SynthesisBMC cardiovascular disorders2026
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation initiation timing and prognosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExtracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a critical life-support intervention for patients with severe respiratory and circulatory failure. Nevertheless, identifying the optimal timing of ECMO initiation and its correlation with survival, mortality, and complication rates continues to pose significant clinical challenges. PURPOSE: This study intends to conduct a systematic review of the existing medical literature to clarify ECMO initiation timing and its association with patient outcomes, aiming to furnish evidence-based recommendations for clinical decision-making.
methodsWe performed systematic searches across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for eligible cohort and case-control studies. Studies combining ECMO with other extracorporeal life-support modalities were excluded to eliminate survival confounding. Inclusion criteria encompassed adult ECMO recipients with reported initiation timing and at least one outcome measure. Study quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS).
resultsFrom 1583 identified records, 30 studies were finally included, comprising 2 prospective cohorts, 1 case-control, and 27 retrospective cohorts. ECMO initiation timing was heterogeneously defined across multiple time intervals and clinical scenarios. Of the full set of 30 included studies, 23 performed statistical analyses examining the link between ECMO initiation delay and mortality; 18 of these 23 studies (60% of all 30 included studies) reported that prolonged ECMO initiation time was significantly associated with higher in-hospital or long-term mortality. Five of the 23 mortality-analyzing studies detected no statistically significant timing-mortality correlation, while the remaining 7 studies only reported organ complication outcomes and did not conduct any statistical testing of mortality as an endpoint. Quality appraisal demonstrated only one low-quality study, with all others graded as medium to high quality.
conclusionFor patients with severe ARDS, cardiogenic shock, drug-induced shock, cardiac arrest, or post-cardiotomy shock, early ECMO initiation-such as within 7 days of mechanical ventilation-can effectively decrease mortality and reduce the incidence of neurological, hepatic, and renal complications.
trial registrationThis study has been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD420250652365).
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.