ArticleHeliyon2024
Impact of independent early stage extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the emergency department following the establishment of an extracorporeal life support team.
Article in Heliyon, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence in respiratory care.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: In this paper, we present a comprehensive overview of our experience in establishing and leading distinct extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR)-related teams to independently handle ECPR in the early stages in the emergency department. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 29 patients who underwent ECPR treatment in the emergency room between May 2018 and April 2022. A control group, consisting of 10 patients treated between May 2018 and September 2019 was managed using a standard rescue coordination mode. The 19 patients who received ECPR between October 2019 and April 2022 were treated by members of the department's 24-h extracorporeal life support team. We compared the implementation and operational challenges faced by the two groups, including item preparation, circuit setup, and ECPR initiation times, among other factors. Results: Gender, age, cardiac arrest risk factors, and other baseline data did not significantly differ between the two groups. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) pipeline prefilling time (from 35.27±10.34 to 13.46±5.32), ECPR establishment time (from 62.35±29.61 to 30.98±13.41), and item preparation time (from 16.42±9.78 to 3.19±1.49) all considerably decreased when compared to the control group. The rate of return of spontaneous circulation recovery rose from 37.50 % to 77.78 % (P < 0.05). The consequences of gastrointestinal and pulmonary bleeding were greatly reduced while ECPR was being used, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Significant improvements were made in the ECPR weaning rate (from 25.00 % to 38.89 %) and survival rate (from 20.0 % to 36.8 %). Conclusion: The establishment of a 24-h extracorporeal life support team significantly reduced the time needed for rescue during the early stage of independent setup of ECPR in the emergency department and serves as a guide for effective care of critically ill patients.
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.