January 26th, 2012

NHLBI Launches Two Large Cardiac Arrest Treatment Trials

The NHLBI today announced the launch of two large clinical trials evaluating treatments for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

The Continuous Chest Compressions (CCC) trial will randomize 23,600 people with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest to either standard CPR or continuous chest compressions, both delivered by paramedics or fire fighters. In recent years, studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine,  JAMA, and the Lancet have provided evidence that continuous chest compressions may be preferable to traditional CPR. Graham Nichol is the principal investigator.

“The CCC trial will help to determine if continuous compressions is equal to or better than standard professional CPR when paramedics, who are better able to provide assisted breathing than bystanders, intervene,” said Nichol, in an NHLBI press release.

The Amiodarone, Lidocaine, or Neither [Placebo] for Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Due to Ventricular Fibrillation or Tachycardia study (ALPS) will randomize 3000 people with shock-resistant VF to amiodarone, lidocaine, or placebo. Although amiodarone and lidocaine are often given when shock treatment fails in VF patients, a beneficial effect of the drugs has never been demonstrated in this setting. Peter Kudenchuk is the principal investigator.

Both trials are part of the NIH-supported Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC), which the NIH describes as “the first large-scale clinical research network in the world designed to study, improve, and standardize how EMS teams deliver very early, pre-hospital interventions to improve patient survival after cardiac arrest or trauma.”

One Response to “NHLBI Launches Two Large Cardiac Arrest Treatment Trials”

  1. Jean-Pierre Usdin, MD says:

    Thank you for these informations.
    I hope these studies will indicate by which means the drugs were given.
    As reported in jwatch.org, in very critical situations “intra-osseous perfusion is clearly the best” more successful and more rapid (non significant 4.6 vs 5.8 minutes ) than IV perfusion in adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
    Having datas concerning the percentage of intra-osseous and IV access can help the future patient’s care in this emergent situation.

    Pallin DJ,