ArticlePloS one2023
Prognostic factors for favorable outcomes after veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in critical care patients with COVID-19.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Back to the wildtype: SARS-CoV-2 evolution in critically ill patients with severe lung failure.Infection · 2026Article
- Outcome of COVID-19 patients treated with VV-ECMO in Tyrol during the pandemic.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2024Article
- Outcomes of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in COVID-19: A Single-Center Study.Journal of chest surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with COVID-19 and severe acute respiratory failure may require veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO). Yet, this procedure is resource-intensive and high mortality rates have been reported. Thus, predictors for identifying patients who will benefit from VV ECMO would be helpful.
methodsThis retrospective study included 129 patients with COVID-19 and severe acute respiratory failure, who had received VV ECMO at the University Medical Center Regensburg, Germany, between 1 March 2020 and 31 December 2021. Patient-specific factors and relevant intensive-care parameters at the time of the decision to start VV ECMO were investigated regarding their value as predictors of patient survival. In addition, the intensive-care course of the first 10 days of VV ECMO was compared between survivors and patients who had died in the intensive care unit.
resultsThe most important parameters for predicting outcome were patient age and platelet count, which differed significantly between survivors and non-survivors (age: 52.6±8.1 vs. 57.4±10.1 years, p<0.001; platelet count before VV ECMO: 321.3±132.2 vs. 262.0±121.0 /nL, p = 0.006; average on day 10: 199.2±88.0 vs. 147.1±57.9 /nL, p = 0.002). A linear regression model derived from parameters collected before the start of VV ECMO only included age and platelet count. Patients were divided into two groups by using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis: group 1: 78% of patients, mortality 26%; group 2: 22% of patients, mortality 75%. A second linear regression model included average blood pH, minimum paO2, and average pump flow on day 10 of VV ECMO in addition to age and platelet count. The ROC curve resulted in two cut-off values and thus in three groups: group 1: 25% of patients, mortality 93%; group 2: 45% of patients, mortality 31%; group 3: 30% of patients, mortality 0%.
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.