SynthesisThe journal of vascular access2025
Assessment of safety and effectiveness after percutaneous closure for decannulation of Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The journal of vascular access, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Meta-analysis: percutaneous versus surgical VA-ECMO decannulation demonstrates no clear differences in most outcomes, with a signal toward lower infection.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2026Pooled it
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVeno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VA-ECMO) has emerged as a crucial component of critical care medicine, mainly as a lifesaving intervention for patients experiencing refractory cardiac arrest and respiratory failure.
backgroundIn the past, VA-ECMO decannulation was surgical and often associated with a high rate of periprocedural complications, such as surgical site infection, bleeding, and patient mobilization costs. To reduce the rate of these adverse events, many percutaneous techniques utilizing suture-mediated closing devices have been adopted. One of those devices is the Perclose Proglide
objectiveThis study's goal was to perform a systematic review to evaluate PP devices' success and complication rates for VA-ECMO decannulation.
methodsTo analyze the outcomes of PP in VA-ECMO decannulation, a systematic review of the most recent literature was conducted. The Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched up to September 2023. The National Health, Blood, and Lung Institute Study quality assessment tools were used.
resultsThe final analysis included 10 observational studies comprising 418 patients. The efficacy of PP in VA-ECMO decannulation was 93.0% (95% CI 90.1%-96.0%). In 381 patients, the incidence of acute limb ischemia after VA-ECMO decannulation was 2.5% (95% CI 0.9%-4.%), the infection of the puncture site after decannulation was 1% (95% CI 0%-2%) in 385 patients. The incidence of patients with pseudoaneurysm after decannulation was 1.1% (95% CI 0.1%-2.1%).
conclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the PP for achieving hemostasis after VA-ECMO decannulation, with a high success rate and low rate of major complications.
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.