ArticleWorld journal of emergency medicine2021
Protective effect of extracorporeal membrane pulmonary oxygenation combined with cardiopulmonary resuscitation on post-resuscitation lung injury.
Article in World journal of emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Brain development in newborns and infants after ECMO.World journal of pediatrics : WJP · 2024Pooled it
- Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a comparison of two experimental approaches and systematic review of experimental models.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2024Article
- Article
- Successful treatment of a patient with diffuse alveolar hemorrhage and anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis.World journal of emergency medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiac arrest (CA) is a critical condition that is a concern to healthcare workers. Comparative studies on extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) and conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR) technologies have shown that ECPR is superior to CCPR. However, there is a lack of studies that compare the protective effects of these two resuscitative methods on organs. Therefore, we aim to perform experiments in swine models of ventricular fibrillation-induced CA to study whether the early application of ECPR has advantages over CCPR in the lung injury and to explore the protective mechanism of ECPR on the post-resuscitation pulmonary injury.
methodsSixteen male swine were randomized to CCPR (CCPR;
resultsFor the two groups, the survival rates between the two groups were not statistically significant (
conclusionsECPR may have pulmonary protective effects, possibly related to the regulation of alveolar surface-active proteins and mitigated oxidative stress response post-resuscitation.
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.