Outcome of Veno-Pulmonary Extracorporeal Life Support in Lung Transplantation Using ProtekDuo Cannula: A Systematic Review and Description of Configurations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Refractory end-stage pulmonary failure may benefit from extracorporeal life support (ECLS) as a bridge to lung transplantation. Veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been recommended for patients who have failed conventional medical therapy and mechanical ventilation. Veno-arterial (VA) ECMO may be used in patients with acute right ventricular (RV) failure, haemodynamic instability, or refractory respiratory failure. Peripheral percutaneous approaches, either dual-site single-lumen cannulation for veno-pulmonary (VP) ECMO or single-site dual-lumen (dl)VP ECMO, using the ProtekDuo right ventricular assist device (RVAD) cannula, has made this configuration a desirable option as a bridge to transplantation. These configurations support the right ventricle, prevent recirculation by placing the tricuspid and pulmonary valve between the drainage and return cannulas, provide the direct introduction of oxygenated blood into the pulmonary artery, and have been shown to decrease the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), requiring continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in certain disease states. This promotes haemodynamic stability, potential sedation-weaning trials, extubation, mobilisation, and pre-transplant rehabilitation. Methods: A web-based literature search in PubMed and EMBASE was undertaken based on a combination of keywords. The PICOS and PRISMA approaches were used. Results: Four case series were identified out of 323 articles, with a total of 34 patients placed on VP ECMO as a bridge to lung transplantation. All relevant data are reviewed and integrated into the Discussion. Conclusions: Despite the limited available evidence, the use of ProtekDuo has become very promising for the management of end-stage lung disease as a bridge to lung transplantation.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".