ArticlePerfusion2024
Evaluation of a new magnetically suspended centrifugal neonatal pump in healthy animals using a veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation configuration.
Article in Perfusion, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- ECMO Support in Pediatric Populations with the Newborn ECMOLife Centrifugal Pump.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe objective of this animal study was to evaluate the hemodynamic performance of a new centrifugal pump for extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support in neonates.
methodsSix healthy swines were supported with veno-venous ECMO with the New Born ECMOLife centrifugal pump (Eurosets, Medolla, Italy) at different flow rates: 0.25, 0.5, 0.6, and 0.8 L/min; three animals were evaluated at low-flows (0.25 and 0.5 L/min) and three at high-flows (0.6 and 0.8 L/min). Each flow was maintained for 4 hours. Blood samples were collected at different time-points. Hematological and biochemical parameters and ECMO parameters [flow, revolutions per minute (RPM), drainage pressure, and the oxygenator pressure drop] were evaluated.
resultsThe increase of the pump flow from 0.25 to 0.5 L/min or from 0.6 to 0.8 L/min required significantly higher RPM and produced significantly higher pump pressures [from 0.25 to 0.5 L/min: 1470 (1253-1569) versus 2652 (2589-2750) RPM and 40 (26-57) versus 125 (113-139) mmHg, respectively;
conclusionsIn this animal study, the "New Born ECMOLife" centrifugal pump showed good hemodynamic performance. Long-term studies are needed to evaluate biocompatibility of this new ECMO pump.
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.