Observational studyEuropean journal of medical research2021
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for SARS-CoV-2: a multi-centered, prospective, observational study in critically ill 92 patients in Saudi Arabia.
Observational study in European journal of medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- International treatment outcomes of neonates on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) with persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN): a systematic review.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Risk Factors for Bleeding in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Effects of Transcatheter Arterial Embolization for Hemostasis.Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan) · 2023Article
- Modified SCOPE (mSCOPE) Score as a Tool to Predict Mortality in COVID-19 Critically Ill Patients.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: A narrative review.Journal of intensive medicine · 2023Review
- Fungal Infections in the ICU during the COVID-19 Era: Descriptive and Comparative Analysis of 178 Patients.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- An Imaging Overview of COVID-19 ARDS in ICU Patients and Its Complications: A Pictorial Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2024-12-30Concerns/Issues about Data · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Objections by Author(s) · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
17 authors at 12 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExtracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been used as a rescue strategy in patients with severe with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to SARS-CoV-2 infection, but there has been little evidence of its efficacy.
objectivesTo describe the effect of ECMO rescue therapy on patient-important outcomes in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2.
methodsA case series study was conducted for the laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 patients who were admitted to the ICUs of 22 Saudi hospitals, between March 1, 2020, and October 30, 2020, by reviewing patient's medical records prospectively.
resultsECMO use was associated with higher in-hospital mortality (40.2% vs. 48.9%; p = 0.000); lower COVID-19 virological cure (41.3% vs 14.1%, p = 0.000); and longer hospitalization (20.2 days vs 29.1 days; p = 0.000), ICU stay (12.6 vs 26 days; p = 0.000) and mechanical ventilation use (14.2 days vs 22.4 days; p = 0.000) compared to non-ECMO group. Also, there was a high number of patients with septic shock (19.6%) and multiple organ failure (10.9%); and more complications occurred at any time during hospitalization [pneumothorax (5% vs 29.3%, p = 0.000), bleeding requiring blood transfusion (7.1% vs 38%, p = 0.000), pulmonary embolism (6.4% vs 15.2%, p = 0.016), and gastrointestinal bleeding (3.3% vs 8.7%, p = 0.017)] in the ECMO group. However, PaO
conclusionFollowing the use of ECMO, the mortality rate of patients and length of ICU and hospital stay were not improved. However, these findings need to be carefully interpreted, as most of our cohort patients were relatively old and had multiple severe comorbidities. Future randomized trials, although challenging to conduct, are highly needed to confirm or dispute reported observations.
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.