We have located links that may give you full text access.
Low vs standardized dose anticoagulation regimens for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A meta-analysis.
PloS One 2021
BACKGROUND: To compare the safety and efficacy of low-dose anticoagulation (LA) with that of standardized dose anticoagulation (SA) for patients supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).
METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were screened for original articles. Screening was performed using predefined search terms to identify cohort studies reporting the comparison of LA with SA in patients supported with ECMO from Nov 1990 to Jun 2020. The effect size was determined by the odds ratio (OR) with the 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS: An analysis of 7 studies including a total of 553 patients was performed. LA (Low-heparin group) was administered to 255 patients, whereas the other 298 patients received SA (Full-heparin group). The incidence of gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20-0.64) and surgical site hemorrhage (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20-0.94) were significantly lower in patients who underwent LA compared with that in those who underwent SA. The rates of hospital mortality (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.42-1.56), successfully weaning off of ECMO (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.30-2.14), pulmonary embolism (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.24-2.65), intracardiac thrombus (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.09-1.30), intracranial hemorrhage (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.22-1.74), and pulmonary hemorrhage (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.30-1.93) were similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis confirms that LA is a feasible and safe anticoagulation strategy in patients supported by ECMO. Future studies should focus on the long-term benefits of LA compared with SA.
METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were screened for original articles. Screening was performed using predefined search terms to identify cohort studies reporting the comparison of LA with SA in patients supported with ECMO from Nov 1990 to Jun 2020. The effect size was determined by the odds ratio (OR) with the 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS: An analysis of 7 studies including a total of 553 patients was performed. LA (Low-heparin group) was administered to 255 patients, whereas the other 298 patients received SA (Full-heparin group). The incidence of gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20-0.64) and surgical site hemorrhage (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20-0.94) were significantly lower in patients who underwent LA compared with that in those who underwent SA. The rates of hospital mortality (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.42-1.56), successfully weaning off of ECMO (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.30-2.14), pulmonary embolism (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.24-2.65), intracardiac thrombus (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.09-1.30), intracranial hemorrhage (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.22-1.74), and pulmonary hemorrhage (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.30-1.93) were similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis confirms that LA is a feasible and safe anticoagulation strategy in patients supported by ECMO. Future studies should focus on the long-term benefits of LA compared with SA.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app