ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2021
Short-term and intermediate outcomes of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest patients supported by venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical significance of geriatric nutritional risk index in risk stratification of acute myocarditis.Heart and vessels · 2026Article
- Comparative Prognostic Performance of SOFA2.0 and SOFA for 28-Day Mortality in Patients Developing Sepsis During ECMO Support.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Article
- Risk factors and economic burden of healthcare-associated infections among patients supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the ICU: a cohort study from China.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2025Article
- Patterns of Disease Progression and Outcomes of Inferior ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: The Multicenter INSTINCT Registry.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Successful rescue of a patient with cardiogenic shock following traumatic cardiac arrest using VA-ECMO after air medical transport: a case report.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Early mNGS testing for diagnose and prognostic prediction of early onset pneumonia among in-hospital cardiac arrest patients undergoing extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
- Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VA-ECMO) in Management of Cardiogenic Shock.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Extracorporeal cardio-pulmonary resuscitation in poisoning: A scoping review article.Resuscitation plus · 2023Article
- ECMO Retrieval Program: What Have We Learned So Far.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Influence of Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Integrated Hemoadsorption on the Early Reversal of Multiorgan and Microcirculatory Dysfunction and Outcome of Refractory Cardiogenic Shock.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- The Role of Excessive Anticoagulation and Missing Hyperinflammation in ECMO-Associated Bleeding.Journal of clinical 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
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest are life-threatening emergencies with high mortality rates. Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) and extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (e-CPR) provide viable options for life sustaining measures when medical therapy fails. The purpose of this study is to determine the utilization and outcomes of VA ECMO and eCPR in patients that require emergent cardiac support at a single academic center.
methodsA retrospective chart review of prospectively collected data was performed at an academic institution from January 1st, 2018 to June 30th, 2020. All consecutive patients who required VA ECMO were evaluated based on whether they underwent traditional VA ECMO or eCPR. The study variables include demographic data, duration on ECMO, length of stay, complications, and survival to discharge.
resultsA total of 90 patients were placed on VA ECMO for cardiac support with 44.4% (40) of these patients undergoing eCPR secondary to cardiac arrest and emergent placement on ECMO. A majority of the patients were male (n = 64, 71.1%) and the mean age was 58.8 ± 15.8 years. 44.4% of patients were transferred from outside hospitals for a higher level of care and 37.8% of patients required another primary therapy such as an Impella or IABP. The most common complication experienced by patients was bleeding (n = 41, 45.6%), which occurred less often in eCPR (n = 29, 58% vs. n = 12, 30%). Other complications included infections (n = 11, 12.2%), limb ischemia (n = 13, 14.4%), acute kidney injury (n = 17, 18.9%), and cerebral vascular accident (n = 4, 4.4%). The length of stay was longer for patients on VA ECMO (32.1 ± 40.7 days vs. 17.7 ± 18.2 days). Mean time on ECMO was 8.1 ± 8.3 days. Survival to discharge was higher in VA ECMO patients (n = 23, 46% vs. n = 8, 20%).
conclusionVA ECMO provided an effective rescue therapy in patients in acute cardiogenic shock with a survival greater than the expected ELSO guidelines of 40%. While the survival of eCPR was lower than expected, this may reflect the severity of patient's condition and emphasizes the importance of careful patient selection and planning.
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.