SynthesisSystematic reviews2025
Neurological outcome predictors after extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Optimal Low-Flow Time of Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Favorable Neurological Outcomes: A Risk-Stratified Approach.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo consolidate current evidence on predictors of neurological outcome following extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) in patients with cardiac arrest.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review of the literature across databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Studies assessing neurological outcomes post-eCPR were identified, with a total of 10 studies eligible for individual assessment of which 8 comprising 4353 patients allowed to perform collective statistical analysis.
resultsFavorable neurological outcomes were associated with age < 65 years (OR = 6.17), shockable rhythm at extracorporeal membrane oxygenation initiation (OR = 6.67) or hospital arrival (OR = 3.68), and initial pH ≥ 7.0 (OR = 2.01). Other factors involved the presence of any life sign (gasping, positive pupillary light reaction, or increased level of consciousness before or throughout cardiopulmonary resuscitation) (OR = 9.63; Se 0.89, Sp 0.46, PPV 0.22, NPV 0.96), transient return of spontaneous circulation, non-hypoxic mechanism of occurred hepatitis, public location, and hypothermic etiology of cardiac arrest; however, each of those findings was supported by only one study. Unfavorable outcomes were linked to hypoxic brain injury on computed tomography (OR = 12.40; Se 0.366, Sp 0.955, PPV 0.767, NPV 0.787) and elevated serum creatinine (OR = 2.22). The TiPS65 scale showed high predictive accuracy in two studies when the cut-off point was set at 4 points (88.4% and 88.6%; Se 0.172, Sp 0.971, PPV 0.423, and NPV 0.906, and Se 0.193, Sp 0.985, PPV 0.646, and NPV 0.896, respectively). Some predictors, like call-to-hospital time and bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, had mixed results across studies.
conclusionNeurological prognostication in eCPR patients is a complex problem requiring the consideration of multiple variables regarding patient's and cardiac arrest characteristics. Future research should focus on the determination of outcome-affecting factors and assessment of their applicability in clinical settings. New knowledge on this ground will help to create recommendations for eCPR initiation and termination, consequently contributing to treatment results improvement.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42024530305.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.