Out-of-Hospital Cardiac ArrestNCT04130984
Intraosseous Versus Intravenous Vascular Access During Resuscitation Following Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
A study testing EZ-IO in people with Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest, run by Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, School of Medicine at 1 site in China.
Trial summary
1. Background: Intraosseous (IO) access is a new, fast, safe and efficient route of rescue of critically ill patients. Studies found drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of IO are similar to IV route. Compared with IV and CVC, IO is time-consuming, easy to grasp, and has high operation success rate. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
- What is being tested?
- EZ-IO
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion, Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 2,356 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- Jun 2020to Jun 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Out of hospital cardiac arrest patients with 18 years or more
Who cannot join
- Traumatic cardiopulmonary arrest with an indication of withholding of resuscitation, including:
- trauma victims with injuries that are obviously incompatible with life, such as decapitation or hemicorporectomy;
- victims of either blunt or penetrating trauma when there is evidence of prolonged cardiac arrest, including rigor mortis or dependent lividity;
- blunt trauma patient who, on the arrival of emergency medical services (EMS) personnel, is found to be apneic, pulseless, and without organized electrocardiographic activity;
- penetrating trauma patients who, on the arrival of EMS personnel, is found to be pulseless and apneic and there are no other signs of life, including spontaneous movement, electrocardiographic activity, and pupillary response;
- Vascular access has been established before admission;
Show all 18Show fewer
- Return of spontaneous circulation before first attempt to establish vascular access;
- Quit resuscitation;
- Patients with contraindications of intraosseous access;
- infection of insertion site, such as skin and soft tissue infections, osteomyelitis;
- integrity damage of the target bone, such as fractures, artificial limbs, etc;
- blood supply or return of the target bone is significantly affected, e.g. arteriovenous rupture;
- burns of insertion site;
- intraosseous attempt in same insertion site within 24 h;
- compartment syndrome exists in same insertion site;
- unclear anatomical structures of insertion site, such as obesity, malformations;
- patients with severe bone diseases, such as imperfect osteogenesis, osteoporosis;
- patients with right to left cardiac shunt (e.g. Tetralogy of Fallot, pulmonary atresia, etc).
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Libing Jiang contact
China1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine & Institute of Emergency Medicine, Zhejiang University
Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310009
Mao Zhang, MD, 86-571-87784654, z2jzk@zju.edu.cn
About this study
Official title: Intraosseous Versus Intravenous Vascular Access During Resuscitation Following Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
- Background: Intraosseous (IO) access is a new, fast, safe and efficient route of rescue of critically ill patients. Studies found drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of IO are similar to IV route. Compared with IV and CVC, IO is time-consuming, easy to grasp, and has high operation success rate. Guidelines recommend IO when the establishment of vascular access is difficult or impossible. Recent animal studies suggest that IO access have better ventricular fibrillation termination rates, ROSC rates and survival compared with IV route. However, recent retrospective clinical studies found that IO versus IV treatment was associated with a lower likelihood of ROSC and hospitalization. How routes of vascular access influence clinical outcomes after OHCA merits multicenter randomized controlled trial. We suppose IO versus IV treatment is associated with a higher likelihood of ROSC and hospital and discharge survival.
- Materials and methods: Study design This study is a prospective, open, two-arm, multicenter randomized controlled trial. The study will be conducted by 22 medical centers or affiliated hospitals in China. We will enroll nearly 2356 OHCA patients by the eligibility and exclusion criteria during January 2020 to December 2022. All of the patients will be randomized to one of 2 routes of vascular access: tibial intraosseous or peripheral intravenous. Other treatment measures of two groups refer to 2015 AHA Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support guidelines. Statistical analysis Intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and per-protocol set (PPS) sensitivity analysis will be conducted in our study. Categorical variables are presented as counts and percentages, and differences are analyzed using the χ2 test. Continuous variables are presented as means with standard deviations or median (interquartile range [IQR]), and analysis is done by the Student t test or the Mann-Whitney U test according to normal or non-normal distributions.
- Sample Size Calculation Set the following assumptions: alpha 0.025, beta 80%, clinically significant difference of 5% and 25% ROSC rate for both arms. Assuming the sample has an equal number of subjects in each arm, the study need to include at least 1178 subjects per arm to reach statistical significance.
