ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Neurological outcomes and survival after prehospital ECPR: the impact of low-flow time.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2026. 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.
- Low-flow time and neurological outcomes in AMI patients undergoing ECPR: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the association between low-flow time (LFT) and outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients treated with prehospital extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). Methods: This retrospective study included OHCA patients receiving prehospital ECPR (July 2023-August 2024). LFT, defined as the interval from conventional CPR start to ECPR flow initiation, was analyzed continuously (per 10 min increment). Due to limited events (13 favorable neurological outcomes), the primary logistic regression adjusted for two prespecified confounders (age, initial shockable rhythm). A sensitivity analysis was performed in patients with witnessed arrest and bystander CPR (no-flow time of approximately 0). All analyses are exploratory. Results: Among 76 patients (mean age 58.80 ± 14.84 years, mean LFT 60.33 ± 13.89 min), survival to hospital discharge was 34.2% (26/76) and favorable neurological outcome 17.1% (13/76). Each 10 min LFT increase was associated with lower survival (aOR 0.557; 95% CI 0.368-0.844; Conclusions: In this single-center study, longer LFT (per 10 min) was associated with worse outcomes, consistent in a no-flow-time-controlled subgroup. Given the exploratory design, external validation is required. No definitive LFT threshold can be recommended.
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.