We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest: a meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) on survival and complication rates in adults with refractory cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest.
DESIGN: Meta-analysis.
SETTING: University hospitals.
PARTICIPANTS: One thousand one hundred ninety-nine patients from 22 observational studies.
INTERVENTIONS: None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Observational studies published from the year 2000 onwards, examining at least 10 adult patients who received ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest were included. Pooled estimates with 95% confidence intervals were calculated based on the Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation and DerSimonian-Laird random-effect model. Survival to discharge was 40.2% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 33.9-46.7), while survival at 3, 6, and 12 months was 55.9% (95% CI, 41.5-69.8), 47.6% (95% CI, 25.4-70.2), and 54.4% (95% CI, 36.6-71.7), respectively. Survival up to 30 days was higher in cardiogenic shock patients (52.5%, 95% CI, 43.7%-61.2%) compared to cardiac arrest (36.2%, 95% CI, 23.1%-50.4%). Concurrently, complication rates were particularly substantial for neurologic deficits (13.3%, 95% CI, 8.3-19.3), infection (25.1%, 95%CI, 15.9-35.5), and renal impairment (47.4%, 95% CI, 30.2-64.9). Significant heterogeneity was detected, although its levels were similar to previous meta-analyses that only examined short-term survival to discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: Venoarterial ECMO can improve short-term survival in adults with refractory cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest. It also may provide favorable long-term survival at up to 3 years postdischarge. However, ECMO also is associated with significant complication rates, which must be incorporated into the risk-benefit analysis when considering treatment. These findings require confirmation by large, adequately controlled and standardized trials with long-term follow-up.
DESIGN: Meta-analysis.
SETTING: University hospitals.
PARTICIPANTS: One thousand one hundred ninety-nine patients from 22 observational studies.
INTERVENTIONS: None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Observational studies published from the year 2000 onwards, examining at least 10 adult patients who received ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest were included. Pooled estimates with 95% confidence intervals were calculated based on the Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation and DerSimonian-Laird random-effect model. Survival to discharge was 40.2% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 33.9-46.7), while survival at 3, 6, and 12 months was 55.9% (95% CI, 41.5-69.8), 47.6% (95% CI, 25.4-70.2), and 54.4% (95% CI, 36.6-71.7), respectively. Survival up to 30 days was higher in cardiogenic shock patients (52.5%, 95% CI, 43.7%-61.2%) compared to cardiac arrest (36.2%, 95% CI, 23.1%-50.4%). Concurrently, complication rates were particularly substantial for neurologic deficits (13.3%, 95% CI, 8.3-19.3), infection (25.1%, 95%CI, 15.9-35.5), and renal impairment (47.4%, 95% CI, 30.2-64.9). Significant heterogeneity was detected, although its levels were similar to previous meta-analyses that only examined short-term survival to discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: Venoarterial ECMO can improve short-term survival in adults with refractory cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest. It also may provide favorable long-term survival at up to 3 years postdischarge. However, ECMO also is associated with significant complication rates, which must be incorporated into the risk-benefit analysis when considering treatment. These findings require confirmation by large, adequately controlled and standardized trials with long-term follow-up.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app