18; p < 0.0001) and favorable neurological outcome (OR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.16-2.33; p = 0.006) compared to normothermia. Subgroup analysis demonstrated greater survival benefit at 12 months and improved neurological outcomes at 6-12 months. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in blood lactate levels, odds of arrhythmia, culture-proven infections, or length of hospital stay. The certainty of evidence for most outcomes was graded as low due to the predominance of nonrandomized studies and imprecision. TH as a TTM strategy following pediatric OHCA may offer survival and neurological advantage, particularly at longer-term follow-up, without a significant increase in adverse events. However, the low certainty of evidence highlights the need for further high-quality randomized trials to inform clinical practice and optimize neuroprotective care in this vulnerable population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alsabri et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: