MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413035511 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103423

A simple VA-ECMO bundle in adult patients with cardiogenic shock: an analysis of ELSO registry

2025· article· en· W4413035511 on OpenAlexaff
Liangshan Wang, Kexin Wang, Yán Wāng, Feng Yang, Chenglong Li, Xing Hao, Zhongtao Du, Peter Rycus, Joseph E. Tonna, Eddy Fan, Hong Wang, Xiaotong Hou

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersBeijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals Clinical Medicine Development of Special Funding SupportBeijing Hospital AuthorityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaCenter for Autonomous Systems and TechnologiesBeijing Nova ProgramNatural Science Foundation of Beijing Municipality
KeywordsMedicineCardiogenic shockBundleInternal medicineShock (circulatory)CardiologyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The optimal management strategy for patients undergoing veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for cardiogenic shock (CS) remains uncertain. To evaluate the impact of "bundled" physiologic targets on outcomes in VA-ECMO patients. Methods This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry, including adult patients receiving VA-ECMO for CS between 2013 and 2022. Patients were grouped by whether they received the full set of bundle components within the first 24 h. The bundle included mean arterial pressure > 65 mmHg, PaO 2 60–150 mmHg, relative change in PaCO 2 [RelΔCO 2 ] > −50% (RelΔCO 2 = [(PaCO 2-24hours −PaCO 2-baseline )/PaCO 2-baseline ] ∗ 100%), and peak inspiratory pressure < 30 mmHg. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge, while secondary outcomes were complications. Findings Of 7950 patients (mean age 56.5 ± 14.3 years), 2762 (34.7%) received the complete bundle. The bundle group had significantly higher rates of survival to hospital discharge (55.9% vs. 39.4%, p < 0.001) with adjusted odds ratio [aOR] of 1.849 (95% CI [1.675, 2.042]; p < 0.001), and the likelihood of brain death (aOR = 0.521, 95% CI: 0.289–0.885; p = 0.021), ischemic stroke (aOR = 0.710, 95% CI: 0.559–0.896; p = 0.004), hemorrhagic complications (aOR = 0.773, 95% CI: 0.681–0.876; p < 0.001) and cardiovascular complications (aOR = 0.863, 95% CI: 0.770–0.966; p = 0.011) were reduced. Interpretation Achieving the proposed physiologic bundle is associated with improved survival and a reduced risk of complications in VA-ECMO patients with CS. These findings provide evidence supporting the use of standardized care bundles in the management of VA-ECMO patients with CS. Funding This work was supported by the Beijing Hospitals Authority Clinical Medicine Development of Special Funding Support (No. ZYLX202111, to X Hou), Beijing Hospitals Authority "Ascent Plan" (No. FDL20190601, to X Hou), Young Elite Scientists Sponsorship Program by CAST (No. 2022QNRC001, to L Wang), National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 82200433, to L Wang), and Beijing Hospitals Authority Youth Programme (No. QML20230602, to L Wang), National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 82100408, to X Hao), Beijing Nova Program (No. 2022064, to C Li), Beijing Natural Science Foundation (No. 7244327, to C Li), and the National Key Research and Development Program of China (No. 2021YFC2701700 and 2021YFC2701703, to Z Du).

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)0.001
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207