ライフサイエンスコーパス: extracorporeal

1 Following a double-membrane extracorporeal apheresis in patients with AD, there was

2 rly pilot trial, we posit a potential use of extracorporeal apheresis in the prevention and treatment

3 he largest series to date, use of venovenous extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal in patients with s

4 arly extubation in select patients receiving extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal is safe and feasib

5 Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal settings, includin

6 ation of invasive mechanical ventilation and extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal support, and compl

7 were successfully extubated while receiving extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal support; none requ

8 Following the initiation of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal, blood gas values

9 de removal support, and complications during extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal.

10 re collected at 24 hours after initiation of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal.

11 cannulation and 24 hours after initiation of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal.

12 However, the ability of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) to m

13 Multivariate regression identified extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (odds ratio

14 The median extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation duration wa

15 Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation has shown s

16 One in four extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation patients ac

17 The overall survival rate after extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation was 29% (95

18 cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 2.3 +/- 0.2; extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation with carbon

19 ous circulation or return of circulation via extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation).

20 cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 1.7 +/- 0.4; extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 2.3 +/- 0.

21 cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 2.5 +/- 0.4; extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 2.4 +/- 0.

22 opulmonary resuscitation, 426 +/- 169 pg/mL; extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 240 +/- 61

23 After excluding studies that included extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, no signifi

24 Further research on assessing predictors of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation-associated

25 complications in patients who have undergone extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

26 Extracorporeal chloride removal by electrodialysis prove

27 a novel strategy to correct acidemia through extracorporeal chloride removal by electrodialysis.Metho

28 propose to infuse a competitor drug into the extracorporeal circuit that increases the free fraction

29 as exchange is sufficiently managed with the extracorporeal circuit.

30 Extracorporeal circulation systems are associated with t

31 Cardiopulmonary resuscitation with extracorporeal circulatory support holds the potential t

32 Indeed, for the same amount of extracorporeal CO2 extraction, it is possible to reduce

33 Indeed, both extracorporeal CO2 removal and extracorporeal oxygen del

34 ing of hypoxemia is frequent during low-flow extracorporeal CO2 removal combined with ultraprotective

35 removes CO2 at rates comparable to low-flow extracorporeal CO2 removal devices (blood flow < 500 mL/

36 l at rates comparable with existing low-flow extracorporeal CO2 removal in a large animal model, but

37 While the effect of extracorporeal CO2 removal on the respiratory quotient o

38 ding low blood flow systems providing mainly extracorporeal CO2 removal, are increasingly applied in

39 full extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and extracorporeal CO2 removal.

40 lution to the blood before the filter of the extracorporeal dialysis circuit) as first-line treatment

41 mechanically ventilated and connected to an extracorporeal electrodialysis device capable of selecti

42 w-density lipoproteins (LDLs) are removed by extracorporeal filtration during LDL apheresis.

43 nd alveolar oxygen tension during venovenous extracorporeal gas exchange and highlight the clinical i

44 al circulatory systems (MCSs) in patients on extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is challenging due to

45 In the most severe forms of the syndrome, extracorporeal life support is increasingly being deploy

46 ilation, need for renal replacement therapy, extracorporeal life support or cardiopulmonary resuscita

47 We used data from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) Registry

48 tional, retrospective cohort study using the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry, inclu

49 data from the International Registry of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization to identify ris

50 he Society of Critical Care Medicine and the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization.

51 sary to manage the spectrum of FM, including extracorporeal life support, percutaneous and durable ve

52 multicenter observational study suggest that extracorporeal life support, when combined with lower Vt

53 penia is a recognized concern in patients on extracorporeal life support.

54 he sickest neonates, such as those requiring extracorporeal life support.

55 linical conditions, including surgery and on extracorporeal life support.

56 tation was stronger among those who received extracorporeal life support: each extra week of gestatio

57 Extracorporeal lipoprotein apheresis systems employ well

58 1.425-9.473; overall p = 0.025), duration of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (< 66 hr: odds ratio

59 were significant increases in listings with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (+1.2%), intra-aorti

60 orporeal membrane oxygenation and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (13% vs 10%; p = 0.4

61 verall brain injury compared with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (19% vs 10%; p = 0.0

62 enous versus venoarterial versus mixed group extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (23.9 vs 34.4 vs 29.

