Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Graft Dysfunction Early After Heart Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a prevailing option for the management of severe early graft dysfunction. This systematic review and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis aims to evaluate (1) mortality, (2) rates of major complications, (3) prognostic factors, and (4) the effect of different VA-ECMO strategies on outcomes in adult heart transplant (HT) recipients supported with VA-ECMO. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a systematic search and included studies of adults (≥18 years) who received VA-ECMO during their index hospitalization after HT and reported on mortality at any timepoint. We pooled data using random effects models. To identify prognostic factors, we analysed IPD using mixed effects logistic regression. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the GRADE framework. We included 49 observational studies of 1477 patients who received VA-ECMO after HT, of which 15 studies provided IPD for 448 patients. There were no differences in mortality estimates between IPD and non-IPD studies. The short-term (30-day/in-hospital) mortality estimate was 33% (moderate certainty, 95% confidence interval [CI] 28%-39%) and 1-year mortality estimate 50% (moderate certainty, 95% CI 43%-57%). Recipient age (odds ratio 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.04) and prior sternotomy (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.99-2.49) are associated with increased short-term mortality. There is low certainty evidence that early intraoperative cannulation and peripheral cannulation reduce the risk of short-term death. CONCLUSIONS: One-third of patients who receive VA-ECMO for early graft dysfunction do not survive 30 days or to hospital discharge, and one-half do not survive to 1 year after HT. Improving outcomes will require ongoing research focused on optimizing VA-ECMO strategies and care in the first year after HT.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".