| Literature DB >> 36078931 |
Zi Hui Celeste Ng1, Siyuan Joseph Ho1, Tan Caleb1, Clyve Yu Leon Yaow1, Seth En Teoh1, Lai Peng Tham2, Marcus Eng Hock Ong3,4, Shu-Ling Chong2,5, Andrew Fu Wah Ho3,4.
Abstract
Long-term outcomes after non-traumatic pediatric out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) are not well understood. This systematic review aimed to summarize long-term outcomes (1 year and beyond), including overall survival, survival with favorable neurological outcomes, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes) amongst pediatric OHCA patients who survived to discharge. Embase, Medline, and The Cochrane Library were searched from inception to October 6, 2021. Studies were included if they reported outcomes at 1 year or beyond after pediatric OHCA. Data abstraction and quality assessment was conducted by three authors independently. Qualitative outcomes were reported systematically. Seven studies were included, and amongst patients that survived to hospital discharge or to 30 days, longer-term survival was at least 95% at 24 months of follow up. A highly variable proportion (range 10-71%) of patients had favorable neurological outcomes at 24 months of follow up. With regard to health-related quality of life outcomes, at a time point distal to 1 year, at least 60% of pediatric non-traumatic OHCA patients were reported to have good outcomes. Our study found that at least 95% of pediatric OHCA patients, who survived to discharge, survived to a time point distal to 1 year. There is a general paucity of data surrounding the pediatric OHCA population.Entities:
Keywords: OHCA; mortality; out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; pediatrics; quality of life; sudden cardiac arrest; survival
Year: 2022 PMID: 36078931 PMCID: PMC9457161 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11175003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Med ISSN: 2077-0383 Impact factor: 4.964
Figure 1PRISMA-P 2020 flow diagram.
Survival outcomes beyond one year.
| Survival Outcomes beyond One Year | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Albrecht et al. (2021) [ | 26.3 (median) | 142 | 135 | 7 | 95% |
| Hunfeld et al. (2021) [ | 24 | 49 | 48 | 1 | 98% |
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Albrecht et al. (2021) [ | 44.4 (median) | 142 | 14 | 10 | |
| Hunfeld et al. (2021) [ | 2 | 49 | 35 | 71 | |
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Albrecht et al. (2021) [ | 28.3 (median) | Infants | 95 | 26 | 27 |
| 23.1 (median) | Children | 187 | 60 | 32 | |
| 25.7 (median) | Adolescents (12–18 years) | 77 | 29 | 38 | |
Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes.
| Author | Year | Scales Used | Further Explanation | Summary Estimates |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hickson et al. [ | 2021 | PedsQL | 85 (69, 93) | PedsQL scores were 85 (69, 93) and did not differ from normative controls ( |
| Hunfeld et al. [ | 2021 | Intellectual Functioning: Total IQ Age-appropriate versions of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development or the Wechsler Scales (BSID-cognitive score, WPPSI-III TIQ, WISC-III TIQ, or WAIS-IV TIQ) | −0.4 (−1.5 to 0.2) | |
| Intellectual Functioning: Verbal IQ Age-appropriate versions of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development or the Wechsler Scales (WPPSI-III VIQ, WISC-III VIQ, WAIS-IV VC-index) | −0.5 (−1.6 to 0.4) | |||
| Intellectual Functioning: Performance IQ Age-appropriate versions of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development or the Wechsler Scales (WPPSI-III PIQ, WISC-III PIQ, WAIS-IV PO-index) | −0.5 (−2.0 to 0.0) | |||
| Selective Attention (STROOP ≥ 11 y) Stroop Color Word Test | −1.3 (−1.6 to −0.5) | |||
| Sustained Attention (Bourdon SD ≥ 6 y) Bourdon Vos Cancellation Test | −4.7 (−7.4 to −2.2) | |||
| Processing Speed (≥ 4 y) Wechsler Scales (WPPSI-III, WISC-III or WAIS-IV) | −1.0 (−1.8 to 0.0) | |||
| Visual Motor Integration (Beery ≥ 2 y) Beery Developmental Test of Visual Motor Integration | −0.7 (−1.1 to 0.2) | |||
| Verbal Memory (Rey-AVLT, delayed recall ≥ 6 y) Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Delayed Recall | 0.2 (−1.1 to 1.1) | |||
| Visual Memory (ReyRecog ≥ 5 y) Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test Recognition | –0.4 (−0.8 to 0.2) | |||
| Cognitive Flexibility (TMTB ≥ 8 y) Trail-Making Test part B | −1.2 (−2.0 to −0.1) | |||
| BRIEF Total score (≥ 2 y) Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function Questionnaires (BRIEF-P or BRIEF) | 0.0 (−1.0 to 0.4) | |||
| Silka et al. [ | 2018 | Neurological Impairment Scale |
No residual neurological impairment compared to pre-arrest status ( Mild levels of impairment in either high level cognitive or physical function ( Moderate levels of impairment ( Severe levels of impairment ( | Patients with VF had a higher proportion of good neurological outcomes compared to patients with asystole (17 vs. 2%) |
| Suominen et al. [ | 2014 | Wechsler Intelligence Manual Scales to assess for higher cortical function such as IQ WPPSI-III (Ages 3–7) WISC-III (Ages 7–16) WAIS-III (Ages > 16) |
Full-scale IQ (FIQ) < 80 ( 4 had FIQ < 70 (intellectual disability) FIQ > 80 ( 5 patients had neurological deficit in memory, executive function, or both | Patients who received CPR from EMS units had a higher risk of major neurological dysfunction ( Submersion time (mins)
Neurologically intact (4.0 (2.0, 6.3)) vs. minor or major neurological deficit (7.5 (4.0, 19.0)), Normal FIQ (3.5 (2.0, 7.5)) vs. low FIQ (12.5 (5.0, 22.5)), Base excess (mmol/L)
Neurologically intact (−7.6 (−15.3, −4.0)) vs. minor or major neurological deficit (−17.0 (−23.2, −10.6)), Normal FIQ (−8.7 (−16.0, -4.5)) vs. low FIQ (−21.0 (−25.4, −12.9)), Mechanical ventilation time (days)
Neurologically intact (1.0 (1.0, 1.0)) vs. minor or major neurological deficit (3.0 (2.0, 7.0)), Normal FIQ (1.0 (1.0, 2.5)) vs. low FIQ (3.0 (2.5, 6.0)), Length of PICU stay (days)
Neurologically intact (1.0 (1.0, 2.0)) vs. minor or major neurological deficit (5.0 (3.0, 7.5)), Normal FIQ (1.0 (1.0, 2.0)) vs. low FIQ (5.5 (4.5, 7.5)), |