Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT00392639

Clinical and Economical Interest of Endovascular Cooling in the Management of Cardiac Arrest (ICEREA Study)

According to international guidelines, mild therapeutic hypothermia is recommended for resuscitated patients after cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation. Whether external or internal cooling is superior in terms of prognosis or security remains unknown. The aim of this study is to evaluate in a randomized trial the clinical and economical interests of the endovascular cooling versus the conventional external cooling for the management of hypothermia after cardiac arrest.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–79 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 4

Primary location

Teaching Lariboisière Hospital

Paris, 75010, France

About this study

According to international guidelines, mild therapeutic hypothermia is recommended for resuscitated patients after experiencing cardiac arrest from cardiac origin: "unconscious adult patients with spontaneous circulation after cardiac arrest should be cooled to 32-34°C for 12-24 hours when the initial rhythm was ventricular fibrillation" or pulseless ventricular tachycardia. "Such cooling may also be beneficial for other rhythm or in-hospital cardiac arrest".

"External or internal cooling techniques can be used to initiate cooling within minutes to hours". The two main randomized and positive studies dealing with the efficiency of hypothermia after cardiac arrest have used external cooling systems. However, several animal studies documented the importance of initiating hypothermia as soon as possible after cardiac arrest. Intravascular cooling enables more rapid induction of hypothermia compared with external cooling method after brain injury. Although several human studies have also documented that intravascular cooling provides more precise control of core temperature than external methods and although an endovascular method has been used safely in pilot studies in those experiencing hypothermia after cardiac arrest, the superiority of such a cooling on the prognosis after cardiac arrest remains unknown, as well as its cost efficiency.

The aim of this study is to evaluate in a randomized trial the potential clinical and economical interests of the endovascular cooling versus the conventional external cooling for the management of cardiac arrest from cardiac origin. With a clinical primary endpoint (survival without major neurological sequels), this study will also focus on important secondary endpoints, as the burden of nurse work and the economical costs induced by these 2 different methods of cooling.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age between 18 and 79 years old
  • Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OH-CA) due to a presumed cardiac etiology
  • Delay between OH-CA and return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) < 60 minutes
  • Delay between ROSC and starting cooling < 240 minutes
  • Patient not obeying verbal command after ROSC and prior to starting cooling
  • Availability of the "CoolGard" device (ALSIUS product)

Exclusion criteria

  • Do not reanimate order or terminal disease before inclusion
  • Known pregnancy
  • Clinical hemorrhagic syndrome or known coagulopathy
  • Contra-indication to device usage (such as femoral venous access impossible)
  • Hypothermia at admission < 30°C
  • Etiology of OH-CA thought to be extra-cardiac (trauma, bleeding or anoxia)
  • In hospital cardiac arrest
  • Refractory shock (need for extra-corporeal life support)

Treatment and study plan

Comparison of 2 cooling procedures

Procedure

Comparison of 2 cooling procedures

Primary outcomes

  1. Clinical interest of endovascular cooling versus conventional external cooling for the management of cardiac arrest from cardiac origin

    Time frame: 28 days

Secondary outcomes

  1. Cost/efficiency ratio (endovascular versus conventional cooling)

    Time frame: at 28 days

  2. Evaluation of the paramedical burden of work

    Time frame: at 28 days

  3. Evaluation of the nurse's satisfaction index

    Time frame: at 28 days

  4. Evaluation of treatment costs: global costs and costs within the first 48 hours of hospitalization

    Time frame: at 28 days

  5. Time necessary to reach the target temperature (33°C): mean speed of temperature decrease

    Time frame: at 28 days

  6. deviations of more than 1°C compared with the target temperature during the 24 hours (24H) after reaching that target temperature

    Time frame: at 28 days

  7. mean speed of rewarming

    Time frame: at 28 days

  8. Safety of the method (type of adverse events)

    Time frame: at 28 days

  9. Analysis according to the type and the cause of the cardiac arrest, duration of resuscitation maneuvers, success of coronary angioplasty, number of organ failures (Logistic Organ Dysfunction System [LODS]

    Time frame: at 28 days

  10. Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA]

    Time frame: at 28 days

  11. and Organ Dysfunctions and/or Infection [ODIN] scores

    Time frame: at 28 days

  12. Simplified Acute Physiology [SAPS II]), duration of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stay and duration of mechanical ventilation

    Time frame: at 28 days

  13. The efficiency is measured on survival and on better neurological outcome, as defined by CPC 1 or 2 on the Pittsburgh cerebral performance categories (CPC), with an expected 12% improvement of the survival without major sequels at day 28 after inclusion.

    Time frame: at 28 days and 90 days

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris

Other

Collaborators

  • Alsius Corporation
  • IST Cardiology (Le Fresne Camilly, France)
  • distributed in France by

Registry information

Official study title

Clinical Interest of Endovascular Cooling in the Management of Cardiac Arrest: Impact on Mortality in a Randomized Medico-economical Trial (the ICEREA Study)

Important dates

Study start
2006
Primary completion
2009
Study completion
2009
First posted
Oct 26, 2006
Registry last updated
Dec 1, 2009

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.