- This study addressed whether helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) could expand timely extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) access for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in rural settings.
- The FLIGHT-to-ECPR Study was a single-center prospective observational cohort study involving 45 patients, comparing HEMS-facilitated ECPR to a matched cohort of 27 patients receiving standard ground-transport ECPR.
- Among matched ECPR patients, favorable neurologic survival was 25.9% in both the HEMS and ground transport groups (p > 0.99), with similar low-flow times (85.9 vs. 87.1 minutes; p > 0.99).
- The authors concluded that a HEMS-facilitated, hospital-based ECPR strategy is feasible and safely expands rural access while preserving neurologic outcomes comparable to standard ground transport.
- This suggests that geographic distance alone should not preclude ECPR for refractory OHCA if optimized systems, such as HEMS, can maintain timely reperfusion.
Extending Advanced Resuscitation: Navigating Geographic Barriers in Refractory Cardiac Arrest
Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains a formidable clinical challenge, with low survival rates, especially in refractory cases where standard resuscitation fails [1, 2]. For select patients, particularly those with an initial shockable rhythm, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) can improve outcomes [3, 4, 2, 5]. ECPR, the use of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during cardiac arrest, has been associated with a greater likelihood of favorable neurologic outcomes in some analyses (odds ratio: 1.84; 95% confidence interval: 1.14 to 2.99) [6]. However, its benefit is critically time-dependent, with shorter low-flow times, the interval from collapse to ECPR initiation, linked to better survival [7]. This requirement for rapid intervention at a specialized center creates a significant barrier to access for patients in rural or geographically distant areas, a challenge a recent study sought to address [8].
A Novel Pathway for Timely ECPR Delivery
To determine if helicopter transport could safely bridge the distance for rural patients with refractory ventricular fibrillation or tachycardia (VF/VT), researchers designed a specialized ECPR pathway. The central hypothesis was that a Helicopter-EMS (HEMS) facilitated, hospital-based ECPR protocol could expand access to this advanced resuscitation without compromising the clinical outcomes seen with standard ground transport. The investigation, called the FaciLItated hospital-based ECPR via Helicopter Transport (FLIGHT-to-ECPR) Study, was structured as a single-center prospective observational cohort study running from August 2021 to December 2025. It enrolled adults aged 18 to 75 years with refractory VF/VT OHCA who met eligibility criteria from the Minnesota Mobile Resuscitation Consortium. The protocol initiated parallel ground EMS and HEMS activation to enable continuous mechanical CPR during transport directly to a hospital-based ECMO center. To rigorously evaluate the HEMS pathway, the authors compared outcomes to a matched cohort of patients who received ECPR via standard ground transport. The groups were matched 1:1 based on low-flow time, the critical variable from arrest to the start of ECMO, thereby isolating the effect of the transport method. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge with a favorable neurologic status, defined as a Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) score of 1 (good performance) or 2 (moderate disability).
Operational Metrics and Patient Characteristics
The study's HEMS pathway was activated for 45 patients with refractory OHCA, of whom 27 (60%) were ultimately cannulated for ECPR. The patient cohort had a mean age of 55.2 years. Clinical circumstances at the time of arrest were favorable for resuscitation, with 83.7% of arrests being witnessed and 69.0% of patients receiving bystander CPR, factors known to be associated with better outcomes. The logistics of air transport were a key focus. The mean time from the 9-1-1 call to hospital arrival was 70.3 minutes. For the HEMS portion of the response, the on-scene time averaged 18.0 minutes, and the flight itself averaged 18.6 minutes. For the 27 patients who received ECPR, the mean low-flow time, representing the total duration of ischemia from arrest to initiation of extracorporeal support, was 85.9 minutes. This duration, while longer than the ideal 60-minute target often cited for urban systems, reflects the reality of providing advanced care across extended distances.
Clinical Outcomes: Survival and Neurologic Status
The primary outcome of favorable neurologic survival (CPC 1-2) for the entire 45-patient activation cohort was 33.3% (15/45). A notable divergence in outcomes appeared when patients were stratified by treatment received. Among the 27 patients who were cannulated for ECPR, the rate of favorable neurologic survival was 25.9% (7/27). In contrast, for the 18 patients who were not cannulated, either because they achieved return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) en route or met criteria for termination of resuscitation, the favorable neurologic survival rate was 44.4% (8/18). The study's central comparison involved the 27 HEMS-transported ECPR patients and a matched cohort of 27 patients who arrived by ground transport. The matching process successfully equalized the crucial variable of low-flow time between the groups (85.9 minutes for HEMS vs. 87.1 minutes for ground; p > 0.99). The key finding was that favorable neurologic survival was identical in both groups at 25.9% (p > 0.99). Furthermore, no significant differences were found in secondary measures such as cannulation performance, duration of ECMO support, or total hospital length of stay, suggesting the HEMS pathway did not introduce additional clinical complications or increase resource utilization compared to the standard protocol.
Implications for Expanding ECPR Access
These findings demonstrate that a HEMS-facilitated, hospital-based ECPR strategy is a feasible and safe method for extending advanced resuscitation to patients with refractory OHCA in rural and remote settings. The study provides strong evidence that this expansion of access can be achieved while preserving neurologic outcomes at a level comparable to that of established ground-transport protocols. The identical favorable neurologic survival of 25.9% in the HEMS and matched ground-transport cohorts is a critical result, indicating that the logistical challenges of air transport did not negatively impact patient benefit. For practicing physicians, particularly those in regions without immediate access to an ECMO center, this study suggests that geography alone does not have to be an absolute barrier to ECPR. The success of the FLIGHT-to-ECPR pathway underscores the importance of systems-level planning. By optimizing regional protocols to include coordinated HEMS activation and transport, healthcare systems can begin to mitigate geographic disparities and offer a higher level of care to patients who would otherwise have a very poor prognosis.
References
1. Gomes DA, Presume J, Ferreira J, et al. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.. Internal and emergency medicine. 2023. doi:10.1007/s11739-023-03357-x
2. Bělohlávek J, Yannopoulos D, Šmalcová J, et al. Intraarrest transport, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and early invasive management in refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: an individual patient data pooled analysis of two randomised trials. EClinicalMedicine. 2023. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101988
3. Low CJW, Ling RR, Ramanathan K, et al. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus conventional CPR in cardiac arrest: an updated meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Critical Care. 2024. doi:10.1186/s13054-024-04830-5
4. Scquizzato T, Bonaccorso A, Swol J, et al. Refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.. Artificial organs. 2023. doi:10.1111/aor.14516
5. Scquizzato T, Bonaccorso A, Consonni M, et al. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and propensity score-matched studies.. Artificial organs. 2022. doi:10.1111/aor.14205
6. Kiyohara Y, Kampaktsis PN, Briasoulis A, Kuno T. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-facilitated resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.. Journal of cardiovascular medicine (Hagerstown, Md.). 2023. doi:10.2459/JCM.0000000000001503
7. Leroux L, Dennis-Benford NB, Bergeron A, et al. Impact of prehospital extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest on survival with good neurological function: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. Resuscitation plus. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.resplu.2025.100974
8. Ortega‐Deballon I, Hornby L, Shemie SD. Protocols for uncontrolled donation after circulatory death: a systematic review of international guidelines, practices and transplant outcomes. Critical Care. 2015. doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0985-7