↓ Skip to main content

Transportation of patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a tertiary medical center experience and systematic review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
Transportation of patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a tertiary medical center experience and systematic review of the literature
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13613-016-0232-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pedro Vitale Mendes, Cesar de Albuquerque Gallo, Bruno Adler Maccagnan Pinheiro Besen, Adriana Sayuri Hirota, Raquel de Oliveira Nardi, Edzangela Vasconcelos dos Santos, Ho Yeh Li, Daniel Joelsons, Eduardo Leite Vieira Costa, Flavia Krepel Foronda, Luciano Cesar Pontes Azevedo, Marcelo Park

Abstract

Utilization of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has increased worldwide, but its use remains restricted to severely ill patients, and few referral centers are properly structured to offer this support. Inter-hospital transfer of patients on ECMO support can be life-threatening. In this study, we report a single-center experience and a systematic review of the available published data on complications and mortality associated with ECMO transportation. We reported single-center data regarding complications and mortality associated with the transportation of patients on ECMO support. Additionally, we searched multiple databases for case series, observational studies, and randomized controlled trials regarding mortality of patients transferred on ECMO support. Results were analyzed independently for pediatric (under 12 years old) and adult populations. We pooled mortality rates using a random-effects model. Complications and transportation data were also described. A total of 38 manuscripts, including our series, were included in the final analysis, totaling 1481 patients transported on ECMO support. A total of 951 patients survived to hospital discharge. The pooled survival rates for adult and pediatric patients were 62% (95% CI 57-68) and 68% (95% CI 60-75), respectively. Two deaths occurred during patient transportation. No other complication resulting in adverse outcome was reported. Using the available pooled data, we found that patient transfer to a referral institution while on ECMO support seems to be safe and adds no significant risk of mortality to ECMO patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 16%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 7 11%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 17 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 18 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 April 2017.
All research outputs
#3,384,253
of 24,598,501 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#425
of 1,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,298
of 429,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#9
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,598,501 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,128 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 429,079 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.