Critical Care, Critical Care Alert, Cardiology

Critical Care Alert: Hypothermia versus Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (TTM2 Trial)

Critical Care Alert

Dankiewicz J, Cronberg T, Lilja G, et al. Hypothermia versus Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(24):2283-2294.

Randomized trial to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of hypothermia vs normothermia and early treatment of fever in comatose patients after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Fever has been thought to be a risk factor for hypoxic-ischemic brain damage in patients post-cardiac arrest. Relatively small trials from the early 2000s showed significant mortality and functional benefits from targeted temperature management to 33℃ after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in patients with shockable rhythms.1,2 Since then, targeted temperature management (TTM) has become a standard protocol in many institutions. In 2013, this dogma was brought into question by the larger TTM1 trial that showed similar outcomes in their hypothermia (33℃) and forced normothermia (36℃) groups.3 In 2019, a trial demonstrated a significant improvement in neurologic outcome but not mortality at 90 days in their hypothermia (33℃) arm after non-shockable arrest.4 Evidence surrounding the benefits of post-arrest hypothermia has been conflicting, but it continues to be the standard of care per international guidelines.


  • Open label-trial with blinded assessment of outcomes


  • ≥ 18 years of age
  • Admitted after out-of-hospital arrest from cardiac or unknown cause
    • Both shockable and non-shockable rhythms
  • > 20 minutes of spontaneous circulation after resuscitation
  • Unconscious, unable to obey verbal commands, and no verbal response to pain


  • Unwitnessed cardiac arrest with asystole as initial rhythm
  • ROSC to screening and randomization > 180 minutes
  • Temperature on admission of < 30℃
  • Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation prior to ROSC
  • Obvious or suspected pregnancy
  • Intracranial bleed
  • Long term home oxygen use secondary to severe pulmonary disease


  • Hypothermia group
    • Cooled with surface or intravascular device to 33℃ for 28 hours followed by gradual rewarming to 37℃ over 12 hours.
  • Normothermia
    • Maintained a temperature of 37.5℃ or less.
    • Cooled with a surface or intravascular device for temperatures greater than 37.8℃


  • Death from any cause at 6 months


  • Functional outcome at 6 months based on Rankin Score
  • Days alive and out of hospital until day 180
  • Health-related quality of life
  • Rate of adverse events

A total of 1850 patients were evaluated for the primary outcome 

Primary Outcome

  • There was no statistically significant difference in mortality at 6 months between the hypothermia and normothermia group (50% vs 48% respectively, relative risk (RR) with hypothermia of 1.04, p = 0.37)
  • The effect of the temperature intervention on death at 6 months was consistent across subgroups, including shockable and non-shockable rhythms.

Selected Secondary Outcomes

  • There was no statistically significant difference in the functional outcome between the two groups. (55% in both groups with “poor” functional outcomes. RR with hypothermia = 1.00)
  • The hypothermia group had increased risk of arrhythmia resulting in hemodynamic compromise compared to normothermia (24% vs 17%, p < 0.001)


  • Largest trial to date of targeted temperature management, spanning multiple countries
  • Hospitals with experience in cooling and considered cardiac arrest centers
  • Physicians performing neuroprognostication were blinded
  • Decisions to withdraw care were performed by a blinded physician at 96 hours, well after the intervention period
  • Investigators, authors, and statisticians were unaware of group assignments during analysis of data


  • No non-temperature regulated group
  • ICU staff members were aware of assigned target temperature
  • Use of a cooling device was used in 43% of the normothermic group patients (an uncommon type of fever control)
  • ⅕ of patients were also involved in TAME trial (targeted mild hypercapnia after resuscitated cardiac arrest)

EM Take-Aways
Historical evidence for the effectiveness of hypothermia to 33℃ post-arrest has been inconsistent at best. The new TTM2 trial demonstrates a low likelihood of meaningful clinical or mortality improvement with TTM. In fact, cooling to 33℃ may be harmful in some cases - more often requiring paralytics, increased risk of unstable arrhythmia, and longer average time on the vent.5

While preventing fever in post-ROSC patients may be beneficial, aggressive cooling to 33℃ seems unlikely to provide benefit, regardless of initial rhythm, contradicting previously touted studies.

New evidence from the TTM2 trial may move critical care and hospital protocols away from post-arrest hypothermia, but until then we recommend you follow your individual hospital protocols.


  1. Mild Therapeutic Hypothermia to Improve the Neurologic Outcome after Cardiac Arrest. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(8):549-556.
  2. Bernard SA, Gray TW, Buist MD, et al. Treatment of Comatose Survivors of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest with Induced Hypothermia. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(8):557-563.
  3. Nielsen N, Wetterslev J, Cronberg T, et al. Targeted Temperature Management at 33°C versus 36°C after Cardiac Arrest. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(23):2197-2206.
  4. Lascarrou J-B, Merdji H, Le Gouge A, et al. Targeted Temperature Management for Cardiac Arrest with Nonshockable Rhythm. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(24):2327-2337.
  5. Farkas J. PulmCrit - A history of hypothermia for cardiac arrest, 2002-2021 (RIP). EMCrit Project. Published June 17, 2021. Accessed June 21, 2021.

Related Articles

Advanced Critical Care Ultrasound: The 60/60 Sign, Let's Be Specific

The 60/60 sign is an ultrasound finding that can help increase specificity in diagnosing right ventricular dysfunction in the setting of an acute pulmonary embolism.

Overlooked Sources of Bias in Adult Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Research

Although bias is pervasive in medical research, OHCA studies have unique sources of bias that are infrequently addressed in study methods. Recognizing these biases is vital to the critical appraisal a