Read the detailed description
- Background: Successful vascular access is critical for the treatment of acute and critically ill patients, especially those with cardiac arrest. For cardiac arrest patients, besides high-quality chest compressions and defibrillation, timely use of rescue drugs is also important. This requires early vascular access during chest compressions. Clinical studies and animal experiments indicate that 1 min delay of administration of antiarrhythmic drugs will increase the risk of adverse outcome, also found that the time interval from cardiac arrest to the first dose of rescue medication is closely related to the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and prognosis. Because of the circulatory failure of patients with cardiac arrest, peripheral venous network often collapses, which makes it more difficult to develop vascular access. In addition, central venous catheterization (CVC) often takes an experienced physician at least 5-10 min, and it may affect resuscitation. Intraosseous (IO) access is a new, fast, safe and efficient route of rescue of critically ill patients. Animal and clinical studies found drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of IO are similar to IV route. Compared with IV and CVC, IO is time-consuming, easy to grasp, and has high operation success rate. European Resuscitation Council (ERC) 2015 guidelines recommend IO when the establishment of vascular access is difficult or impossible. Recent animal studies suggest that IO access have better ventricular fibrillation termination rates, ROSC rates and survival compared with IV route. However, recent retrospective clinical studies found that IO versus IV treatment was associated with a lower likelihood of ROSC and hospitalization. How routes of vascular access influence clinical outcomes after OHCA merits multicenter randomized controlled trial. We suppose IO versus IV treatment is associated with a higher likelihood of ROSC and hospital and discharge survival.
- Materials and methods: Study Design: This study is a prospective, open, two-arm, multicenter randomized controlled trial. The study will be conducted by the Department of Emergency Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, and other 21 medical centers or affiliated hospitals in China. Selection of patients: We will enroll nearly 2356 patients experiencing an out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients by the eligibility and exclusion criteria during January 2020 to December 2022. Randomization: Block randomization will be conducted in this study. Randomized sequence numbers, which will be generated by the computer random number generator from Department of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Zhejiang University, will be put into opaque envelopes and saved by an independent third party. A section included 4 random numbers, and each reference unit has its own independent research random number segment. avoiding centers into groups selectively shift caused by uneven. Research institutions and researchers should random subjects into the groups according to the random envelope numbers without secretly opening the envelope or jumping numbers. After being unpacked, random envelopes will be uniformly sealed and saved. Patients consistent with inclusion and exclusion criteria will be randomized into IO group or peripheral venous access group (IV). Patients will be randomized using a random envelope method, and researchers of all centers are not aware of the length of randomized block. Preparation and production of random envelops are commissioned by the Department of Emergency Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University. The study is an open label study. But the staff responsible for the follow-up, data collection and data analysis later does not know the specific grouping. To avoid rescue delay, random envelope will be placed in fixed position in all research centers. When an OHCA patient is enrolled, randomly open a random envelope and determine the grouping. Intervention: Group IO: The insertion site locates at 1 cm medial tibial tuberosity. EZ-IO (U.S. Teleflex® Corporation) will be used with an adult 15G needle. Pull out the needle when having a sense of frustration, withdraw the bone marrow with the syringe, bolus 20 mL of normal saline to open intramedullary path and begin drug resuscitation at the same time. The retention time of IO route should be less than 24 h, and venous access should be established after winning rescue time as soon as possible to continue treatment. If failed, the next catheterization plan will be determined by the physician in charge of the scene. Group IV: Any available peripheral venous can be chose to establish vascular access for the administration of drugs or fluids, the antecubital vein is preferred. If failed, the next catheterization plan will be determined by the physician in charge of the scene. Other treatment measures of two groups refer to 2015 AHA Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support guidelines. Technical Training: The operators of IO receive at least 1 h theoretical study and practice in training until master mold puncture technique, passing the examination before the start of the study. Operators of peripheral venipuncture have more than 1 year venipuncture experience. Statistical analysis: Intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and per-protocol set (PPS) sensitivity analysis will be conducted in our study. Descriptive statistics are used to summarize the data. Categorical variables are presented as counts and percentages, and differences between groups are analyzed using the χ2 test. Continuous variables are presented as means with standard deviations or median (interquartile range [IQR]), hence analysis is done by the Student t test or the Mann-Whitney U test according to normal or non-normal distributions. Stage analysis will be performed when collected data account for 30%, 50%, 80%, 100% of anticipation. The interim analysis will follow the O'Brien-Fleming rule to assess the safety and efficacy of this study. If the results of interim study do not meet the criteria of suspension, cases will continue to be collected until the completion of the target sample size.
