Intramuscular epinephrine in cardiac arrest: A systematic review.
Resuscitation Plus · 2025-10-15 · Systematic review
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epinephrine administered by intravenous (IV) or intraosseous (IO) route is the first-line medication for cardiac arrest and is associated with improved survival. Intramuscular (IM) epinephrine is currently not indicated for cardiac arrest but may be faster and easier to administer and may result in improved patient outcomes. AIM: To evaluate the evidence for IM epinephrine compared to IV or IO epinephrine in, and animals with cardiac arrest. METHODS: This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021259729). Databases were searched for studies comparing IV, IO, and IM epinephrine administration in cardiac arrest up to June 2, 2025. Studies in children, adults, and animals with cardiac arrest were included. Studies involving neonates and unpublished studies (such as conference abstracts and trial protocols) were excluded. Two investigators reviewed studies for relevance, extracted data and assessed bias of individual studies using the ROBINS-I and OHAT tools. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE methodology. RESULTS: One observational adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) study, five animal studies, and one narrative review were included. For all studies, the risk of bias was moderate and certainty of evidence was low. In the one human before-and-after study of 1405 adults with OHCA, IM epinephrine was associated with improved survival (11.0 % vs 7.0 %; aOR 1.73, 95 % CI 1.10-2.71) and neurologically favourable survival (9.8 % vs 6.2 %; aOR, 1.72, 95 % CI 1.07-2.76) compared to IV/IO epinephrine. Animal studies in both adults and children had heterogeneous methods and results were mixed. CONCLUSION: A limited number of studies have compared IM epinephrine to IV/IO or no epinephrine in cardiac arrest, including one human trial which showed improved neurological survival for IM epinephrine. Further studies, particularly randomized controlled trials in humans, to explore IM epinephrine for cardiac arrest are justified.
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Adrenaline · Cardiovascular drugs · Intraosseous access · Intravenous access · Mortality & survival · Quality of life & function
Related articles
- Effects of Intravenous Versus Intraosseous Adrenalin Administration on Morbidity and Mortality After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Systematic Review. (Medicina (Kaunas), 2025)
- Intraosseous and Intravenous Epinephrine Administration Routes in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: Survival and Neurologic Outcomes. (J Am Heart Assoc, 2024)
- Intraosseous Versus Peripheral Intravenous Access During Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: a Comparison of 30-Day Survival and Neurological Outcome in the French National Registry. (Cardiovasc Drugs Ther, 2020)
- Intraosseous versus intravenous administration of adrenaline in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a secondary analysis of the PARAMEDIC2 placebo-controlled trial. (Intensive Care Med, 2020)
- Intravenous versus intraosseous adrenaline administration in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A retrospective cohort study. (Resuscitation, 2020)
- Vascular access in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with non-shockable rhythms-a retrospective observational study of the intravenous versus intraosseous approach: the VANISH study. (Front Public Health, 2026)