ArticleInterdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2024
Alternative venous access sites for dual-lumen extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cannulation.
Article in Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Central versus peripheral veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during lung transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.JHLT open · 2026Article
- [Extracorporeal Life Support in Lung Transplantation and Beyond].Zentralblatt fur Chirurgie · 2025Review
- Managing Refractory Hypoxemia in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Obese Patients with Veno-Venous Extra-Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Narrative Review.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
10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDual-lumen cannulas for veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support are typically inserted in the right internal jugular vein (RIJV); however, some scenarios can make this venous route inaccessible. This multicentre case series aims to evaluate if single-site cannulation using an alternative venous access is safe and feasible in patients with an inaccessible RIJV.
methodsWe performed a multi-institutional retrospective analysis including high-volume ECMO centres with substantial experience in dual-lumen cannulation (DLC) (defined as >10 DLC per year). Three centres [Freiburg (Germany), Toronto (Canada) and Vienna (Austria)] agreed to share their data, including baseline characteristics, technical ECMO and cannulation data as well as complications related to ECMO cannulation and outcome.
resultsA total of 20 patients received alternative DLC for respiratory failure. Cannula insertion sites included the left internal jugular vein (n = 5), the right (n = 7) or left (n = 3) subclavian vein and the right (n = 4) or left (n = 1) femoral vein. The median cannula size was 26 (19-28) French. The median initial target ECMO flow was 2.9 (1.8-3.1) l/min and corresponded with used cannula size and estimated cardiac output. No procedural complications were reported during cannulation and median ECMO runtime was 15 (9-22) days. Ten patients were successfully bridged to lung transplantation (n = 5) or lung recovery (n = 5). Ten patients died during or after ECMO support.
conclusionsAlternative venous access sites for single-site dual-lumen catheters are a safe and feasible option to provide veno-venous ECMO support to patients with inaccessible RIJV.
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.