- Sample Size Calculation Prior to the start of the study a sample size calculation was performed to determine study feasibility. Model assumptions were made based on prior quality assurance reviews. Sample size requirements for a non-inferiority comparison were calculated using the following assumptions: alpha 0.025, beta 80%, clinically significant difference of 5% increase in ROSC and 25% ROSC rate for both arms. Assuming the sample has an equal number of subjects in each arm, the study would need to include at least 1178 subjects per arm (2356 total) to reach statistical significance.
- Data Management and Confidentiality Data Management: Using EDC platform+ paper version for data management and storage. The person responsible for collecting paper version will input data in EDC platform uniformly, summary paper and electronic versions for further statistical analysis and preservation. Security measures: All records related to the identity of subjects are to be confidential and not open to the public outside the scope of relevant laws or regulations.
- Informed consent: Subjects must obtain written informed consent prior to the implementation, being informed of specific content of study, as detailed informed consent.
- Adverse events reporting:
Definition of adverse events and classification of serious adverse events:
Adverse events (AE): It is defined as any adverse medical events occurred in patients, which is not necessarily a cause or result of treatment. Therefore, adverse event can be any discomfort or unconscious signs (including abnormal laboratory findings), symptom or disease generated after interventions, whether or not considered to be related to drugs.
Serious adverse events (SAE):
Death, life-threatening, hospitalization, prolonged hospitalization, persistent or significant disability / loss of function, important medical events that require medical or surgical treatment to avoid serious consequences.
Assessment of adverse events:
In each AE, researchers need to assess: intensity (severity), clinical relevance, causality (relationship between drugs and research process), results and measures taken.
Recording and reporting procedures:
During the study, researchers should record all AE in detail and report. All SAE are required to be recorded in the AE page of CRF. In addition, a completed "serious adverse events" should be sent to the competent authorities, the local Food and Drug Administration investigators and Ethics Committee involved immediately (at the latest within 24 hours). The researcher will sign and date the report, informing the other researchers involved in this clinical study at the same time.
- Conditions
- Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
- Being tested
- EZ-IO
- Keywords
- Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest, Intraosseous, Intravenous, Resuscitation
- Medical subject headings
- Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
EZ-IODevice
Also called IO device
The insertion site locates at 1 cm medial tibial tuberosity. EZ-IO (U.S. Teleflex® Corporation) will be used with an adult 15G needle. Pull out the needle when having a sense of frustration, withdraw the bone marrow with the syringe, bolus 20 mL of normal saline to open intramedullary path and begin drug resuscitation at the same time. The retention time of IO route should be less than 24 h, and venous access should be established after winning rescue time as soon as possible to continue treatment.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Group IO | Experimental | Intraosseous assess will be established in group IO, using EZ-IO for drug or fuild resuscitation. Proximal tibia is the insertion site,locating at 1 cm medial tibial tuberosity. IO access should be retained for less than 1 day, and venous access should be established as soon as possible after winning rescue time to continue treatment. Other treatment measures refer to 2015 AHA guidelines. Receives: Device: EZ-IO |
| Group IV | No intervention | Intravenous access will be established in group IV, choosing any available peripheral venous for the administration of drugs or fluids.The antecubital vein is the preferred choice. If failed, the next catheterization plan will be determined by the physician in charge of the scene.Other treatment measures also refer to 2015 AHA guidelines. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC)
ROSC can be identified with the following three conditions: 1. arterial pulse can be reached; 2. effective ECG rhythm; 3. systolic blood pressure > 60 mmHg (1 mm Hg = 0.133 kPa);.
Measured: within 24 hours
Secondary outcomes (5)
first attempt success
refer to the initial attempted intraosseous or intravenous access is successful
Measured: within 24 hours
overall success
including the initial attempted success and eventual attempted success after trying several times of intraosseous or intravenous access .
Measured: within 24 hours
initial access interval
defined as the interval from arrival of first EMS vehicle on site to successful placement of an intraosseous or intravenous access.
