Article Data

  • Views 2625
  • Dowloads 182

Original Research

Open Access Special Issue

Comparison of the survival and neurological outcomes in OHCA based on smoking status: investigation of the existence of the smoker's paradox

  • Gina Yu1
  • Taeyoung Kong1
  • Je Sung You1
  • Yoo Seok Park1
  • Hye Sun Lee2
  • Sung Phil Chung1

1Department of Emergency Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 03722 Seoul, Republic of Korea

2Biostatistics Collaboration Unit, Yonsei Biomedical Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 03722 Seoul, Republic of Korea

DOI: 10.22514/sv.2021.231 Vol.18,Issue 2,March 2022 pp.121-129

Submitted: 24 August 2021 Accepted: 24 September 2021

Published: 08 March 2022

*Corresponding Author(s): Sung Phil Chung E-mail:


The smoker’s paradox has been reported to reduce mortality following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). However, recent studies on this paradox have reported contradictory findings, with some indicating that it does not exist. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between smoking status and OHCA outcomes. This retrospective observational study was conducted using multicenter registry data. The associations between smoking status and OHCA outcomes were assessed using multivariable logistic regression analyses and propensity score-adjusted methods. We compared outcomes among current, former, and never-smokers, as well as between current and non-smokers and between ever- and never-smokers. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge, and the secondary outcome was favourable neurological outcomes. Among 4443 patients with OHCA, 19.9% were current smokers, 15.2% were former smokers, and 64.9% were never-smokers. Current smokers had significantly better outcomes than former or never-smokers. However, the significant differences observed in univariable analysis or before propensity score matching were not observed after adjustments with multivariable logistic regression or after propensity score matching analysis in both current vs. non-smokers and ever- vs. never-smokers. Other propensity score adjusted models also did not show significant differences, except for the stratification method. This study suggests that smoking is not an independent prognostic factor for OHCA. The statistically significant better outcomes observed in current or ever-smokers were not maintained after adjusting for confounders. Therefore, the smoker’s paradox should be investigated in additional prospective studies.


Smokers; Ex-smokers; Non-smokers; Cardiac arrest; Propensity score

Cite and Share

Gina Yu,Taeyoung Kong,Je Sung You,Yoo Seok Park,Hye Sun Lee,Sung Phil Chung. Comparison of the survival and neurological outcomes in OHCA based on smoking status: investigation of the existence of the smoker's paradox. Signa Vitae. 2022. 18(2);121-129.


[1] Pollock JS, Hollenbeck RD, Wang L, Janz DR, Rice TW, McPherson JA. A history of smoking is associated with improved surviv-al in patients treated with mild therapeutic hypothermia following cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2014; 85: 99–103.

[2] Lahmann AL, Bongiovanni D, Berkefeld A, Kettern M, Martinez L, Okrojek R, et al. Predicting factors for long-term survival in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest - A propensity score-matched analysis. PLoS ONE. 2020; 15: e0218634.

[3] Gupta T, Kolte D, Khera S, Aronow WS, Palaniswamy C, Mujib M, et al. Relation of Smoking Status to Outcomes after Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for in-Hospital Cardiac Arrest. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2014; 114: 169–174.

[4] Hausenloy DJ, Yellon DM. The therapeutic potential of ischemic conditioning: an update. Nature Reviews. Cardiology. 2011; 8: 619–629.

[5] Aune E, Røislien J, Mathisen M, Thelle DS, Otterstad JE. The “smoker’s paradox” in patients with acute coronary syn-drome: a systematic review. BMC medicine. 2011; 9: 97.

[6] Li B, Li D, Liu JF, Wang L, Li BZ, Yan X, et al. “Smoking paradox” is not true in patients with ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Neurology. 2021; 268: 2042–2054.

[7] Ricceri S, Salazar JW, Vu AA, Vittinghoff E, Moffatt E, Tseng ZH. Factors Predisposing to Survival after Resuscitation for Sudden Cardiac Arrest. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2021; 77: 2353–2362.

[8] Kim JY, Hwang SO, Shin SD, Yang HJ, Chung SP, Lee SW, et al. Korean Cardiac Arrest Research Consortium (KoCARC): rationale, development, and implementation. Clinical and Experimental Emergency Medicine. 2018; 5: 165–176.

[9] Perkins GD, Jacobs IG, Nadkarni VM, Berg RA, Bhanji F, Biarent D, et al. Cardiac Arrest and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Outcome Reports: Update of the Utstein Resuscitation Registry Templates for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From a Task Force of the International Liaison Committee on Resus-citation (American Heart Association, European Resuscitation Council, Australian and New Zealand Council on Resuscitation, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, InterAmerican Heart Foundation, Resuscitation Council of Southern Africa, Resuscitation Council of Asia); and the American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee and the Council on Cardiopulmonary, Critical Care, Perioperative and Resuscitation. Resuscitation. 2015; 96: 328–340.

