ArticleAcute and critical care2024
Outcomes of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support in pediatric hemato-oncology patients.
Article in Acute and critical care, 2024. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the Management of Tumor Lysis Syndrome in Children: A Review of Cases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
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
backgroundIn this study, we reviewed the outcomes of pediatric patients with malignancies who underwent hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the records of pediatric hemato-oncology patients treated with chemotherapy or HSCT and who received ECMO in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) at Seoul National University Children's Hospital from January 2012 to December 2020.
resultsOver a 9-year period, 21 patients (14 males and 7 females) received ECMO at a single pediatric institute; 10 patients (48%) received veno-arterial (VA) ECMO for septic shock (n=5), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (n=3), stress-induced myopathy (n=1), or hepatopulmonary syndrome (n=1); and 11 patients (52%) received veno-venous (VV) ECMO for ARDS due to pneumocystis pneumonia (n=1), air leak (n=3), influenza (n=1), pulmonary hemorrhage (n=1), or unknown etiology (n=5). All patients received chemotherapy; 9 received anthracycline drugs and 14 (67%) underwent HSCT. Thirteen patients (62%) were diagnosed with malignancies and 8 (38%) were diagnosed with non-malignant disease. Among the 21 patients, 6 (29%) survived ECMO in the PICU and 5 (24%) survived to hospital discharge. Among patients treated for septic shock, 3 of 5 patients (60%) who underwent ECMO and 5 of 10 patients (50%) who underwent VA ECMO survived. However, all the patients who underwent VA ECMO or VV ECMO for ARDS died.
conclusionsECMO is a feasible treatment option for respiratory or heart failure in pediatric patients receiving chemotherapy or undergoing HSCT.
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.