Measured: within 24 hours
initial epinephrine administration interval
defined as the interval from arrival of first EMS vehicle on site to administration of initial epinephrine
Measured: within 24 hours
sustained ROSC
the presence of ROSC maintain ≥ 24 h
Measured: 24 hours
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Oct 2019
- Study startJun 2020 (estimated)
- Primary completionDec 2022 (estimated)
- Study completionJun 2023 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (16)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac ArrestStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, School of MedicineThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 2,356 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Second Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Shanghai 10th People's Hospital, The Affiliated Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University, West China Hospital, Shanghai Zhongshan Hospital, Ningbo Medical Center Lihuili Hospital, Henan Provincial People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Shandong Provincial Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Mao Zhang, Principal investigator, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang Universitiy School of Medicine
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04130984
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- z2jzk20191015
- Status last verified
- Oct 2019
- First submitted
- 16 Oct 2019
- Last updated
- 11 May 2020
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Though data that will be collected in our study are huge and multicentral, it is limited in part provinces of China, which makes it hard to apply for other centers in the world , so we do not have a plan to share IPD with other researchers.
Publications
Link MS, Berkow LC, Kudenchuk PJ, Halperin HR, Hess EP, Moitra VK, Neumar RW, O'Neil BJ, Paxton JH, Silvers SM, White RD, Yannopoulos D, Donnino MW. Part 7: Adult Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support: 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation. 2015 Nov 3;132(18 Suppl 2):S444-64. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000261. No abstract available.
PubMed 26472995Petitpas F, Guenezan J, Vendeuvre T, Scepi M, Oriot D, Mimoz O. Use of intra-osseous access in adults: a systematic review. Crit Care. 2016 Apr 14;20:102. doi: 10.1186/s13054-016-1277-6.
PubMed 27075364Ong MEH, Chan YH, Oh JJ, Ngo AS. An observational, prospective study comparing tibial and humeral intraosseous access using the EZ-IO. Am J Emerg Med. 2009 Jan;27(1):8-15. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2008.01.025.
PubMed 19041528Kurowski A, Timler D, Evrin T, Szarpak L. Comparison of 3 different intraosseous access devices for adult during resuscitation. Randomized crossover manikin study. Am J Emerg Med. 2014 Dec;32(12):1490-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2014.09.007. Epub 2014 Sep 18.
PubMed 25440232Reades R, Studnek JR, Vandeventer S, Garrett J. Intraosseous versus intravenous vascular access during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2011 Dec;58(6):509-16. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.07.020.
PubMed 21856044Soar J, Nolan JP, Bottiger BW, Perkins GD, Lott C, Carli P, Pellis T, Sandroni C, Skrifvars MB, Smith GB, Sunde K, Deakin CD; Adult advanced life support section Collaborators. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2015: Section 3. Adult advanced life support. Resuscitation. 2015 Oct;95:100-47. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.07.016. No abstract available.
PubMed 26477701Mader TJ, Kellogg AR, Walterscheid JK, Lodding CC, Sherman LD. A randomized comparison of cardiocerebral and cardiopulmonary resuscitation using a swine model of prolonged ventricular fibrillation. Resuscitation. 2010 May;81(5):596-602. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.01.013. Epub 2010 Feb 21.
PubMed 20176434Zuercher M, Kern KB, Indik JH, Loedl M, Hilwig RW, Ummenhofer W, Berg RA, Ewy GA. Epinephrine improves 24-hour survival in a swine model of prolonged ventricular fibrillation demonstrating that early intraosseous is superior to delayed intravenous administration. Anesth Analg. 2011 Apr;112(4):884-90. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31820dc9ec. Epub 2011 Mar 8.
PubMed 21385987Feinstein BA, Stubbs BA, Rea T, Kudenchuk PJ. Intraosseous compared to intravenous drug resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2017 Aug;117:91-96. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.014. Epub 2017 Jun 16.
PubMed 28629995Kawano T, Grunau B, Scheuermeyer FX, Gibo K, Fordyce CB, Lin S, Stenstrom R, Schlamp R, Jenneson S, Christenson J. Intraosseous Vascular Access Is Associated With Lower Survival and Neurologic Recovery Among Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest. Ann Emerg Med. 2018 May;71(5):588-596. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.11.015. Epub 2018 Jan 6.
PubMed 29310869Clemency B, Tanaka K, May P, Innes J, Zagroba S, Blaszak J, Hostler D, Cooney D, McGee K, Lindstrom H. Intravenous vs. intraosseous access and return of spontaneous circulation during out of hospital cardiac arrest. Am J Emerg Med. 2017 Feb;35(2):222-226. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2016.10.052. Epub 2016 Oct 24.
