ReviewJournal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia2016
Mobile Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Teams: The North American Versus the European Experience.
Review in Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mobile ECMO for inter-hospital transport of pediatric patients: experience from 22 cases.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- The future of cardiac critical care: an anesthesia perspective.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Article
- Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) for Pulmonary and/or Cardiopulmonary Support-a Brief Review and Our Experience.The Indian journal of surgery · 2022Review
- Implementation and Outcomes of a Mobile Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Program in the United States During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia · 2021Review
- Article
- Critical Care During the Coronavirus Crisis-Reflections on the Roles of Anesthesiologists in Meeting the Challenges of the Pandemic.Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate differences in the inclusion of anesthesiologists in mobile extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) teams between North American and European centers.
designA retrospective review of North American versus European mobile ECMO teams. The search terms used to identify relevant articles were the following: "extracorporeal membrane transport," "mobile ECMO," and "interhospital transport."
settingMEDLINE review of articles.
participantsNone.
interventionsNone.
resultsBetween 1986 and 2015, 25 articles were published that reported the personnel makeup of mobile ECMO teams in North America and Europe: 6 from North American centers and 19 from European centers. The included articles reported a total of 1,329 cases: 389 (29%) adult-only cohorts and 940 (71%) mixed-age cohorts. Among North American studies, 0 of 6 (0%) reported the presence of an anesthesiologist on the mobile ECMO team in contrast to European studies, in which 10 of 19 (53%) reported the inclusion of an anesthesiologist (Fisher exact p for difference = 0.05). In terms of number of cases, this discrepancy translated to 543 total cases in North America (all without an anesthesiologist) and 499 cases in Europe (37%) including an anesthesiologist on the team (Fisher exact p for difference<0.001).
conclusionsThis study demonstrated significant geographic discrepancies in the inclusion of anesthesiologists on mobile ECMO teams, with European centers more likely to incorporate an anesthesiologist into the mobile ECMO process compared with North American centers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.