Observational studyScientific reports2024
Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a propensity score matching, observational study.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Survival and neurological outcome in patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and therapeutic hypothermia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Extra-corporeal-cardiopulmonary-resuscitation vs. conventional-cardiopulmonary-resuscitation: an in-depth look into short- and long-term neurological outcomes.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Optimizing Regional Access to Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Geographic-Information-System-Based Comparison of Hospital- and Prehospital-Initiated Strategies in Nara Prefecture, Japan.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Early lactate kinetics predicts survival and neurological outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a retrospective cohort study.BMC emergency medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is increasingly performed as an adjunct to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR) for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). However, the specific benefits of ECPR concerning survival with favorable neurological outcomes remain uncertain. This study aimed to investigate the potential advantages of ECPR in the management of refractory OHCA. We conducted a retrospective cohort study involved OHCA patients between January 2016 and May 2021. Patients were categorized into ECPR or CCPR groups. The primary endpoint assessed was survival with favorable neurological outcomes, and the secondary outcome was survival rate. Multivariate logistic regression analyses, with and without 1:2 propensity score matching, were employed to assess ECPR's effect. In total, 1193 patients were included: 85underwent ECPR, and 1108 received CCPR. Compared to the CCPR group, the ECPR group exhibited notably higher survival rate (29.4% vs. 2.4%; p < 0.001). The ECPR group also exhibited a higher proportion of survival with favorable neurological outcome than CCPR group (17.6% vs. 0.7%; p < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that ECPR correlated with increased odds of survival with favorable neurological outcome (adjusted odds ratio: 13.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.60-40.06). Following propensity score matching, the ECPR group showed significantly elevated odds of survival with favorable neurological outcomes (adjusted odds ratio: 13.31; 95% CI 1.61-109.9). This study demonstrated that in comparison to CCPR, ECPR may provide survival benefit and increase the odds of favorable neurological outcomes in selected OHCA 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.