PubMed 28288774Nguyen L, Suarez S, Daniels J, Sanchez C, Landry K, Redfield C. Effect of Intravenous Versus Intraosseous Access in Prehospital Cardiac Arrest. Air Med J. 2019 May-Jun;38(3):147-149. doi: 10.1016/j.amj.2019.02.005. Epub 2019 Mar 12.
PubMed 31122576Rittenberger JC, Menegazzi JJ, Callaway CW. Association of delay to first intervention with return of spontaneous circulation in a swine model of cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2007 Apr;73(1):154-60. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2006.07.029. Epub 2007 Jan 16.
PubMed 17223246Lapostolle F, Catineau J, Garrigue B, Monmarteau V, Houssaye T, Vecci I, Treoux V, Hospital B, Crocheton N, Adnet F. Prospective evaluation of peripheral venous access difficulty in emergency care. Intensive Care Med. 2007 Aug;33(8):1452-7. doi: 10.1007/s00134-007-0634-y. Epub 2007 Jun 7.
PubMed 17554524Lewis FR Jr. Prehospital intravenous fluid therapy: physiologic computer modelling. J Trauma. 1986 Sep;26(9):804-11. doi: 10.1097/00005373-198609000-00005.
PubMed 3746955
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 May 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Intraosseous Versus Intravenous Vascular Access During Resuscitation Following Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04130984
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- z2jzk20191015
- Conditions
- Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
- Keywords
- Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest, Intraosseous, Intravenous, Resuscitation
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 2,356 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, School of MedicineUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, The Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Second Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Shanghai 10th People's Hospital, The Affiliated Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, The First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical University, West China Hospital, Shanghai Zhongshan Hospital, Ningbo Medical Center Lihuili Hospital, Henan Provincial People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Shandong Provincial Hospital, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital
- Study start
- Jun 2020 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Dec 2022 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Jun 2023 (estimated)
- First posted
- 18 Oct 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
- Background: Intraosseous (IO) access is a new, fast, safe and efficient route of rescue of critically ill patients. Studies found drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of IO are similar to IV route. Compared with IV and CVC, IO is time-consuming, easy to grasp, and has high operation success rate. Guidelines recommend IO when the establishment of vascular access is difficult or impossible. Recent animal studies suggest that IO access have better ventricular fibrillation termination rates, ROSC rates and survival compared with IV route. However, recent retrospective clinical studies found that IO versus IV treatment was associated with a lower likelihood of ROSC and hospitalization. How routes of vascular access influence clinical outcomes after OHCA merits multicenter randomized controlled trial. We suppose IO versus IV treatment is associated with a higher likelihood of ROSC and hospital and discharge survival.
- Materials and methods: Study design This study is a prospective, open, two-arm, multicenter randomized controlled trial. The study will be conducted by 22 medical centers or affiliated hospitals in China. We will enroll nearly 2356 OHCA patients by the eligibility and exclusion criteria during January 2020 to December 2022. All of the patients will be randomized to one of 2 routes of vascular access: tibial intraosseous or peripheral intravenous. Other treatment measures of two groups refer to 2015 AHA Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support guidelines. Statistical analysis Intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and per-protocol set (PPS) sensitivity analysis will be conducted in our study. Categorical variables are presented as counts and percentages, and differences are analyzed using the χ2 test. Continuous variables are presented as means with standard deviations or median (interquartile range [IQR]), and analysis is done by the Student t test or the Mann-Whitney U test according to normal or non-normal distributions.
- Sample Size Calculation Set the following assumptions: alpha 0.025, beta 80%, clinically significant difference of 5% and 25% ROSC rate for both arms. Assuming the sample has an equal number of subjects in each arm, the study need to include at least 1178 subjects per arm to reach statistical significance.
Detailed description
- Background: Successful vascular access is critical for the treatment of acute and critically ill patients, especially those with cardiac arrest. For cardiac arrest patients, besides high-quality chest compressions and defibrillation, timely use of rescue drugs is also important. This requires early vascular access during chest compressions. Clinical studies and animal experiments indicate that 1 min delay of administration of antiarrhythmic drugs will increase the risk of adverse outcome, also found that the time interval from cardiac arrest to the first dose of rescue medication is closely related to the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and prognosis. Because of the circulatory failure of patients with cardiac arrest, peripheral venous network often collapses, which makes it more difficult to develop vascular access. In addition, central venous catheterization (CVC) often takes an experienced physician at least 5-10 min, and it may affect resuscitation. Intraosseous (IO) access is a new, fast, safe and efficient route of rescue of critically ill patients. Animal and clinical studies found drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of IO are similar to IV route. Compared with IV and CVC, IO is time-consuming, easy to grasp, and has high operation success rate. European Resuscitation Council (ERC) 2015 guidelines recommend IO when the establishment of vascular access is difficult or impossible. Recent animal studies suggest that IO access have better ventricular fibrillation termination rates, ROSC rates and survival compared with IV route. However, recent retrospective clinical studies found that IO versus IV treatment was associated with a lower likelihood of ROSC and hospitalization. How routes of vascular access influence clinical outcomes after OHCA merits multicenter randomized controlled trial. We suppose IO versus IV treatment is associated with a higher likelihood of ROSC and hospital and discharge survival.
