MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084506144 · doi:10.1093/jbcr/iraa160

Successful Use of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Therapy in Patients With 80% Full Thickness Burns

2020· article· en· W3084506144 on OpenAlexaff
Jack Rasmussen, Mete Erdogan, Osama Loubani, Robert S. Green

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineARDSExtracorporeal membrane oxygenationSurgeryRescue therapyRefractory (planetary science)Burn centerProne positionSevere burnTotal body surface areaPopulationAnesthesiaIntensive care medicineLungPoison controlEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite advances in burn care, mortality in adult patients with extensive burn injuries remains a concern, particularly in those who develop concurrent acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In cases of ARDS refractory to conventional treatments, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) may represent a viable salvage therapy, even in the major burn population. We present the case of a 38-year-old man with full thickness burns to over 80% of his body, who developed severe ARDS 4 days postburn. After failing to respond to deep sedation, paralysis, and proning, ECMO therapy was initiated to maintain oxygenation and ventilation. Over the next 14 days, while the patient was treated with ECMO, he successfully underwent three major operations to debride and allograft approximately 65% of his body surface area, including one in the prone position. ECMO therapy was discontinued on postburn day 18, and the patient had his wounds reconstructed and survived his injuries. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of a burn patient with such severe burns requiring surgical intervention that has been treated with ECMO and survived, and the first case of a burn patient on ECMO having surgery in the prone position. They conclude this case serves as a "proof of concept" that ECMO is a potential treatment for appropriately selected major burn patients with ARDS who fail to respond to other therapies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207