Sedation Practice in Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation–Treated Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Retrospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our objective was to characterize sedation management in adult patients with severe respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) treated with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). We conducted a retrospective chart review of these patients treated at Toronto General Hospital between January 2012 and October 2015. Medications administered (sedative, analgesic, paralytic, and antipsychotic), sedation depth (Sedation Agitation Scale [SAS] score) delirium assessments, and mobilization were recorded daily. Forty-five adults (33 males, median age 47 years; interquartile range [IQR], 35-56]) with ARDS (median PaO2/FiO2 71; IQR 59-83) because of respiratory infection (91%) were treated with VV-ECMO for a median of 11 days (IQR, 7-17). After ECMO initiation, 96% patients were deeply sedated (SAS score < 3) with continuous infusions of midazolam (49%), propofol (18%), or both (29%) and 98% were receiving opioid infusions (93% fentanyl). Patients were deeply sedated for a median of 6 days (IQR, 3-10) after cannulation before transitioning to intermediate or light sedation (SAS score ≥ 3). Before ECMO discontinuation, 77% of surviving patients were intermediately or lightly sedated, 20% were receiving no sedatives, and 9% were receiving no opioids. During ECMO, 58% had positive delirium assessment and 24% experienced agitation (SAS ≥ 6). During ECMO support, 71% received physical therapy that occurred after a median of 7 days (IQR, 4-12) after cannulation. In conclusion, we found that although patients were deeply sedated for a prolonged duration after VV-ECMO initiation, many were able to safely achieve light sedation and active mobilization.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".