Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29349617›Full record

ArticlePediatric surgery international2018

Use of venovenous ECMO for neonatal and pediatric ECMO: a decade of experience at a tertiary children's hospital.

Jennifer L Carpenter, Yangyang R Yu, Darrell L Cass, Oluyinka O Olutoye, James A Thomas, Cole Burgman, Caraciolo J Fernandes, Timothy C Lee

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric surgery international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Neonatal respiratory extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and primary diagnosis: trends between two decades.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jennifer L CarpenterDivision of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Texas Children's Hospital/Baylor College of Medicine, 6701 Fannin St, Suite 1210, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Yangyang R YuDivision of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Texas Children's Hospital/Baylor College of Medicine, 6701 Fannin St, Suite 1210, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Darrell L CassDivision of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Texas Children's Hospital/Baylor College of Medicine, 6701 Fannin St, Suite 1210, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Oluyinka O OlutoyeDivision of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Texas Children's Hospital/Baylor College of Medicine, 6701 Fannin St, Suite 1210, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
James A ThomasCritical Care Section, Department of Pediatrics, Texas Children's Hospital, 6621 Fannin St, Suite 6006, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Cole BurgmanCritical Care Section, Department of Pediatrics, Texas Children's Hospital, 6621 Fannin St, Suite 6006, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Caraciolo J FernandesNeonatology Section, Department of Pediatrics, Texas Children's Hospital, 6621 Fannin St, Suite 6104, Houston, TX, 77030, USA.
Timothy C LeeDivision of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Texas Children's Hospital/Baylor College of Medicine, 6701 Fannin St, Suite 1210, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. tclee@texaschildrens.org.
Texas Children's Hospital · USBaylor College of Medicine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvances in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) have led to increased use of venovenous (VV) ECMO in the pediatric population. We present the evolution and experience of pediatric VV ECMO at a tertiary care institution.

methodsA retrospective cohort study from 01/2005 to 07/2016 was performed, comparing by cannulation mode. Survival to discharge, complications, and decannulation analyses were performed.

resultsIn total, 160 patients (105 NICU, 55 PICU) required 13 ± 11 days of ECMO. VV cannulation was used primarily in 83 patients with 64% survival, while venoarterial (VA) ECMO was used in 77 patients with 54% survival. Overall, 74% of patients (n = 118) were successfully decannulated; 57% survived to discharge. VA ECMO had a higher rate of intra-cranial hemorrhage than VV (22 vs 9%, p = 0.003). Sixteen VA patients (21%) had radiographic evidence of a cerebral ischemic insult. No cardiac complications occurred with the use of dual-lumen VV cannulas. There were no differences in complications (p = 0.40) or re-operations (p = 0.85) between the VV and VA groups.

conclusionDual-lumen VV ECMO can be safely performed with appropriate image guidance, is associated with a lower rate of intra-cranial hemorrhage, and may be the preferred first-line mode of ECMO support in appropriately selected NICU and PICU patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Indexed as

Brain IschemiaCatheterizationChildChild, PreschoolCohort StudiesExtracorporeal Membrane OxygenationFemaleHospitals, PediatricHumansInfantInfant, NewbornIntensive Care Units, NeonatalIntensive Care Units, PediatricIntracranial HemorrhagesMaleRetrospective StudiesCannulationCritical careECMOVenoarterialVenovenous

Identifiers

PMID29349617
OpenAlexW2785187804

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.