[10] Ajam K, Gold LS, Beck SS, Damon S, Phelps R, Rea TD. Reliability of the Cerebral Performance Category to classify neurological status among survivors of ventricular fibrillation arrest: a cohort study. Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine. 2011; 19: 38.

[11] Deb S, Austin PC, Tu JV, Ko DT, Mazer CD, Kiss A, et al. A Review of Propensity-Score Methods and their Use in Cardiovascular Research. The Canadian Journal of Cardiology. 2016; 32: 259–265.

[12] Kuss O, Blettner M, Borgermann J. Propensity Score: an Alternative Method of Analyzing Treatment Effects. Deutsches Arzteblatt Interna-tional. 2016; 113: 597–603.

[13] Elosua R, Vega G, Rohlfs I, Aldasoro E, Navarro C, Cabades A, et al. Smoking and myocardial infarction case-fatality: hospital and population approach. European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation. 2007; 14: 561–567.

[14] Sonke GS, Stewart AW, Beaglehole R, Jackson R, White HD. Comparison of case fatality in smokers and non-smokers after acute cardiac event. British Medical Journal. 1997; 315: 992–993.

[15] Weinblatt E, Shapiro S, Frank CW, Sager RV. Prognosis of men after first myocardial infarction: mortality and first recur-rence in relation to selected parameters. American Journal of Public Health and the Nations Health. 1968; 58: 1329–1347.

[16] Sparrow D, Dawber TR. The influence of cigarette smoking on prognosis after a first myocardial infarction. a report from the Framingham study. Journal of Chronic Diseases. 1978; 31: 425–432.

[17] Kelly TL, Gilpin E, Ahnve S, Henning H, Ross J. Smoking status at the time of acute myocardial infarction and subse-quent prognosis. American Heart Journal. 1985; 110: 535–541.

[18] Sia C, Ko J, Zheng H, Ho AF, Foo D, Foo L, et al. Association between smoking status and outcomes in myocar-dial infarction patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Scientific Reports. 2021; 11: 6466.

[19] Kufner A, Nolte CH, Galinovic I, Brunecker P, Kufner GM, Endres M, et al. Smoking-thrombolysis paradox: recanalization and reperfusion rates after intravenous tissue plasminogen activator in smokers with ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2013; 44: 407–413.

[20] Bell TM, Bayt DR, Zarzaur BL. “Smoker’s Paradox” in Patients Treated for Severe Injuries: Lower Risk of Mortality after Trauma Observed in Current Smokers. Nicotine & Tobacco Research. 2015; 17: 1499–1504.

[21] Fonarow GC, Abraham WT, Albert NM, Stough WG, Gheorghiade M, Greenberg BH, et al. A smoker’s paradox in patients hospitalized for heart failure: findings from OPTIMIZE-HF. European Heart Journal. 2008; 29: 1983–1991.

[22] Kojayan GG, Grigorian A, Schubl SD, Kuza CM, Dolich M, Bashir R, et al. The effects of smoking on adoles-cent trauma patients: a propensity-score-matched analysis. Pediatric Surgery International. 2020; 36: 743–749.

[23] Doi SA, Islam N, Sulaiman K, Alsheikh‐Ali AA, Singh R, Al‐Qahtani A, et al. Demystifying Smoker’s Paradox: a Propensity Score–Weighted Analysis in Patients Hospitalized with Acute Heart Failure. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2019; 8: e013056.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,200 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Chemical Abstracts Service Source Index The CAS Source Index (CASSI) Search Tool is an online resource that can quickly identify or confirm journal titles and abbreviations for publications indexed by CAS since 1907, including serial and non-serial scientific and technical publications.

Index Copernicus The Index Copernicus International (ICI) Journals database’s is an international indexation database of scientific journals. It covered international scientific journals which divided into general information, contents of individual issues, detailed bibliography (references) sections for every publication, as well as full texts of publications in the form of attached files (optional). For now, there are more than 58,000 scientific journals registered at ICI.

Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research The Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research (GFMER) is a non-profit organization established in 2002 and it works in close collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO). The overall objectives of the Foundation are to promote and develop health education and research programs.

Scopus: CiteScore 1.0 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.

Embase Embase (often styled EMBASE for Excerpta Medica dataBASE), produced by Elsevier, is a biomedical and pharmacological database of published literature designed to support information managers and pharmacovigilance in complying with the regulatory requirements of a licensed drug.

Submission Turnaround Time