Left Ventricular Unloading During Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a widely used form of mechanical circulatory support in patients with refractory cardiogenic shock. A common drawback of this modality is a resultant increase in left ventricular afterload. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy and safety of left ventricular unloading strategies during VA-ECMO in adult patients with cardiogenic shock. METHODS: The authors performed a systematic search of studies examining left ventricular unloading during VA-ECMO in Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included limb ischemia, bleeding, need for renal replacement therapy, multiorgan failure, stroke or transient ischemic attack, and hemolysis. RESULTS: Of 2,221 publications identified, 17 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. In total, outcomes in 3,997 patients were included with 1,696 (42%) receiving a concomitant left ventricular unloading strategy while on VA-ECMO (intra-aortic balloon pump 91.7%, percutaneous ventricular assist device 5.5%, pulmonary vein or transseptal left atrial cannulation 2.8%). There were 2,412 deaths (60%) in the total cohort. Mortality was lower in patients with (54%) versus without (65%) left ventricular unloading while on VA-ECMO (risk ratio: 0.79; 95% confidence interval: 0.72 to 0.87; p < 0.00001). Hemolysis was higher in patients who underwent VA-ECMO with left ventricular unloading. Otherwise, secondary outcomes were not demonstrably different in patients treated with VA-ECMO with versus without left ventricular unloading. CONCLUSIONS: In observational studies, left ventricular unloading was associated with decreased mortality in adult patients with cardiogenic shock treated with VA-ECMO. In the absence of prospective randomized data, left ventricular unloading may be considered for appropriately selected patients undergoing VA-ECMO support.
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 | 0.007 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".