A study by scientists from Aarhus University in Denmark found no difference between the two common life-saving methods for cardiac arrest. The results were published in the journal NEJM.
The scientists compared two methods of accessing the bloodstream: a standard needle insertion into a vein or into the bone marrow.
“When a person suffers cardiac arrest outside of hospital, it is critical to quickly access the bloodstream to administer life-saving medication. We investigated which method is better,” the scientists explained.
Until now, health care professionals have preferred to use a venous catheter, but inserting one can be difficult because veins can collapse when the heart stops.
An analysis of data from almost 1,500 cardiac arrest patients across Denmark found that circulation was restored in approximately 30% of patients in both groups.
“Both methods were found to be equally effective in restoring circulation and saving lives. There was no difference in survival or quality of life of patients,” the scientists concluded.
New data from additional testing may lead to revisions to recommendations for the treatment of cardiac arrest. Venous catheters are now considered the best choice.
