ArticleResuscitation plus2023
Extracorporeal cardio-pulmonary resuscitation in poisoning: A scoping review article.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2023. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation combined with prone ventilation for the treatment of high-dose metoprolol and amlodipine poisoning: A case report.Resuscitation plus · 2025Article
- Case Files from the University of California San Diego Medical Toxicology Fellowship: Neonatal Flecainide Toxicity from an Accidental Dosing Error.Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) represents last-line salvage therapy for poisoning-induced cardiac arrest but no review has focused on this specific area. Objective: This scoping review sought to evaluate the survival outcomes and characteristics of published cases of ECPR for toxicological arrest, with the aim of highlighting the potential and limitations of ECPR in toxicology.Eligibility Criteria.We searched PubMed and Cochrane for eligible papers from database inception to October 1, 2022 using the keywords "toxicology", "ECLS" and "CPR". References of included publications were searched to identify additional relevant articles. Qualitative synthesis was used to summarize the evidence. Results: 85 articles were chosen: 15 case series, 58 individual cases and 12 other publications that were analyzed separately due to ambiguity. ECPR may improve survival outcomes in selected poisoned patients, although the extent of benefit is unclear. As ECPR for poisoning-induced arrest may have better prognosis compared to from other aetiologies, it is likely reasonable to apply ELSO ECPR consensus guideline recommendations to toxicological arrest.Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest alone may not be sufficient grounds to deny ECPR if effective resuscitation had been promptly instituted. Poisonings involving membrane-stabilizing agents and cardio-depressive drugs, and cardiac arrests with shockable rhythms appear to have better outcomes. ECPR may permit excellent neurologically-intact recovery despite prolonged low-flow time of up to four hours. Early ECLS activation and pre-emptive catheter placement can significantly shorten time-to-ECPR and possibly improve survival. Conclusion: As effects of poisoning may be reversible, ECPR can potentially support poisoned patients through the critical peri-arrest state.
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.