Why the study?
While survival benefits have been reported for ECPR in refractory cardiac arrest, its impact on neurological outcomes remained uncertain.
Does extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) improve favorable neurological outcomes at 30 days post-discharge in adult patients with refractory cardiac arrest compared to conventional CPR?
Population
Adult patients undergoing CPR across eight comparative studies
Comparison
ECPR vs CCPR
Design
Systematic review and meta-analysis
Follow-up
30 days post-discharge
Key result
ECPR significantly improved favorable neurological outcomes at 30 days compared to conventional CPR in adult patients with refractory cardiac arrest (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.54-0.71; p<0.0001).
Authors
Loading...
Supports ECPR consideration in refractory arrest; reinforces Level 1 meta-analytic evidence for neurological benefit.
Meta-Analysis
Does extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) improve favorable neurological outcomes at 30 days post-discharge in adult patients with refractory cardiac arrest compared to conventional CPR?
Hazard Ratio: 0.62 (95% CI 0.54–0.71)
p-value: p=< 0.0001
In adult patients with refractory cardiac arrest, ECPR is associated with a 38% reduction in poor neurological outcomes at 30 days post-discharge compared to conventional CPR.
Jena et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in Refractory cardiac arrest. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) vs. Conventional CPR (CCPR) was evaluated on Favorable neurological outcome at 30 days post-discharge (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.54-0.71, p=< 0.0001). ECPR significantly improved favorable neurological outcomes at 30 days compared to conventional CPR in adult patients with refractory cardiac arrest (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.54-0.71; p<0.0001).