ArticleCritical care (London, England)2025
Comparison of hypothermic and normothermic targeted temperature management in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with acute coronary syndrome: a nationwide retrospective study.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTargeted temperature management (TTM) is considered a beneficial treatment for improving outcomes in patients with OHCA due to acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The comparative benefits of hypothermic TTM (32-34°C) versus normothermic TTM (35-36°C) are unclear. This study compares these TTM strategies in improving neurological outcomes and survival rates in OHCA patients with ACS.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis using data from the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (JAAM-OHCA) registry, encompassing 68,110 OHCA patients between June 2014 and December 2020. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 1,217 adult patients with ACS who received TTM were eligible for the study. Patients were categorized into two groups based on their TTM strategy: hypothermic TTM (32-34°C) and normothermic TTM (35-36°C). The primary outcome was 30-day favorable neurological outcome, defined by the Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) scale (CPC 1-2). Secondary outcomes included 30-day survival and adverse event incidence. Statistical analysis involved multivariable logistic regression and propensity score adjustments with inverse probability weighting (IPW) to account for potential confounders.
resultsOf the 1,217 patients, 369 received normothermic TTM and 848 received hypothermic TTM. In both groups, most patients were male, with a median age in the 60s. Approximately 70% had a shockable rhythm at the scene, one-third had a shockable rhythm in-hospital, around 70% had ST segment elevation, and about half received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The proportions of patients with 30-day favorable neurological outcomes were 36.6% (135) in the normothermic group and 36.6% (310) in the hypothermic group. No difference in neurological outcomes was observed in the multivariable regression analysis (adjusted OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.84-1.54), and the result was consistent in the IPW analysis (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.84-1.47). Other outcomes also showed no significant differences.
conclusionIn this nationwide, retrospective study using the JAAM-OHCA registry, we found no significant differences in 30-day favorable neurological outcome, 30-day survival, and adverse event incidences between hypothermic TTM (32-34°C) and normothermic TTM (35-36°C) in adult patients with OHCA due to ACS.
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.