ArticleScientific reports2022
The feasibility of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for patients with active cancer who undergo in-hospital cardiac arrest.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest event after cancer diagnosis: a korean metropolitan cohort study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Is Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation a Panacea?The Eurasian journal of medicine · 2023Article
- A recommended preclinical extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation model for neurological outcomes: A scoping review.Resuscitation plus · 2023Article
- Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation After Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation With Pancytopenia: JACC Patient Care Pathways.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2023Review
- Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation After Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation With Pancytopenia:JACC. Case reports · 2023Review
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
Indications of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) are still debatable, particularly in patients with cancer. Prediction of the prognosis of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) in patients with cancer receiving ECPR is important given the increasing prevalence and survival rate of cancer. We compared the neurologic outcomes and survival rates of IHCA patients with and without cancer receiving ECPR. Data from the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation registry between 2015 and 2019 were used in a retrospective manner. The primary outcome was 6-month good neurologic outcome, defined as a Cerebral performance category score of 1 or 2. The secondary outcomes were 1- and 3-month good neurologic outcome, and 6-month survival. Among 247 IHCA patients with ECPR, 43 had active cancer. The 6-month good neurologic outcome rate was 27.9% and 32.4% in patients with and without active cancer, respectively (P > 0.05). Good neurologic outcomes at 1-month (30.2% vs. 20.6%) and 3-month (30.2% vs. 28.4%), and the survival rate at 6-month (39.5% vs. 36.5%) were not significantly different (all P > 0.05) Active cancer was not associated with 6-month good neurologic outcome by logistic regression analyses. Therefore, patients with IHCA should not be excluded from ECPR solely for the presence of cancer itself.
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.