Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during pregnancy and peripartal. An international retrospective multicenter study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) may be used in the setting of pregnancy or the peripartal period, however its utility has not been well-characterized. This study aims to give an overview on the prevalence of peripartel ECMO cases and further assess the indications and outcomes of ECMO in this setting across multiple centers and countries. Methods A retrospective, multicenter, international cohort study of pregnant and peripartum ECMO cases was performed. Data were collected from six ECMO centers across three continents over a 10-year period. Results A total of 60 pregnany/peripartal ECMO cases have been identified. Most frequent indications are acute respiratory distress syndrome ( n = 30) and pulmonary embolism ( n = 5). Veno-venous ECMO mode was applied more often (77%). ECMO treatment during pregnancy was performed in 17 cases. Maternal and fetal survival was high with 87% ( n = 52), respectively 73% ( n = 44). Conclusions Various emergency scenarios during pregnancy and at time of delivery may require ECMO treatment. Peripartal mortality in a well-resourced setting is rare, however emergencies in the labor room occur and knowledge of available rescue therapy is essential to improve outcome. Obstetricians and obstetric anesthesiologists should be aware of the availability of ECMO resource at their hospital or region to ensure immediate contact when needed.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it