ArticleBMC surgery2025
Benefits of prophylactic veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for high-risk cardiac interventions.
Article in BMC surgery, 2025. 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.
- Percutaneous Versus Surgical Cannulation for Femoro-Femoral Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Retrospective Cohort Study on Cannulation-Related Complications.Artificial organs · 2026Article
- Global research trends and hotspots in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for cardiogenic shock: a bibliometric review and knowledge mapping approach (1990-2024).Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Takotsubo cardiomyopathy with cardiogenic shock misdiagnosed as old MI, successfully treated with TAVR: a case report.European heart journal. Case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComplex high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are challenging and frequently associated with life-threatening complications. We evaluated the benefits of prophylactic extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)-supported interventions and the risks of this approach.
methodsFrom March 2020 to September 2021, 11 patients underwent TAVI, and 15 patients underwent PCI supported with prophylactic ECMO. Clinical characteristics and outcomes in terms of the requirement of ECMO were evaluated.
resultsCannulation was femoro-femoral in all patients. TAVI was performed via transfemoral access. In the TAVI group, mean patient age was 72 ± 7.84 years and 63.64% were male. During valve implantation, supportive ECMO flow was maintained at 3.24 ± 0.19 L/min. The additional median time in the ICU was 2 (1-4) days. Patients were discharged from the hospital after 16 (15-27) days. All of them were successfully weaned off V-AECMO. Only 1 patient died of respiratory and cardiac arrest 10 days after the operation. During PCI, ECMO flow was maintained at 3.35 ± 0.22 L/min. The average age of the patients in this group was 59 ± 10.80 years, and the ejection fraction was 42.59 ± 16.34%. Fourteen patients were successfully weaned off veno-arterial ECMO and survived to hospital discharge. No ECMO-related, peripheral cannulation-related or life-threatening bleeding complications were observed in the two groups. The median follow-up was 6 months, and there was 1 late death.
conclusionBased on this experience, we consider ECMO support to be a viable alternative and effective approach for complex high-risk cardiac interventions.
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.