- Materials and methods: Study Design: This study is a prospective, open, two-arm, multicenter randomized controlled trial. The study will be conducted by the Department of Emergency Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, and other 21 medical centers or affiliated hospitals in China. Selection of patients: We will enroll nearly 2356 patients experiencing an out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients by the eligibility and exclusion criteria during January 2020 to December 2022. Randomization: Block randomization will be conducted in this study. Randomized sequence numbers, which will be generated by the computer random number generator from Department of Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Zhejiang University, will be put into opaque envelopes and saved by an independent third party. A section included 4 random numbers, and each reference unit has its own independent research random number segment. avoiding centers into groups selectively shift caused by uneven. Research institutions and researchers should random subjects into the groups according to the random envelope numbers without secretly opening the envelope or jumping numbers. After being unpacked, random envelopes will be uniformly sealed and saved. Patients consistent with inclusion and exclusion criteria will be randomized into IO group or peripheral venous access group (IV). Patients will be randomized using a random envelope method, and researchers of all centers are not aware of the length of randomized block. Preparation and production of random envelops are commissioned by the Department of Emergency Medicine, Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University. The study is an open label study. But the staff responsible for the follow-up, data collection and data analysis later does not know the specific grouping. To avoid rescue delay, random envelope will be placed in fixed position in all research centers. When an OHCA patient is enrolled, randomly open a random envelope and determine the grouping. Intervention: Group IO: The insertion site locates at 1 cm medial tibial tuberosity. EZ-IO (U.S. Teleflex® Corporation) will be used with an adult 15G needle. Pull out the needle when having a sense of frustration, withdraw the bone marrow with the syringe, bolus 20 mL of normal saline to open intramedullary path and begin drug resuscitation at the same time. The retention time of IO route should be less than 24 h, and venous access should be established after winning rescue time as soon as possible to continue treatment. If failed, the next catheterization plan will be determined by the physician in charge of the scene. Group IV: Any available peripheral venous can be chose to establish vascular access for the administration of drugs or fluids, the antecubital vein is preferred. If failed, the next catheterization plan will be determined by the physician in charge of the scene. Other treatment measures of two groups refer to 2015 AHA Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support guidelines. Technical Training: The operators of IO receive at least 1 h theoretical study and practice in training until master mold puncture technique, passing the examination before the start of the study. Operators of peripheral venipuncture have more than 1 year venipuncture experience. Statistical analysis: Intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and per-protocol set (PPS) sensitivity analysis will be conducted in our study. Descriptive statistics are used to summarize the data. Categorical variables are presented as counts and percentages, and differences between groups are analyzed using the χ2 test. Continuous variables are presented as means with standard deviations or median (interquartile range [IQR]), hence analysis is done by the Student t test or the Mann-Whitney U test according to normal or non-normal distributions. Stage analysis will be performed when collected data account for 30%, 50%, 80%, 100% of anticipation. The interim analysis will follow the O'Brien-Fleming rule to assess the safety and efficacy of this study. If the results of interim study do not meet the criteria of suspension, cases will continue to be collected until the completion of the target sample size.
- Sample Size Calculation Prior to the start of the study a sample size calculation was performed to determine study feasibility. Model assumptions were made based on prior quality assurance reviews. Sample size requirements for a non-inferiority comparison were calculated using the following assumptions: alpha 0.025, beta 80%, clinically significant difference of 5% increase in ROSC and 25% ROSC rate for both arms. Assuming the sample has an equal number of subjects in each arm, the study would need to include at least 1178 subjects per arm (2356 total) to reach statistical significance.
- Data Management and Confidentiality Data Management: Using EDC platform+ paper version for data management and storage. The person responsible for collecting paper version will input data in EDC platform uniformly, summary paper and electronic versions for further statistical analysis and preservation. Security measures: All records related to the identity of subjects are to be confidential and not open to the public outside the scope of relevant laws or regulations.
