ArticleJournal of cardiac surgery2022
Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) venovenous extracorporeal oxygenation: Single community hospital results and insights.
Article in Journal of cardiac surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) venovenous extracorporeal oxygenation: Single community hospital results and insights.Journal of cardiac surgery · 2022Article
- Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO): Can we do it ourselves?Journal of cardiac surgery · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for patients with refractory respiratory failure due to coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) is still unclear even now over a year into the pandemic. ECMO is becoming more commonplace even at smaller community hospitals. While the advantages of venovenous (VV) ECMO in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) from COVID-19 have not been fully determined, we believe the benefits outweighed the risks in our patient population. Here we describe all patients who underwent VV ECMO at our center.
methodsAll patients placed on ECMO at our center since the beginning of the pandemic, May 5, 2020, until February 20, 2021 were included in our study. All patients placed on ECMO during the time period described above were followed until discharge or death. The primary endpoint was in-hospital death. Secondary outcomes included discharge disposition, that is, whether patients were sent to a long-term acute care center (LTAC), inpatient rehabilitation, or went directly home.
resultsA total of 41 patients were placed on VV ECMO for refractory acute respiratory failure. Survival to discharge, the primary end point, was 63.4% (26/41). Inpatient mortality was 36.6% (15/41).
conclusionsWe show here that a successful high-volume VV ECMO program for ARDS is achievable at even a medium-size community hospital. We think our success can be replicated by most small- and medium-size community hospitals with cardiothoracic surgery programs and intensivist teams.
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.