Trial reportPLoS medicine2017
A comparison of Selective Aortic Arch Perfusion and Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta for the management of hemorrhage-induced traumatic cardiac arrest: A translational model in large swine.
Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endovascular resuscitation: an expert practice review.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2026Review
- Selective aortic arch perfusion vs. conventional advanced cardiac life support: a bi-ventricular pressure-volume loop analysis in a swine model of cardiac arrest.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Unlocking survival in traumatic cardiac arrest: global insights, innovations, and unmet needs.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
- Selective aortic arch perfusion: a first-in-human observational cadaveric study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2023Article
- Class of hemorrhagic shock is associated with progressive diastolic coronary flow reversal and diminished left ventricular function.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
- The use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) for non-traumatic cardiac arrest: A review.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2020Review
- State-of-the-art methods for the treatment of severe hemorrhagic trauma: selective aortic arch perfusion and emergency preservation and resuscitation-what is next?Acute medicine & surgeryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurvival rates remain low after hemorrhage-induced traumatic cardiac arrest (TCA). Noncompressible torso hemorrhage (NCTH) is a major cause of potentially survivable trauma death. Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) at the thoracic aorta (Zone 1) can limit subdiaphragmatic blood loss and allow for IV fluid resuscitation when intrinsic cardiac activity is still present. Selective Aortic Arch Perfusion (SAAP) combines thoracic aortic balloon hemorrhage control with intra-aortic oxygenated perfusion to achieve return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) when cardiac arrest has occurred. METHODS AND
findingsMale Yorkshire Landrace cross swine (80.0 ± 6.0 kg) underwent anesthesia, instrumentation for monitoring, and splenectomy. TCA was induced by laparoscopic liver lobe resection combined with arterial catheter blood withdrawal to achieve a sustained systolic blood pressure <10 mmHg, cardiac arrest. After 3 min of arrest, swine were allocated to one of three interventions: (1) REBOA plus 4 units of IV fresh whole blood (FWB), (2) SAAP with oxygenated lactated Ringer's (LR), 1,600 mL/2 min, or (3) SAAP with oxygenated FWB 1,600 mL/2 min. Primary endpoint was survival to the end of 60 min of resuscitation, a simulated prehospital phase. Thirty animals were allocated to 3 groups (10 per group)-5 protocol exclusions resulted in a total of 35 animals being used. Baseline measurements and time to cardiac arrest were not different amongst groups. ROSC was achieved in 0/10 (0%, 95% CI 0.00-30.9) REBOA, 6/10 (60%, 95% CI 26.2-87.8) SAAP-LR and 10/10 (100%, 95% CI 69.2-100.0) SAAP-FWB animals, p < 0.001. Survival to end of simulated 60-minute prehospital resuscitation was 0/10 (0%, 95% CI 0.00-30.9) for REBOA, 1/10 (10%, 95% CI 0.25-44.5) for SAAP-LR and 9/10 (90%, 95% CI 55.5-99.7) for SAAP-FWB, p < 0.001. Total FWB infusion volume was similar for REBOA (2,452 ± 0 mL) and SAAP-FWB (2,250 ± 594 mL). This study was undertaken in laboratory conditions, and as such may have practical limitations when applied clinically. Cardiac arrest in this study was defined by intra-aortic pressure monitoring that is not feasible in clinical practice, and as such limits the generalizability of findings. Clinical trials are needed to determine if the beneficial effects of SAAP-FWB observed in this laboratory study will translate into improved survival in clinical practice.
conclusionsSAAP conferred a superior short-term survival over REBOA in this large animal model of hemorrhage-induced traumatic cardiac arrest with NCTH. SAAP using an oxygen-carrying perfusate was more effective in this study than non-oxygen carrying solutions in TCA. SAAP can effect ROSC from hemorrhage-induced electrocardiographic asystole in large swine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.