Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36961606›Full record

ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2023

The efficacy of venous-arterial membrane oxygenation for emergency extracorporeal life support: results from a single-center large series over 6 years.

Davide Ottolina, Riccardo Colombo, Tommaso Fossali, Antonio Castelli, Roberto Rech, Beatrice Borghi, Elisabetta Ballone, Emanuele Catena

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 49% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Davide OttolinaDivision of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital, Via G. B. Grassi, 74, 20157, Milan, Italy. ottolina.davide@asst-fbf-sacco.it.ORCID 0000-0001-6055-5444
Riccardo ColomboDivision of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital, Via G. B. Grassi, 74, 20157, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9616-803X
Tommaso FossaliDivision of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital, Via G. B. Grassi, 74, 20157, Milan, Italy.
Antonio CastelliDivision of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital, Via G. B. Grassi, 74, 20157, Milan, Italy.
Roberto RechDivision of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital, Via G. B. Grassi, 74, 20157, Milan, Italy.
Beatrice BorghiDivision of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital, Via G. B. Grassi, 74, 20157, Milan, Italy.
Elisabetta BalloneDivision of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital, Via G. B. Grassi, 74, 20157, Milan, Italy.
Emanuele CatenaDivision of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, "Luigi Sacco" Hospital, Via G. B. Grassi, 74, 20157, Milan, Italy.
Luigi Sacco Hospital · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The efficacy of venous-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) in supporting cardio-pulmonary resuscitation for cardiac arrest is still debated. This study aimed to evaluate the outcome of patients treated with VA-ECMO positioned according to different clinical indications. The method is retrospective data analysis from patients admitted to a tertiary referral center for VA-ECMO in 6 years. The study population was divided into three groups based on the VA-ECMO indication: patients with refractory cardiac arrest (CA group), cardiogenic shock after return of spontaneous circulation (CS-ROSC group), and cardiogenic shock without cardiac arrest (CS group). Seventy-nine patients underwent emergency VA-ECMO, 49 patients (62.0%) were in the CA group, 14 (17.7%) in the CS-ROSC group, and 16 patients (20.3%) in the CS group. The overall survival at 28 days was different between the three groups (6.1% in the CA group, 64.2% in the CS-ROSC group, and 50.0% in the CS group, p < 0.001) and remained significant at 12 months (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the Cerebral Performance Category at 12 months differed between groups with good outcomes in 4.1% of patients in CA, 50.0% in CS-ROSC, and 31.2% in CS groups (p < 0.001). In the studied population, emergency VA-ECMO had negligible efficacy in refractory cardiac arrest, while it was correlated with a good outcome in cardiogenic shock after cardiac arrest, such as in cardiogenic shock alone. Patients with ROSC appear to benefit from VA-ECMO in the setting of persistent shock at rates comparable to cardiogenic shock patients who never sustained cardiac arrest.

Indexed as

Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationExtracorporeal Membrane OxygenationHeart ArrestHumansRetrospective StudiesShock, CardiogenicCardiac arrestECPRROSCVA-ECMO

Identifiers

PMID36961606
OpenAlexW4360805059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.