ReviewJournal of intensive care2022
Prone positioning in ARDS patients supported with VV ECMO, what we should explore?
Review in Journal of intensive care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of prone positioning in adult patients receiving veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A meta-analysis.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Recommendations for lung ventilation and perfusion assessment with chest electrical impedance tomography in critically ill adult patients: an international evidence-based and expert Delphi consensus study.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a prevalent cause of admittance to intensive care units, is associated with high mortality. Prone positioning has been proven to improve the outcomes of moderate to severe ARDS patients owing to its physiological effects. Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) will be considered in patients with severe hypoxemia. However, for patients with severe hypoxemia supported with VV ECMO, the potential effects and optimal strategies of prone positioning remain unclear. This review aimed to present these controversial questions and highlight directions for future research. MAIN BODY: The clinically significant benefit of prone positioning and early VV ECMO alone was confirmed in patients with severe ARDS. However, a number of questions regarding the combination of VV ECMO and prone positioning remain unanswered. We discussed the potential effects of prone positioning on gas exchange, respiratory mechanics, hemodynamics, and outcomes. Strategies to achieve optimal outcomes, including indications, timing, duration, and frequency of prone positioning, as well as the management of respiratory drive during prone positioning sessions in ARDS patients receiving VV ECMO, are challenging and controversial. Additionally, whether and how to implement prone positioning according to ARDS phenotypes should be evaluated. Lung morphology monitored by computed tomography, lung ultrasound, or electrical impedance tomography might be a potential indication to make an individualized plan for prone positioning therapy in patients supported with VV ECMO.
conclusionFor patients with ARDS supported with VV ECMO, the potential effects of prone positioning have yet to be clarified. Ensuring an optimal strategy, especially an individualized plan for prone positioning therapy during VV ECMO, is particularly challenging and requires further research.
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.