MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309320642 · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000006210

Predictors and Hospital Outcomes in Pregnant Patients Undergoing Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Nationwide Study

2022· article· en· W4309320642 on OpenAlexafffund
Oscar F. C. van den Bosch, Rabail Chaudhry, James Wicker, Talha Mubashir, Daniel Limb, Rohit Jogendran, Laveena Munshi, Mrinalini Balki

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineExtracorporeal membrane oxygenationCardiogenic shockOdds ratioIncidence (geometry)Mortality ratePopulationConfidence intervalRespiratory failureEmergency medicineSurgeryInternal medicineMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly used in patients with severe cardiorespiratory collapse. Although prior large database reviews of ECMO use in the peripartum population exist, they do not stratify by ECMO indication nor do they include obstetric conditions such as preeclampsia. Our objective was to characterize the incidence, indication-associated mortality, and factors associated with mortality in pregnant patients who underwent ECMO. METHODS: We examined the United States National Inpatient Sample database to identify hospitalizations for pregnancy from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2016. We identified pregnant patients who underwent ECMO using International Classification of Diseases ninth and tenth revisions codes. The primary outcome was in-hospital all-cause mortality across pregnant patients who underwent ECMO for any indication. We evaluated the indication for ECMO, incidence, prevalence of risk factors, comorbidities and conditions, and their association with in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Fifty-nine of 5'346,517 pregnant patients underwent ECMO during our study period (incidence, 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84-1.4 per 100,000 hospitalizations). Indications for ECMO support included respiratory failure (79.7%), cardiogenic shock (64.4%), or circulatory arrest (25.4%). Most patients (57.6%) had more than 1 indication. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 30.5%. Mortality was 29.8% in patients with respiratory failure, 39.5% with cardiogenic shock, 46.7% with cardiac arrest, and 42.4% in those with combined diagnoses. Cardiogenic shock was associated with a significantly higher mortality rate and adjusted odds ratio 5.0 (95% CI, 1.25-27.0). Most patients (62.7%) had one or more comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of ECMO use across the pregnant population was low over this time period, with a mortality rate of 1 in 3 patients. Mortality was greatest in patients with cardiogenic shock. Further work is needed to understand how best to improve ECMO outcomes in pregnant patients.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.907

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207