ReviewCritical care (London, England)2025
Unlocking survival in traumatic cardiac arrest: global insights, innovations, and unmet needs.
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Resuscitative thoracotomy in traumatic cardiac arrest : Multisociety consensus recommendations for settings with a low prevalence of penetrating injuries.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2026Pooled it
- Incidence and epidemiology of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Upper Austria : A multicenter, retrospective cohort study.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2026Article
- Timing and outcomes of out-of-hospital traumatic cardiac arrest: results of a multicentre, retrospective cohort study.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Research progress in agitation early warning monitoring and new technologies for critically ill patients: a narrative review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Traumatic cardiac arrest (TCA) remains one of the most formidable challenges in acute care, with global survival rates persistently below 7.5% despite significant advances in trauma systems and resuscitative strategies. Through a comprehensive scoping review of literature from 2016 to 2025, this study delineates the shifting epidemiology, modern management, and key determinants of outcomes in TCA. Our synthesis reveals that TCA predominantly affects young males and results primarily from blunt mechanisms, with severe hemorrhage and traumatic brain injury as leading critical lesions. While pioneering interventions such as resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta and emergency resuscitative thoracotomy have been widely adopted, robust evidence for their survival benefit remains limited and context dependent. Early identification and correction of reversible causes, targeted hemorrhage control, and timely application of advanced life support measures-especially prehospital thoracostomy and vascular access-significantly increase the likelihood of return of spontaneous circulation and favorable neurological outcomes. Conversely, routine use of epinephrine shows at best inconsistent benefits and may be detrimental in blunt trauma. Survival is further influenced by initial rhythm, presence of signs of life, rapid patient triage to trauma centers, and tailored protocols for pediatric and older populations. Notwithstanding notable progress, major knowledge gaps persist in defining optimal intervention timing, reporting standards, and long-term neurologic recovery. The findings underscore the critical need for multicenter, prospective research, harmonized trauma registries, and global consensus to inform future guidelines and optimize outcomes for TCA patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.