Randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of vasopressin versus standard
of care during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) have yielded conflicting results.
An electronic search of MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Embase databases was conducted through
February 2022 for randomized controlled trials that evaluated the outcomes of vasopressin
versus standard of care during CPR among patients with cardiac arrest. The primary
outcome was the likelihood of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) return. Data were pooled
using the random-effects model. The final analysis included 11 trials with 6,609 patients.
The weighted mean age was 65.5 years, and 68.2% were men. There was no significant
difference between the vasopressin and control groups in the likelihood of ROSC (33.1%
vs 31.9%, odds ratio [OR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98 to 1.55). Subgroup
analyses suggested that the use of vasopressin versus control increased the likelihood
of ROSC when used in combination with steroids (pinteraction = 0.01) and in cases of in-hospital cardiac arrest (pinteraction = 0.01). There was no significant difference between the vasopressin and control
groups in the likelihood of favorable neurological outcome (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.75 to
1.71), in-hospital mortality (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.31), or ventricular arrhythmias
(OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.97). In conclusion, compared with the standard of care,
the use of vasopressin during CPR did not increase the likelihood of ROSC among patients
with cardiac arrest. There was no difference between the vasopressin and control groups
in the likelihood of the favorable neurological outcome, in-hospital mortality, or
ventricular arrhythmias.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to American Journal of CardiologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Executive summary: heart disease and stroke statistics–2016 update: a report from the American Heart Association.Circulation. 2016; 133: 447-454
- The global survival rate among adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Crit Care. 2020; 24: 61
- Targeted hypothermia vs targeted normothermia in survivors of cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.Am J Med. 2022; 135: 626-633
- Adult Basic and Advanced Life Support, Pediatric Basic and Advanced Life Support, Neonatal Life Support, Resuscitation Education Science, and Systems of Care Writing Groups. Part 1: executive summary: 2020 American Heart Association guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care.Circulation. 2020; 142: S337-S357
- Evolving role of vasopressin in the treatment of cardiac arrest.Pharmacotherapy. 2006; 26: 828-839
- Vasopressin, epinephrine, and corticosteroids for in-hospital cardiac arrest.Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169: 15-24
- Randomised comparison of epinephrine and vasopressin in patients with out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation.Lancet. 1997; 349: 535-537
- Effect of the addition of vasopressin or vasopressin plus nitroglycerin to epinephrine on arterial blood pressure during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in humans.J Emerg Med. 2011; 41: 453-459
- Vasopressin and epinephrine vs. epinephrine alone in cardiopulmonary resuscitation.N Engl J Med. 2008; 359: 21-30
- Reduced effectiveness of vasopressin in repeated doses for patients undergoing prolonged cardiopulmonary resuscitation.Resuscitation. 2009; 80: 755-761
- A randomised, double-blind, multi-centre trial comparing vasopressin and adrenaline in patients with cardiac arrest presenting to or in the Emergency Department.Resuscitation. 2012; 83: 953-960
- European Resuscitation Council Vasopressor during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Study Group. A comparison of vasopressin and epinephrine for out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation.N Engl J Med. 2004; 350: 105-113
- Vasopressin versus epinephrine for inhospital cardiac arrest: a randomised controlled trial.Lancet. 2001; 358: 105-109
- Effect of vasopressin and methylprednisolone vs placebo on return of spontaneous circulation in patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest: a randomized clinical trial.JAMA. 2021; 326: 1586-1594
- Vasopressin, steroids, and epinephrine and neurologically favorable survival after in-hospital cardiac arrest: a randomized clinical trial.JAMA. 2013; 310: 270-279
- Usefulness of vasopressin administered with epinephrine during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.Am J Cardiol. 2006; 98: 1316-1321
- The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations.Ann Intern Med. 2015; 162: 777-784
- The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.BMJ. 2011; 343: d5928
- Efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants vs. low molecular weight heparin for cancer-related venous thromboembolism: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2021; 7: 380-388
- Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.BMJ. 2003; 327: 557-560
- Meta-analysis of trials on prophylactic use of levosimendan in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.Ann Thorac Surg. 2018; 105: 1403-1410
- Meta-analysis of randomized trials on remote ischemic conditioning during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.Am J Cardiol. 2017; 119: 832-838
- Vasopressin for cardiac arrest: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Resuscitation. 2012; 83: 32-39
- In-hospital cardiac arrest: a review.JAMA. 2019; 321: 1200-1210
Article Info
Publication History
Published online: August 04, 2022
Received in revised form:
May 23,
2022
Received:
April 9,
2022
Footnotes
Funding: None.
Identification
Copyright
Published by Elsevier Inc.
