ReviewThe Annals of thoracic surgery2022
Multi-institutional Analysis of 505 Patients With Coronavirus Disease-2019 Supported With Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Predictors of Survival.
Review in The Annals of thoracic surgery, 2022. 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.
- Relationship between the Pre-ECMO and ECMO Time and Survival of Severe COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Potential for recovery after extremely prolonged VV-ECMO support in well-selected severe COVID-19 patients: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Variation in outcomes with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the era of coronavirus: A multicenter cohort evaluation.Perfusion · 2023Observational
- Outcomes of Patients Transported in the Prone Position to a Regional Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Center: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Critical care explorations · 2023Article
- The role of ECMO in COVID-19 acute respiratory failure: Defining risk factors for mortality.American journal of surgery · 2023Article
- Variation in survival in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A multi-institutional analysis of 594 consecutive patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation at 49 hospitals within 21 states.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2023Review
- In-hospital and 6-month outcomes in patients with COVID-19 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (EuroECMO-COVID): a multicentre, prospective observational study.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2023Observational
- Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for COVID-19: Comparison of Outcomes to Non-COVID-19-Related Viral Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome From the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry.Critical care explorations · 2023Article
- Anticoagulant Use During Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Using Heparin and Direct Thrombin Inhibitors in COVID-19 and ARDS Patients.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2022Article
- Real-World Outcomes for ECMO in COVID-19.The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2022Article
- Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in COVID-19 compared to other etiologies of acute respiratory failure: A single-center experience.Heart & lung : the journal of critical careArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe reviewed our experience with 505 patients with confirmed coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) at 45 hospitals and estimated risk factors for mortality.
methodsA multi-institutional database was created and used to assess all patients with COVID-19 who were supported with ECMO. A Bayesian mixed-effects logistic regression model was estimated to assess the effect on survival of multiple potential risk factors for mortality, including age at cannulation for ECMO as well as days between diagnosis of COVID-19 and intubation and days between intubation and cannulation for ECMO.
resultsMedian time on ECMO was 18 days (interquartile range, 10-29 days). All 505 patients separated from ECMO: 194 patients (38.4%) survived and 311 patients (61.6%) died. Survival with venovenous ECMO was 184 of 466 patients (39.5%), and survival with venoarterial ECMO was 8 of 30 patients (26.7%). Survivors had lower median age (44 vs 51 years, P < .001) and shorter median time interval from diagnosis to intubation (7 vs 11 days, P = .001). Adjusting for several confounding factors, we estimated that an ECMO patient intubated on day 14 after the diagnosis of COVID-19 vs day 4 had a relative odds of survival of 0.65 (95% credible interval, 0.44-0.96; posterior probability of negative effect, 98.5%). Age was also negatively associated with survival: relative to a 38-year-old patient, we estimated that a 57-year-old patient had a relative odds of survival of 0.43 (95% credible interval, 0.30-0.61; posterior probability of negative effect, >99.99%).
conclusionsECMO facilitates salvage and survival of select critically ill patients with COVID-19. Survivors tend to be younger and have shorter time from diagnosis to intubation. Survival of patients supported with only venovenous ECMO was 39.5%.
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.