ArticleResuscitation plus2026
Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for in-hospital cardiac arrest: a comparative cohort study from the first ECPR program in Brazil.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is a rescue therapy for refractory in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA), but Brazilian data are scarce. We compared ECPR with conventional CPR (cCPR) at the first Brazilian center with a protocolized ECPR program. Methods: Retrospective single-center cohort at Einstein Hospital Israelita, São Paulo. Adults (18-75 years) with witnessed and refractory IHCA fulfilling institutional ECPR eligibility were included. The cCPR cohort (2017-2025) comprised eligible patients who did not receive ECPR due to absence of 24/7 ECMO coverage; the ECPR cohort (2020-2025) included all protocolized cases. The primary outcome was hospital survival with favorable neurological outcome (Cerebral Performance Category, CPC, of 2 or less). Groups were compared descriptively; survival was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test, and the absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat were calculated. Results: Thirty-eight patients were analyzed (16 ECPR, 22 cCPR). Hospital survival was higher in the ECPR group (43.7% vs 13.6%, Conclusions: In this first Brazilian single-center cohort, hospital survival was higher and neurological recovery uniformly favorable among patients treated with ECPR for refractory IHCA. These descriptive findings are hypothesis-generating and support the feasibility of a structured in-hospital ECPR program in the Brazilian setting.
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.