Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31267300›Full record

ReviewAnnals of intensive care2019

Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal for acute hypercapnic respiratory failure.

Luis Morales-Quinteros, Lorenzo Del Sorbo, Antonio Artigas

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of intensive care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Effects of extracorporeal COCritical care (London, England) · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. [Recent research on extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2023
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in COVID-19-Where Are We Now?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
  11. Physiological effects of adding ECCOAnnals of intensive care · 2020
    Article
  12. Development of a COSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Luis Morales-QuinterosIntensive Care Unit, Hospital Universitario Sagrado Corazón, Barcelona, Spain. luchomq2077@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8937-9824
Lorenzo Del SorboInterdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Antonio ArtigasIntensive Care Unit, Hospital Universitario Sagrado Corazón, Barcelona, Spain.
Hospital Quirónsalud Sagrado Corazón · ESUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the past, the only treatment of acute exacerbations of obstructive diseases with hypercapnic respiratory failure refractory to medical treatment was invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Considerable technical improvements transformed extracorporeal techniques for carbon dioxide removal in an attractive option to avoid worsening respiratory failure and respiratory acidosis, and to potentially prevent or shorten the duration of IMV in patients with exacerbation of COPD and asthma. In this review, we will present a summary of the pathophysiological rationale and evidence of ECCO

Indexed as

AsthmaCOPDECCO2RInvasive mechanical ventilationNoninvasive mechanical ventilation

Identifiers

PMID31267300
PMCPMC6606679
OpenAlexW2955634793

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.