Extracorporeal Life Support in Pediatric and Neonatal Critical Care: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is a modified form of cardiopulmonary bypass used to provide prolonged tissue oxygen delivery in patients with respiratory and/or cardiac failure. The first large-scale success of ECLS was achieved in the management of term newborns with respiratory failure. ECLS has become an accepted therapeutic modality for neonates, children, and adults who have failed conventional therapy and in whom cardiac and/or respiratory insufficiency is potentially reversible. The use of ECLS allows one to reduce other cardiopulmonary supports and apply a gentle ventilation strategy in a population of severely compromised critical care patients. ECLS has now been employed in more than 26,000 neonatal and pediatric patients with an overall survival rate of 68%. ECLS has evolved significantly over 25 years of clinical practice; patient selection for this complex and highly invasive therapy, as well as how ECLS is employed in different patient groups, is constantly changing. Generally, ECLS is used more liberally now than in the past. The number of patients requiring this support, however, is declining yearly, and those patients who receive ECLS compose a more severe subset of an intensive care population. This review provides an overview of the development of ECLS and the equipment and techniques employed. The use of ECLS for neonatal respiratory failure, pediatric respiratory failure, and cardiac support are outlined. Management of the ECLS patient is discussed in detail, and outcome of these patients is reviewed. Finally, current trends and future implications of ECLS in neonatal and pediatric critical care are addressed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".