This registry-based study evaluated whether emergent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) improves survival to hospital discharge (SHD) among adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) who received extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). The authors note that most patients with refractory OHCA have underlying coronary artery disease, but the benefit of immediate PCI in the context of ECPR remains uncertain.
The investigators performed a retrospective analysis using the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry. They included adult patients (≥18 years) who experienced OHCA between January 2020 and December 2023 and received ECPR for a presumed cardiac etiology or who had an initial shockable rhythm. Exclusions applied to patients younger than 18 and to those with presumed non-cardiac causes or an initial non-shockable rhythm. The data used for the analysis are from the ELSO registry, as reported by the authors.
Of 1,336 patients in the ELSO registry who received ECPR for OHCA, 1,131 met the study criteria after exclusions for age (n=31) and presumed non-cardiac or initial non-shockable rhythm (n=174). The median age of included patients was 55 years (interquartile range [IQR] 44–62). Most patients were male (n=901; 80%). The authors report these summary demographics for the analyzed cohort.
Among the 1,131 included patients, 243 (21%) underwent emergent PCI. Patients who received PCI were described as slightly older (median 58 years, IQR 48–63) compared with those who did not receive PCI (median 53 years, IQR 42–62). The PCI group was more frequently male (n=212, 87%) versus the non-PCI group (n=689, 78%). No further procedural details, PCI timing, angiographic findings, or adjunctive therapies were reported in the source text.
The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge (SHD). To estimate the effect of PCI on SHD, the authors used inverse probability weighted matching to estimate the average treatment effect of PCI. They also performed a sensitivity analysis restricted to patients judged most likely to benefit from PCI: those with witnessed arrest and no return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after five minutes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The preprint reports the analytic approach and outcome measures but does not provide individual-level covariate lists or full model specifications in the summary provided.
In the primary inverse probability weighted analysis, the authors found no statistically significant difference in SHD between patients who underwent PCI and those who did not. The reported absolute difference in SHD was −3.56% with a 95% confidence interval from −10.31% to 3.19% and a p-value of 0.301. The confidence interval crosses zero, indicating the effect estimate was not significant in this cohort.
The sensitivity analysis restricted to patients most likely to benefit from PCI (witnessed arrest with no ROSC after five minutes of CPR) also did not show a significant survival advantage for PCI. The reported absolute difference in SHD was −4.52% (95% CI −12.42 to 2.46) with a p-value of 0.246. As with the primary analysis, the confidence interval includes the possibility of harm and benefit and does not reach statistical significance.
Using the ELSO registry data across 2020–2023, the authors conclude that emergent PCI was not associated with a significant improvement in survival to hospital discharge among refractory OHCA patients treated with ECPR. The report emphasizes the lack of an observed survival benefit in both the primary cohort and the specified sensitivity subgroup.
The analysis is retrospective and registry-based, which introduces limitations inherent to observational data, including potential residual confounding and selection bias. The summary does not report granular procedural details (for example, timing of PCI relative to ECPR initiation, angiographic findings, or post-PCI care), nor does it provide the complete set of covariates used in propensity weighting; those details were not reported in the source summary. The manuscript is a preprint posted on medRxiv and has not been peer-reviewed; the authors explicitly note this status and that the findings should not be used to guide clinical practice without further evaluation.
The authors report institutional oversight: the study was approved by the UCLA IRB with exemption from human subjects review. All data for the analysis derive from the ELSO registry, per the article's Data Availability statement.
In this large, contemporary registry cohort of adults with OHCA treated with ECPR, emergent PCI was not associated with a statistically significant increase in survival to hospital discharge in either the primary inverse probability weighted analysis or the predefined sensitivity analysis. The findings are limited by the observational design, available registry variables, and the preprint status of the report. Future prospective studies or randomized data would be needed to more definitively define the role of emergent PCI in ECPR-treated refractory OHCA.