ArticleThe journal of extra-corporeal technology2025
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) and hospital economics.
Article in The journal of extra-corporeal technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in adults with cardiogenic shock.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
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
backgroundExtracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a powerful, life-prolonging technology, but is resource-intensive.
methodsThis retrospective analysis utilized Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) inpatient data (October 2019-December 2022) to identify ECMO hospitalizations with continuous FFS coverage. We assessed total payment, costs, length of stay (LOS), and predominant medical severity diagnosis-related group (MS-DRG) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) codes. Outcomes were stratified by DRG code, ICD-10 procedure codes, and ECMO type. Hospital costs were estimated using cost-to-charge ratios from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services with a 3-year lag.
resultsContinuous ECMO within MS-DRG 003 discharged between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2022, were a subset of hospitalizations analyzed. For continuous central (CC) ECMO, mean costs were $287,334, median costs were $223,766, and the standard deviation (SD) was $224,261. Mean payment was $264,021, median was $218,642, and SD was $157,882. For continuous venoarterial (VA) ECMO, mean costs were $245,448, median was $191,363, and SD was $212,822. Mean payment was $241,617, median was $202,199, and SD was $145,456. For continuous venovenous (VV) ECMO, mean costs were $329,111, median was $256,706, and SD was $285,745. Mean payment was $298,141, median was $237,679, and SD was $198,160. The majority of patients (64%) received VA, which was the only ECMO type with a median payment that surpassed median costs. Rural facilities and teaching hospitals had consistently higher mean frequencies among all ECMO claims (CC, VA, VV) from October 2019 to December 2022 compared to their counterparts (Rural: CC = 2.4, VA = 9.3, VV = 4.9; Urban: CC = 1.4, VA = 6.1, VV = 2.2; Teaching: CC = 2.1, VA = 8.6, VV = 3.4; Non-teaching: CC = 0.5, VA = 1.9, VV = 0.7).
conclusionVV ECMO had the highest median costs and payment among the ECMO types. Median payment was less than median hospitalization costs for all types of ECMO, apart from continuous VA ECMO.
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.