Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39781494›Full record

ArticleCritical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine2024

Hospital-level volume in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cases and death or disability at 6 months.

Atacan D Ertugrul, Ary Serpa Neto, Bentley J Fulcher, Anaïs Charles-Nelson, Michael Bailey, Aidan J C Burrell, Shannah Anderson, Stephen Bernard, Jasmin V Board, Daniel Brodie and 24 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) in high-risk (HR) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

34 authors.

Atacan D ErtugrulAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Ary Serpa NetoAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Bentley J FulcherAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Anaïs Charles-NelsonAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Michael BaileyAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Aidan J C BurrellAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Shannah AndersonAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Stephen BernardSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Australia.
Jasmin V BoardIntensive Care Unit, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Daniel BrodieDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Heidi BuhrIntensive Care Service, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia.
D James CooperAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Craig DickerAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Eddy FanInterdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
John F FraserUniversity of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia.
David J GattasIntensive Care Service, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, Australia.
Ingrid K HopperSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Australia.
Sue HucksonAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society, Melbourne, Australia.
Natalie J LinkeAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Edward LittonIntensive Care Unit, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Murdoch, Australia.
Shay P McGuinnessAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Priya NairIntensive Care Unit, St Vincent's Hospital, Darlinghurst, Australia.
Neil OrfordAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Rachael L ParkeAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Vincent A PellegrinoIntensive Care Unit, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
David V PilcherAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Dion StubSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Australia.
Andrew A UdyAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Benjamin A J ReddiIntensive Care Unit, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia.
Tony V TrapaniAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Annalie JonesIntensive Care Unit, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Alisa M HigginsAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Carol L HodgsonAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
EXCEL Study Investigators and the International ECMO Network (ECMONet)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a high-risk procedure with significant morbidity and mortality and there is an uncertain volume-outcome relationship, especially regarding long-term functional outcomes. The aim of this study was to examine the association between ECMO centre volume and long-term death and disability outcomes. Design setting and participants: This is a registry-embedded observational cohort study. Patients were included if they were enrolled in the binational ECMO registry (EXCEL). The exclusion criteria included patients on ECMO for heart/lung transplants. Data included demographics, clinical information on their first ECMO run, and six-month outcomes obtained by telephone interview. The primary outcome was death or new disability at six months. A multivariable analysis was conducted using hospitals' annual ECMO volume. High-volume centres were defined as having >30 ECMO cases annually, and analyses were run on ECMO subgroups of veno-venous (VV), veno-arterial (VA), and extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). Results: Of 1232 patients, 663 patients were cared for on ECMO at high-volume centres and 569 patients at low-volume centres. There was no difference in six-month death or new disability between high- and low-volume ECMO centres in VV-ECMO [OR: 1.09 (0.65-1.83), p = 0.744], VA-ECMO [OR: 1.10 (0.66-1.84), p = 0.708], and ECPR-ECMO [OR: 1.38 (0.37-5.08), p = 0.629]. This finding was persistent in all sensitivity analyses, including exclusion of patients who were transferred between high- and low-volume centres. Conclusion: There was no difference in death or disability at six months between high- and low-volume centres in Australia and New Zealand, possibly due to the current model of coordinated care that includes patient transfers and training between high- and low-volume ECMO centres in our region.

Indexed as

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)Anaesthesia and intensive careCardiac failureCardiac perfusionEmergency medicineExtracorporeal life supportIntensive careOxygen deliveryRespiratory functionResuscitation

Identifiers

PMID39781494
PMCPMC11704083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.