- Informed consent: Subjects must obtain written informed consent prior to the implementation, being informed of specific content of study, as detailed informed consent.
- Adverse events reporting:
Definition of adverse events and classification of serious adverse events:
Adverse events (AE): It is defined as any adverse medical events occurred in patients, which is not necessarily a cause or result of treatment. Therefore, adverse event can be any discomfort or unconscious signs (including abnormal laboratory findings), symptom or disease generated after interventions, whether or not considered to be related to drugs.
Serious adverse events (SAE):
Death, life-threatening, hospitalization, prolonged hospitalization, persistent or significant disability / loss of function, important medical events that require medical or surgical treatment to avoid serious consequences.
Assessment of adverse events:
In each AE, researchers need to assess: intensity (severity), clinical relevance, causality (relationship between drugs and research process), results and measures taken.
Recording and reporting procedures:
During the study, researchers should record all AE in detail and report. All SAE are required to be recorded in the AE page of CRF. In addition, a completed "serious adverse events" should be sent to the competent authorities, the local Food and Drug Administration investigators and Ethics Committee involved immediately (at the latest within 24 hours). The researcher will sign and date the report, informing the other researchers involved in this clinical study at the same time.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Group IO | Experimental | Device: EZ-IOIntraosseous assess will be established in group IO, using EZ-IO for drug or fuild resuscitation. Proximal tibia is the insertion site,locating at 1 cm medial tibial tuberosity. IO access should be retained for less than 1 day, and venous access should be established as soon as possible after winning rescue time to continue treatment. Other treatment measures refer to 2015 AHA guidelines. |
| Group IV | No intervention | –Intravenous access will be established in group IV, choosing any available peripheral venous for the administration of drugs or fluids.The antecubital vein is the preferred choice. If failed, the next catheterization plan will be determined by the physician in charge of the scene.Other treatment measures also refer to 2015 AHA guidelines. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Out of hospital cardiac arrest patients with 18 years or more
Key exclusion criteria (18 listed)
- Traumatic cardiopulmonary arrest with an indication of withholding of resuscitation, including:
- Vascular access has been established before admission;
- Return of spontaneous circulation before first attempt to establish vascular access;
- Quit resuscitation;
- Patients with contraindications of intraosseous access;
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| EZ-IOAlso: IO deviceThe insertion site locates at 1 cm medial tibial tuberosity. EZ-IO (U.S. Teleflex® Corporation) will be used with an adult 15G needle. Pull out the needle when having a sense of frustration, withdraw the bone marrow with the syringe, bolus 20 mL of normal saline to open intramedullary path and begin drug resuscitation at the same time. The retention time of IO route should be less than 24 h, and venous access should be established after winning rescue time as soon as possible to continue treatment. | Device | Group IO |
Primary outcome
return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC)
Time frame: within 24 hours
ROSC can be identified with the following three conditions: 1. arterial pulse can be reached; 2. effective ECG rhythm; 3. systolic blood pressure > 60 mmHg (1 mm Hg = 0.133 kPa);.
5 secondary outcomes
first attempt success
Time frame: within 24 hours
overall success
Time frame: within 24 hours
initial access interval
Time frame: within 24 hours
initial epinephrine administration interval
Time frame: within 24 hours
sustained ROSC
Time frame: 24 hours
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 11 May 2020.
- Background: PubMed 26472995Link MS, Berkow LC, Kudenchuk PJ, Halperin HR, Hess EP, Moitra VK, Neumar RW, O'Neil BJ, Paxton JH, Silvers SM, White RD, Yannopoulos D, Donnino MW. Part 7: Adult Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support: 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation. 2015 Nov 3;132(18 Suppl 2):S444-64. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000261. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 27075364Petitpas F, Guenezan J, Vendeuvre T, Scepi M, Oriot D, Mimoz O. Use of intra-osseous access in adults: a systematic review. Crit Care. 2016 Apr 14;20:102. doi: 10.1186/s13054-016-1277-6.
- Background: PubMed 19041528Ong MEH, Chan YH, Oh JJ, Ngo AS. An observational, prospective study comparing tibial and humeral intraosseous access using the EZ-IO. Am J Emerg Med. 2009 Jan;27(1):8-15. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2008.01.025.
