Skip to main content
Annals of Intensive Care

Table 3 Comparison of baseline characteristics according to existence of gasping during transportation by EMS

From: Gasping during refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a prognostic marker for favourable neurological outcome following extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a retrospective study

Variables

Univariate analysis

IPTW

Gasping during transportation

n = 38

No gasping during transportation

n = 128

P value

Std Dif

Std Dif

Age (y)

61.0 (52.0, 70.8)

59.5 (47.3, 69.0)

0.435

0.172

0.052

Male sex, n (%)

28 (73.7)

100 (78.1)

0.660

0.104

0.034

Cardiac arrest witnessed, n (%)

34 (89.5)

78 (60.9)

0.001

0.700

0.341

Bystander CPR attempt, n (%)

28 (73.7)

60 (46.9)

0.005

0.570

0.095

Initial recorded cardiac arrest rhythm, n (%)

  

0.002

  

 VF or pulseless VT

22 (57.9)

89 (69.5)

 

0.244

0.363

 Pulseless electrical activity

14 (36.8)

16 (12.5)

 

0.589

0.492

 Asystole

2 (5.3)

23 (18.0)

 

–

–

Aetiology of CA, n (%)

  

1.000

  

 Cardiac, n (%)

30 (78.9)

101 (78.9)

 

0.001

0.014

 No cardiac, n (%)

8 (21.1)

27 (21.1)

   

  Pulmonary embolism

1

2

   

  Subarachnoid haemorrhage

0

3

   

  Accidental hypothermia

3

11

   

  Acute aortic dissection

1

2

   

  Respiratory disease

     

   Pneumonia

0

1

   

   Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

1

0

   

   Asthma

1

0

   

   Other

1

8

   

Epinephrine administration from EMS, mg

1.0 (0.0, 2.0)

2.0 (0.0, 3.0)

0.025

0.443

0.083

Cardiac rhythm at admission

  

0.009

  

 ROSC

5 (13.2)

5 (3.9)

 

0.336

0.016

 VF or pulseless VT

17 (44.7)

61 (47.7)

 

0.059

0.198

 Pulseless electrical activity

15 (39.5)

37 (28.9)

 

0.224

0.544

 Asystole

1 (2.6)

25 (19.5)

 

–

–

Low-flow duration, min

40.5 (29.5, 51.3)

46.0 (37.0, 54.0)

0.049

0.397

0.130

No-flow duration, mina

0.0 (0.0, 5.0), n = 35b

6.0 (0.0, 10.0), n = 82b

0.002

0.586

0.012

pH at admission, n = 162b

6.914 (6.814, 7.012), n = 37

6.914 (6.815, 7.019), n = 125

0.795

0.104

0.128

Serum lactate at admission, n = 158b

13.8 (9.5, 16.0), n = 36

12.7 (10.8, 15.1), n = 122

0.435

0.217

0.036

Epinephrine administration after admission, mg

1.0 (0.0, 3.0)

1.0 (0.0, 2.0)

0.841

0.029

0.054

Intra-aortic balloon pumping, n (%)

29 (76.3)

86 (67.7)

0.421

0.204

0.138

Percutaneous coronary intervention, n (%)

16 (42.1)

62 (48.8)

0.579

0.127

0.280

Therapeutic temperature management, n (%)

26 (68.4)

84 (66.1)

0.847

0.060

0.192

Outcomes

 Survival discharge, n (%)

23 (60.5)

44 (34.4)

0.005

  

 CPC score 1–2 at hospital discharge, n (%)

20 (52.6)

14 (10.9)

< 0.001

  
  1. IPTW inverse probability treatment weighting, EMS emergency medical service, CPR cardiopulmonary resuscitation, VF ventricular fibrillation, VT ventricular tachycardia, ROSC return of spontaneous circulation, CPC cerebral performance category, Std Dif standardised difference
  2. aNo-flow time could be basically calculated in patients with cardiac arrest witnessed and some un-witnessed cardiac arrest patients could be estimated no-flow time by relatives and/or bystanders. Accordingly, the number of patients with no-flow was less than 166
  3. bThe number was less than 166 due to insufficient data
Back to article page