ArticleResuscitation plus2024
Temporal trends in the incidence and outcomes of shock-refractory ventricular fibrillation out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Antiarrhythmic drugs for cardiac arrest with a shockable rhythm and their effect on outcomes: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- A comparison of the epidemiology and outcomes of true refractory and recurrent ventricular fibrillation out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a retrospective study.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Beyond Standard Shocks: A Critical Review of Alternative Defibrillation Strategies in Refractory Ventricular Fibrillation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Predictive Factors of CPR Failure After 20 Minutes of Advanced Cardiac Life Support for Non-Traumatic Out-of-Hospital Arrest Cases; a Cross-sectional Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: We aimed to describe trends in the incidence and outcomes of refractory ventricular fibrillation (RVF) compared to non-refractory ventricular fibrillation (non-RVF) in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Methods: Between 2010 and 2019, we included all OHCA cases involving adults ≥ 16 years old with an initial shockable rhythm and who received an attempted resuscitation by Emergency Medical Services (EMS) or a bystander shock prior to EMS arrival in Victoria, Australia. Trends in incidence and survival outcomes over the study period were examined. Adjusted logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine factors associated with RVF, as well as the association of RVF on survival to hospital discharge. RVF refers to patients receiving three or more consecutive shocks without a return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Results: Of the 57,749 OHCA attended by EMS, 7,267 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 4,168 (57.4%) were non-RVF and 3,099 (42.6%) were RVF. The incidence of RVF decreased significantly from 7.7 per 100,000 population in 2010 to 5.6 per 100,000 population in 2019 ( Conclusion: The incidence of RVF is declining, and survival rates are improving. Early treatment of VF patients with bystander CPR and defibrillation is likely to reduce RVF incidence.
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.