AbstractBackgroundIn adults with refractory out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest, when conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) alone does not achieve return of spontaneous circulation, extracorporeal CPR is attempted to restore perfusion and improve outcomes. Considering the contrasting findings of recent studies, we conducted a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials to ascertain the effect of extracorporeal CPR on survival and neurological outcome.MethodsPubmed via MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to February 3, 2023, for randomized controlled trials comparing extracorporeal CPR versus conventional CPR in adults with refractory out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest. Survival with a favorable neurological outcome at the longest follow‐up available was the primary outcome.ResultsAmong four randomized controlled trials included, extracorporeal CPR compared with conventional CPR increased survival with favorable neurological outcome at the longest follow‐up available for all rhythms (59/220 [27%] vs. 39/213 [18%]; OR = 1.72; 95% CI, 1.09–2.70; p = 0.02; I² = 26%; number needed to treat of 9), for initial shockable rhythms only (55/164 [34%] vs. 38/165 [23%]; OR = 1.90; 95% CI, 1.16–3.13; p = 0.01; I² = 23%; number needed to treat of 7), and at hospital discharge or 30 days (55/220 [25%] vs. 34/212 [16%]; OR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.13–2.92; p = 0.01; I² = 0.0%). Overall survival at the longest follow‐up available was similar (61/220 [25%] vs. 34/212 [16%]; OR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.13–2.92; p = 0.59; I² = 58%).ConclusionsExtracorporeal CPR compared with conventional CPR increased survival with favorable neurological outcome in adults with refractory out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest, especially when the initial rhythm was shockable.Review RegistrationPROSPERO CRD42023396482.