Next Article in Journal
Causal Relationship Between Epilepsy, Status Epilepticus and Sleep-Related Traits: A Bidirectional Mendelian Randomization Study
Previous Article in Journal
Redefining Clinical Perspectives on MCS: Toward an Evidence-Based, Multisystem Model. Comment on Jacques, L. Multiple Chemical Sensitivity: A Clinical Perspective. Brain Sci. 2024, 14, 1261
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Correction

Correction: MACCHINI et al. Intra-Arrest Therapeutic Hypothermia and Neurologic Outcome in Patients Admitted After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Princess Trial. Brain Sci. 2022, 12, 1374

1
Department of Intensive Care, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles (HUB), 1070 Brussels, Belgium
2
Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Centre for Resuscitation Science, Karolinska Institutet, 17177 Stockholm, Sweden
3
Emergency Medical Services of the Hradec Kralove Region, Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Charles University in Prague, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, 50022 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic
4
Department of Medicine, Karolinska Institute, 17177 Stockholm, Sweden
5
Function Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, 17177 Stockholm, Sweden
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Brain Sci. 2025, 15(7), 748; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15070748
Submission received: 14 April 2025 / Accepted: 12 May 2025 / Published: 14 July 2025
In the original publication [1], a wording error was introduced. Throughout the manuscript, Risk Ratio (RR) is used for comparisons. However, in the manuscript text, in Tables 3 and 4 and in the legends for Tables 3 and 4, the term Odds Ratio (OR) was mistakenly used instead of the correct Risk Ratio (RR). This error is limited to the terminology; the numerical values presented remain correct and correspond to RR. The only instance where Odds Ratio (OR) was actually used is in the random effects model, which is described in the manuscript but not included in the tables. In this context, Odds Ratio (OR) is the appropriate effect measure, and it is correctly reported. The results and conclusions of this study remain unaffected by this mistake.
The terminology has now been corrected in Table 3 and Table 4 and their legends, as shown below and in the manuscript. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has been updated.
Table 3. Primary outcome in the study population, which are presented as Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Data are presented in all patients and in the subgroup of patients with shockable (ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia) and non-shockable (asystole and pulseless electric activity) initial rhythm. CPC = Cerebral Performance Category.
Table 3. Primary outcome in the study population, which are presented as Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Data are presented in all patients and in the subgroup of patients with shockable (ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia) and non-shockable (asystole and pulseless electric activity) initial rhythm. CPC = Cerebral Performance Category.
Primary OutcomeInterventionControlDifference
(95% CI)
Risk Ratio
(95% CI)
p-Value
Survival with CPC 1–2 at 90 days, n (%)
All patients56/149 (37.6%)45/142 (31.7%)5.9 [−5.2–16.8]1.19 [0.86–1.63]0.29
Shockable rhythm48/83 (57.8%)35/78 (44.9%)12.9 [−2.4–28.3]1.29 [0.95–1.75]0.10
Non-shockable rhythm8/66 (12.1%)10/64 (15.6%)−3.3 [−15.3–8.6]0.79 [0.33–1.87]0.58
Table 4. Secondary outcomes in the population, which are presented as Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Data are presented in all patients and in the subgroup of patients with shockable (ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia) and non-shockable (asystole and pulseless electric activity) initial rhythm. CPC = Cerebral Performance Category.
Table 4. Secondary outcomes in the population, which are presented as Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Data are presented in all patients and in the subgroup of patients with shockable (ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia) and non-shockable (asystole and pulseless electric activity) initial rhythm. CPC = Cerebral Performance Category.
Secondary OutcomeInterventionControlDifference
(95% CI)
Risk Ratio
(95% CI)
p-Value
Overall survival at 90 days, no (%)
All patients60/149 (40.3%)52/142 (36.6%)3.7 [−7.5–14.8]1.10 [0.82–1.47]0.09
Shockable rhythm51/83 (61.4%)41/78 (52.6%)8.8 [−6.4–24.1]1.17 [0.89–1.53]0.25
Non-shockable rhythm9/66 (13.6%)11/64 (17.1%)−3.5 [−15.8–9.1]0.81 [0.36–1.81]0.36
Survival with CPC 1 at 90 days, no (%)
All patients50/149 (33.6%)35/142 (24.6%)9.0 [−1.5–19.3]1.36 [0.94–1.96]0.11
Shockable rhythm45/83 (54.2%)27/78 (34.6%)19.6 [4.6–34.6]1.57 [1.09–2.25]0.01
Non-shockable rhythm5/66 (7.6%)8/64 (12.5%)−5.0 [−15.2–5.6]0.62 [0.21–1.78]0.60

Reference

  1. MACCHINI, E.; DILLENBECK, E.; JONSSON, M.; ANNONI, F.; FORSBERG, S.; HOLLENBERG, J.; TRUHLAR, A.; SVENSSON, L.; NORDBERG, P.; TACCONE, F.S. Intra-Arrest Therapeutic Hypothermia and Neurologic Outcome in Patients Admitted after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Princess Trial. Brain Sci. 2022, 12, 1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

MACCHINI, E.; DILLENBECK, E.; JONSSON, M.; ANNONI, F.; FORSBERG, S.; HOLLENBERG, J.; TRUHLAR, A.; SVENSSON, L.; NORDBERG, P.; TACCONE, F.S. Correction: MACCHINI et al. Intra-Arrest Therapeutic Hypothermia and Neurologic Outcome in Patients Admitted After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Princess Trial. Brain Sci. 2022, 12, 1374. Brain Sci. 2025, 15, 748. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15070748

AMA Style

MACCHINI E, DILLENBECK E, JONSSON M, ANNONI F, FORSBERG S, HOLLENBERG J, TRUHLAR A, SVENSSON L, NORDBERG P, TACCONE FS. Correction: MACCHINI et al. Intra-Arrest Therapeutic Hypothermia and Neurologic Outcome in Patients Admitted After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Princess Trial. Brain Sci. 2022, 12, 1374. Brain Sciences. 2025; 15(7):748. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15070748

Chicago/Turabian Style

MACCHINI, Elisabetta, Emelie DILLENBECK, Martin JONSSON, Filippo ANNONI, Sune FORSBERG, Jacob HOLLENBERG, Anatolij TRUHLAR, Leif SVENSSON, Per NORDBERG, and Fabio Silvio TACCONE. 2025. "Correction: MACCHINI et al. Intra-Arrest Therapeutic Hypothermia and Neurologic Outcome in Patients Admitted After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Princess Trial. Brain Sci. 2022, 12, 1374" Brain Sciences 15, no. 7: 748. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15070748

APA Style

MACCHINI, E., DILLENBECK, E., JONSSON, M., ANNONI, F., FORSBERG, S., HOLLENBERG, J., TRUHLAR, A., SVENSSON, L., NORDBERG, P., & TACCONE, F. S. (2025). Correction: MACCHINI et al. Intra-Arrest Therapeutic Hypothermia and Neurologic Outcome in Patients Admitted After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Princess Trial. Brain Sci. 2022, 12, 1374. Brain Sciences, 15(7), 748. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15070748

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop