The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
Background: There are several reports of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who develop severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to guide clinical decision-making and future research. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and Scopus databases from 1 December 2019 to 10 January 2021 for observational studies or randomised clinical trials examining ECMO in adults with COVID-19 ARDS. We performed random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression, assessed risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist and rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Survival outcomes were presented as pooled proportions while continuous outcomes were presented as pooled means, both with corresponding 95% confidence intervals [CIs]. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were duration of ECMO therapy and mechanical ventilation, weaning rate from ECMO and complications during ECMO. Results: We included twenty-two observational studies with 1896 patients in the meta-analysis. Venovenous ECMO was the predominant mode used (98.6%). The pooled in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients (22 studies, 1896 patients) supported with ECMO was 37.1% (95% CI 32.3–42.0%, high certainty). Pooled mortality in the venovenous ECMO group was 35.7% (95% CI 30.7–40.7%, high certainty). Meta-regression found that age and ECMO duration were associated with increased mortality. Duration of ECMO support (18 studies, 1844 patients) was 15.1 days (95% CI 13.4–18.7). Weaning from ECMO (17 studies, 1412 patients) was accomplished in 67.6% (95% CI 50.5–82.7%) of patients. There were a total of 1583 ECMO complications reported (18 studies, 1721 patients) and renal complications were the most common. Conclusion: The majority of patients received venovenous ECMO support for COVID-19-related ARDS. In-hospital mortality in patients receiving ECMO support for COVID-19 was 37.1% during the first year of the pandemic, similar to those with non-COVID-19-related ARDS. Increasing age was a risk factor for death. Venovenous ECMO appears to be an effective intervention in selected patients with COVID-19-related ARDS. PROSPERO CRD42020192627.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
Wan, X., Wang, W., Liu, J., & Tong, T. (2014) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-135 · Cited by 11,735
THE USE OF CONFIDENCE OR FIDUCIAL LIMITS ILLUSTRATED IN THE CASE OF THE BINOMIAL
CLOPPER, C. J., & PEARSON, E. S. (1934) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/26.4.404 · Cited by 5,003
Peek, G. J., Mugford, M., Tiruvoipati, R., Wilson, A., Allen, E., Thalanany, M. M., Hibbert, C. L., Truesdale, A., Clemens, F., Cooper, N., et al. (2009) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(09)61069-2 · Cited by 3,395
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Combes, A., Hajage, D., Capellier, G., Demoule, A., Lavoué, S., Guervilly, C., Da Silva, D., Zafrani, L., Tirot, P., Veber, B., et al. (2018) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1800385 · Cited by 2,380
Self-citationGRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency
Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Kunz, R., Woodcock, J., Brozek, J., Helfand, M., Alonso-Coello, P., Glasziou, P., Jaeschke, R., Akl, E. A., et al. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.03.017 · Cited by 2,320
Alhazzani, W., Møller, M. H., Arabi, Y. M., Loeb, M., Gong, M. N., Fan, E., Oczkowski, S., Levy, M. M., Derde, L., Dzierba, A., et al. (2020) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-020-06022-5 · Cited by 2,105
Self-citationExtracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for 2009 Influenza A(H1N1) Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
(2009) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1535 · Cited by 1,596
Metadata
- Authors
- Ramanathan, K., Shekar, K., Ling, R. R., Barbaro, R. P., Wong, S. N., Tan, C. S., Rochwerg, B., Fernando, S. M., Takeda, S., MacLaren, G., Fan, E., & Brodie, D.
- Venue
- Critical Care
- Published
- 2021-06-14
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 211-211
- ISSN
- 1364-8535 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3155073785
- Cited by
- 280
- References
- 45
- FWCI
- 6.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s13054-021-03634-1
- The paper
- Ramanathan, K., Shekar, K., Ling, R. R., Barbaro, R. P., Wong, S. N., Tan, C. S., Rochwerg, B., Fernando, S. M., Takeda, S., MacLaren, G., Fan, E., & Brodie, D. (2021). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Critical Care. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-021-03634-1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.