Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36873286›Full record

ArticleBurns & trauma2023

Efficacy and safety of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for burn patients: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.

Xue Heng, Peng Cai, Zhiqiang Yuan, Yizhi Peng, Gaoxing Luo, Haisheng Li

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Burns & trauma, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xue HengInstitute of Burn Research, State Key Laboratory of Trauma, Burns and Combined Injury, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Chongqing, 400038, China.
Peng CaiDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, PLA 80th Group Army Hospital, Wei Fang City, Shan Dong Province, 261000, China.
Zhiqiang YuanInstitute of Burn Research, State Key Laboratory of Trauma, Burns and Combined Injury, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Chongqing, 400038, China.
Yizhi PengInstitute of Burn Research, State Key Laboratory of Trauma, Burns and Combined Injury, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Chongqing, 400038, China.
Gaoxing LuoInstitute of Burn Research, State Key Laboratory of Trauma, Burns and Combined Injury, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Chongqing, 400038, China.
Haisheng LiInstitute of Burn Research, State Key Laboratory of Trauma, Burns and Combined Injury, Southwest Hospital, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Chongqing, 400038, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1898-164X
Army Medical University · CNPeople's Liberation Army 401 Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Respiratory and circulatory dysfunction are common complications and the leading causes of death among burn patients, especially in severe burns and inhalation injury. Recently, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been increasingly applied in burn patients. However, current clinical evidence is weak and conflicting. This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of ECMO in burn patients. Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science and Embase from inception to 18 March 2022 was performed to identify clinical studies on ECMO in burn patients. The main outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included successful weaning from ECMO and complications associated with ECMO. Meta-analysis, meta-regression and subgroup analyses were conducted to pool the clinical efficacy and identify influencing factors. Results: Fifteen retrospective studies with 318 patients were finally included, without any control groups. The commonest indication for ECMO was severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (42.1%). Veno-venous ECMO was the commonest mode (75.29%). Pooled in-hospital mortality was 49% [95% confidence interval (CI) 41-58%] in the total population, 55% in adults and 35% in pediatrics. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis found that mortality significantly increased with inhalation injury but decreased with ECMO duration. For studies with percentage inhalation injury ≥50%, pooled mortality (55%, 95% CI 40-70%) was higher than in studies with percentage inhalation injury <50% (32%, 95% CI 18-46%). For studies with ECMO duration ≥10 days, pooled mortality (31%, 95% CI 20-43%) was lower than in studies with ECMO duration <10 days (61%, 95% CI 46-76%). In minor and major burns, pooled mortality was lower than in severe burns. Pooled percentage of successful weaning from ECMO was 65% (95% CI 46-84%) and inversely correlated with burn area. The overall rate of ECMO-related complications was 67.46%, and infection (30.77%) and bleedings (23.08%) were the two most common complications. About 49.26% of patients required continuous renal replacement therapy. Conclusions: ECMO seems to be an appropriate rescue therapy for burn patients despite the relatively high mortality and complication rate. Inhalation injury, burn area and ECMO duration are the main factors influencing clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Acute respiratory distress syndromeBurnsExtracorporeal membrane oxygenationInhalation injury

Identifiers

PMID36873286
PMCPMC9977350
OpenAlexW4322718290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.