Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33419553›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2022

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for patients with refractory coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Multicenter experience of referral hospitals in a large health care system.

Emily Shih, J Michael DiMaio, John J Squiers, Jasjit K Banwait, Dan M Meyer, Timothy J George, Gary S Schwartz, Baylor Scott & White ECMO for COVID Group

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.6field-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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Blood Product Utilization in Patients With COVID-19 on ECMO.The Journal of surgical research · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Commentary: COVID-19 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A long way from home.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2022
    Article
  18. Commentary: Heroic tales from a national tragedy.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Emily ShihDepartment of General Surgery, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Tex.
J Michael DiMaioDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Baylor Scott and White The Heart Hospitals, Plano, Tex; Baylor Scott and White Research Institute, Dallas, Tex. Electronic address: michael.dimaio@bswhealth.org.
John J SquiersDepartment of General Surgery, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Tex; Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Baylor Scott and White The Heart Hospitals, Plano, Tex.
Jasjit K BanwaitBaylor Scott and White Research Institute, Dallas, Tex.
Dan M MeyerDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Tex.
Timothy J GeorgeDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Baylor Scott and White The Heart Hospitals, Plano, Tex.
Gary S SchwartzDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Tex.
Baylor Scott & White ECMO for COVID Group
General Department of Preventive Medicine · VNBaylor University Medical Center · USBaylor Medical Center at Garland · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe benefit of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for patients with severe acute respiratory distress from coronavirus disease 2019 refractory to medical management and lung-protective mechanical ventilation has not been adequately determined.

methodsWe reviewed the clinical course of 37 patients with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection supported by venovenous ECMO at 4 ECMO referral centers within a large health care system. Patient characteristics, progression of hemodynamics and inflammatory markers, and clinical outcomes were evaluated.

resultsThe patients had median age of 51 years (interquartile range, 40-59), and 73% were male. Peak plateau pressures, vasopressor requirements, and arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide all improved with ECMO support. In our patient population, 24 of 37 patients (64.8%) survived to decannulation and 21 of 37 patients (56.8%) survived to discharge. Among patients discharged alive from the ECMO facility, 12 patients were discharged to a long-term acute care or rehabilitation facility, 2 were transferred back to the referring hospital for ventilatory weaning, and 7 were discharged directly home. For patients who were successfully decannulated, median length of time on ECMO was 17 days (interquartile range, 10-33.5).

conclusionsVenovenous ECMO represents a useful therapy for patients with refractory severe acute respiratory distress syndrome from coronavirus disease 2019.

Indexed as

Extracorporeal Membrane OxygenationAdultAgedCOVID-19Disease ProgressionFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient AcuityRetrospective StudiesSecondary Care CentersSurvival AnalysisTertiary Care CentersTreatment Outcomeacute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)coronavirus (COVID-19)critical careextracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)

Identifiers

PMID33419553
PMCPMC7704331
OpenAlexW3110547727

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.