Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34316151›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine2021

Role of Invasive Mechanical Ventilation and ECMO in the Management of COVID-19: A Systematic Review.

Sanjana Nagraj, Rutu Karia, Sahar Hassanain, Prithwish Ghosh, Viraj R Shah, Abin Thomas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Is Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation a Panacea?The Eurasian journal of medicine · 2023
    Article
  2. COVID-19: Some unresolved issues.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2022
    Review
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

6 authors.

Sanjana NagrajDepartment of Internal Medicine, Jacobi Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6230-7214
Rutu KariaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Anna Medical College and Research Centre, Montagne Blanche, Mauritius.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9191-1675
Sahar HassanainWomen Medical College, Abbottabad, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1111-1609
Prithwish GhoshDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5294-9504
Viraj R ShahDepartment of Internal Medicine, RCSM Government Medical College, Kolhapur, Maharashtra, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0390-5510
Abin ThomasCentre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8283-6762

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis systematic review aims to provide insight into the outcome of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and invasive mechanical ventilation use in critically ill COVID-19 patients. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases PubMed Central and PubMed were searched from January 2020 to June 2020 for published studies about ECMO and/or invasive mechanical ventilation use in COVID-19 patients. Data Extraction and Study Selection: The search strategy retrieved 766 articles, of which 19 studies consisting of 204 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. DATA SYNTHESIS: Primary outcomes evaluated were discharge and/or clinical improvement and mortality rate. Secondary outcomes evaluated included reported complications and the mean number of days of hospitalization for survivors. Weighted averages of included studies were calculated, and data were pooled in forest plots. Nearly, 68.1% of the patients received invasive mechanical ventilation without ECMO support, and 31.9% were placed on ECMO. Also, 22.5% of the patients were discharged and/or clinically improved and 51.5% died. Twenty-six percent of the study population deteriorated but remained alive or experienced no improvement in clinical condition. And 75.2% of those who died belonged to the non-ECMO group and 24.8% to the ECMO group. The mortality rate in the non-ECMO group was 56.8% compared to 40% in the ECMO group.

conclusionThe utility of ECMO during a pandemic is uncertain as it is a resource-intensive modality, especially when the mortality rate in severely ill patients infected with COVID-19 virus is already known to be high. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Nagraj S, Karia R, Hassanain S, Ghosh P, Shah VR, Thomas A. Role of Invasive Mechanical Ventilation and ECMO in the Management of COVID-19: A Systematic Review. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(6):691-698.

Indexed as

Coronavirus disease 2019COVID-19Critically illExtracorporeal membrane oxygenationInvasive mechanical ventilationSARS-CoV-2 infection

Identifiers

PMID34316151
PMCPMC8286391

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.