ReviewCureus2019
The Patient Selection Criteria for Veno-arterial Extracorporeal Mechanical Oxygenation.
Review in Cureus, 2019. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Scoping review of contemporary adult venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) selection criteria and decision-making mechanisms.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2026Article
- Long-term outcomes of out-of-center veno-arterial ECMO cannulation for cardiopulmonary failure: investigation of prognostic parameters for a decision support tool - a 16-year retrospective study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Current role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for the management of trauma patients: Indications and results.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Traumatic Bronchus Avulsion Managed With Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation, Pneumonectomy, and Rib Fixation.Case reports in surgery · 2025Article
- Recurrent Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy due to Pheochromocytoma Managed With Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.Journal of medical cases · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) plays a crucial role in the management of patients with refractory cardiac and pulmonary dysfunction by providing temporary mechanical hemodynamic and respiratory support. However, the paucity of guidelines on indications for administering it and the failure to timely initiate VA-ECMO often result in a high in-hospital mortality rate and poor six-month outcomes after VA-ECMO deployment. Due to ethical issues, randomized controlled studies with VA-ECMO have not been conducted so that no recommended evidence-based guidelines exist for VA-ECMO patient-selection criteria. Therefore, the indication for administering the device depends solely on expert opinion after reviewing the literature. We conducted a review of the current literature to better understand and classify the need for proper patient selection, including proven indications for VA-ECMO.
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.