- Background: PubMed 25440232Kurowski A, Timler D, Evrin T, Szarpak L. Comparison of 3 different intraosseous access devices for adult during resuscitation. Randomized crossover manikin study. Am J Emerg Med. 2014 Dec;32(12):1490-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2014.09.007. Epub 2014 Sep 18.
- Background: PubMed 21856044Reades R, Studnek JR, Vandeventer S, Garrett J. Intraosseous versus intravenous vascular access during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2011 Dec;58(6):509-16. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.07.020.
- Background: PubMed 26477701Soar J, Nolan JP, Bottiger BW, Perkins GD, Lott C, Carli P, Pellis T, Sandroni C, Skrifvars MB, Smith GB, Sunde K, Deakin CD; Adult advanced life support section Collaborators. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2015: Section 3. Adult advanced life support. Resuscitation. 2015 Oct;95:100-47. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.07.016. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 20176434Mader TJ, Kellogg AR, Walterscheid JK, Lodding CC, Sherman LD. A randomized comparison of cardiocerebral and cardiopulmonary resuscitation using a swine model of prolonged ventricular fibrillation. Resuscitation. 2010 May;81(5):596-602. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.01.013. Epub 2010 Feb 21.
- Background: PubMed 21385987Zuercher M, Kern KB, Indik JH, Loedl M, Hilwig RW, Ummenhofer W, Berg RA, Ewy GA. Epinephrine improves 24-hour survival in a swine model of prolonged ventricular fibrillation demonstrating that early intraosseous is superior to delayed intravenous administration. Anesth Analg. 2011 Apr;112(4):884-90. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31820dc9ec. Epub 2011 Mar 8.
- Background: PubMed 28629995Feinstein BA, Stubbs BA, Rea T, Kudenchuk PJ. Intraosseous compared to intravenous drug resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2017 Aug;117:91-96. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.06.014. Epub 2017 Jun 16.
- Background: PubMed 29310869Kawano T, Grunau B, Scheuermeyer FX, Gibo K, Fordyce CB, Lin S, Stenstrom R, Schlamp R, Jenneson S, Christenson J. Intraosseous Vascular Access Is Associated With Lower Survival and Neurologic Recovery Among Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest. Ann Emerg Med. 2018 May;71(5):588-596. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.11.015. Epub 2018 Jan 6.
- Background: PubMed 28288774Clemency B, Tanaka K, May P, Innes J, Zagroba S, Blaszak J, Hostler D, Cooney D, McGee K, Lindstrom H. Intravenous vs. intraosseous access and return of spontaneous circulation during out of hospital cardiac arrest. Am J Emerg Med. 2017 Feb;35(2):222-226. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2016.10.052. Epub 2016 Oct 24.
- Background: PubMed 31122576Nguyen L, Suarez S, Daniels J, Sanchez C, Landry K, Redfield C. Effect of Intravenous Versus Intraosseous Access in Prehospital Cardiac Arrest. Air Med J. 2019 May-Jun;38(3):147-149. doi: 10.1016/j.amj.2019.02.005. Epub 2019 Mar 12.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Though data that will be collected in our study are huge and multicentral, it is limited in part provinces of China, which makes it hard to apply for other centers in the world , so we do not have a plan to share IPD with other researchers.
Related trials for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
Not yet recruitingObservational study
CAROTID DOPPLER AND CEREBRAL OXIMERY IN POST CARDIAC ARREST ICU PATIENTS
Cardiac Arrest (CA), Carotid Doppler
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
The Danish Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Study
Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest, Post-Cardiac Arrest Syndrome
Not yet recruiting
Compression-Only Versus Standard Basic Life Support Training in Nursing Students
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
Not yet recruiting
Execution of Prehospital Transesophageal Echocardiography During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Patients With Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest
Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA)
Active, not recruiting
The REVIVE-PEEP Trial: Positive End-expiratory Pressure Versus Sham Valve/Zero End-expiratory Pressure in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation During Manual Ventilation to Improve Neurological Outcomes at Discharge in Adult Patients Suffering an Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest
Cardiac Arrest, Out-Of-Hospital
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Libing Jiang contact
Mao Zhang principal investigator
Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang Universitiy School of Medicine
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing EZ-IO in people with Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest, run by Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, School of Medicine at 1 site in China.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 18 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 11 May 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in China. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Mao Zhang (86-571-87784654, z2jzk@zju.edu.cn), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) (time frame: within 24 hours). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04130984, which also lists 16 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 11 May 2020.