ReviewUS cardiology2024
Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Life-saving or Resource Wasting?
Review in US cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- From arrest to circuit: Mapping twenty years of progress and pitfalls in ECPR implementation, patient selection, and initiation timing☆.The journal of extra-corporeal technology · 2026Review
- Emergency department eCPR: an exploratory observational study of human factors.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Observational
- Rising Above the Limits of Critical Care ECMO: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation-Where Do We Currently Stand?Biomedicines · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The morbidity and mortality for patients having a cardiac arrest is substantial. Even if optimally performed, conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation is an inadequate substitute for native cardiac output and results in a 'low-flow' perfusion state. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during cardiac arrest, also known as extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR), has been proposed as an alternative to restore systemic perfusion. However, conflicting results regarding its efficacy compared to routine advanced cardiac life support have left its role in clinical practice uncertain. In this article, the merits and limitations of the existing data for eCPR are reviewed in a 'point- counterpoint' style debate, followed by potential considerations for future trials.
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.