ArticleResuscitation plus2026
Implementation of a regional extracorporeal membrane oxygenation program for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: results of the prospective observational study.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We implemented a multi-centre extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) program in a regional emergency medical services (EMS) system and assessed the time-to-cannulation, survival, and neurologic outcomes for patients routed by EMS to eCPR-capable centres. Methods: This was an observational study of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) transported to eCPR-capable centres from July 2020 to September 2024. Patients were routed to an eCPR-capable centre if all applied: age 15-75, refractory/recurrent shockable arrest, a mechanical compression device (MCD) applied, and treatment by a participating EMS unit. Additional patients were routed on clinician judgment. Patients with traumatic arrest, do-not-resuscitate order, known terminal illness, baseline severe neurologic deficit, pregnancy, MCD contraindications, or estimated >30-min transport to an eCPR-capable centre were not routed. The outcomes were survival to hospital discharge (SHD) and neurologic status at discharge. We conducted a logistic regression with inverse-probability weighting to evaluate the association between eCPR and patient outcomes. Results: There were 233 patients routed for eCPR. Median age was 58 years (IQR 48-65), 51 (22 %) were female. Fifty-eight (27 %) were cannulated for eCPR; median time from arrest to cannulation was 66 min (IQR 58-78). Both for all routed patients and among those cannulated, SHD was 27 % and SHD with cerebral performance category (CPC) 1 or 2 was 21 %. In the regression analysis, eCPR was not associated with improved outcomes. Conclusion: In this regional eCPR program, survival among patients refractory to conventional therapy and treated with eCPR was 27%.
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.