Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34223349›Full record

ReviewResuscitation plus2021

A review of ECMO for cardiac arrest.

Tyler E Klee, Karl B Kern

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Resuscitation plus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Mechanism of post cardiac arrest syndrome based on animal models of cardiac arrest.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tyler E KleeUniversity of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, United States.
Karl B KernUniversity of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ, United States.
University of Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardiac arrest is an important public health concern, affecting an estimated 356,500 people in the out-of-hospital setting and 209,000 people in the in-hospital setting each year. The causes of cardiac arrest include acute coronary syndromes, pulmonary embolism, dyskalemia, respiratory failure, hypovolemia, sepsis, and poisoning among many others. In order to tackle the enormous issue of high mortality among sufferers of cardiac arrest, ongoing research has been seeking improved treatment protocols and novel therapies. One of the mechanical devices that has been increasingly utilized for cardiac arrest is venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). Presently there is only one published randomized controlled trial examining the use of VA-ECMO as part of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), a process referred to as extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). Recently there has been significant progress in providing ECPR for refractory cardiac arrest patients. This narrative review seeks to outline the use of ECPR for both in-hospital and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, as well as provide information on the expected outcomes associated with its use.

Indexed as

Cardiac arrestCOVID-19ECMOECPRExtracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitationExtracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Identifiers

PMID34223349
PMCPMC8244483
OpenAlexW3126606533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.