63 0%), prone positioning (10%), HFOV (9%), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (3%).

64 ion was the most frequent complication after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (37% of patients).

65 umonia was the main indication of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (46.7%).

66 Survival was lower in venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (48%) than venovenou

67 l membrane oxygenation (48%) than venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (64%) (p < 0.001).

68 Of 25, 22 had venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (88%) (nine cardiac

69 0.49; p < 0.001), higher PO2 on first day of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (adjusted odds ratio

70 ces (TCS-VAD) have a survival advantage over extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as a bridge t

71 ases in Pa(CO(2)) that occur when initiating extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in patients w

72 mice and suppresses blood coagulation in an extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) setting in ra

73 or health organisations recommend the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support for C

74 cept that more patients who had a history of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) underwent PT

75 arding the outcomes of patients supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) who undergo d

76 nt characteristics, the use of pretransplant extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), and on index

77 irst randomised clinical trial in the USA of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)-facilitated r

78 date have not investigated its use alongside extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

79 erall p = 0.017), and renal complications on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (odds ratio, 2.346;

80 arin-induced thrombocytopenia in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (p = 0.79).

81 Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is increas

82 The early use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) may facili

83 This study assessed venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) support fo

84 herapy (surgical embolectomy or venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [ECMO]) is safe and

85 MCS (Impella microaxial pump + venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [VA-ECMO]) in refrac

86 n variables in patients requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation according to the pat

87 artificial surfaces and shear stress inside extracorporeal membrane oxygenation additionally contrib

88 Patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation also followed a simi

89 In-hospital mortality was 30% for venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and 37.5% for venoar

90 data, including demographics, comorbidities, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and cannulation char

91 Mean age (+/- SD) of the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and cardiopulmonary

92 uency of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and cardiopulmonary

93 support is complex and differs between full extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and extracorporeal C

94 c arrest excluded) who required venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and for whom subling

95 is of vascular complications associated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and identify prognos

96 tion and intra-aortic balloon pump in 2, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and Impella CP in 1.

97 2, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in 2, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and intra-aortic bal

98 Although extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and other modalities

99 did not differ between patients who died on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and those successful

100 ers between patients successfully weaned-off extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and those who died o

101 iated coagulopathy differ between venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and venoarterial ext

102 hemorrhage were similar between venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and venovenous extra

103 rall acute brain injury between venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and venovenous extra

104 y associated with overall mortality, but not extracorporeal membrane oxygenation at the time of heart

105 ant outcomes of patients supported or not by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation at the time of heart

106 5 transplanted patients, 118 (28.4%) were on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation at the time of trans

107 Median time on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation before heart transpl

108 cardiogenic shock) and three had venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cannulation (12%).

109 y plays a role in these outcomes and whether extracorporeal membrane oxygenation causes secondary bra

110 From 2015 to 2018, heparin monitoring during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation changed from hourly

111 % CI, 1.00-1.02; p = 0.009), higher rates of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation circuit mechanical f

112 article release were increased in venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation compared to venoarte

113 requent in both venovenous- and venoarterial-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation compared with cardio

114 severe thrombocytopenia were more common in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation compared with cardio

115 l cardiopulmonary resuscitation venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation compared with venove

116 Brain injury was more common in venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation compared with venove

117 f the intensivist in the care of patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation continues to evolve

118 In that context, venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation could rapidly restor

119 tion curriculum; 2) defining criteria for an extracorporeal membrane oxygenation course as a vehicle

120 120% (treatment) or not (control) during the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation course.

121 regarding 1) the creation of a standardized extracorporeal membrane oxygenation curriculum; 2) defin

122 howed a 59% reduction in circuit changes per extracorporeal membrane oxygenation day compared with le

123 ted 75% reduction in the circuit changes per extracorporeal membrane oxygenation day.

124 Platelets were transfused on 68% of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation days, plasma on 34%

125 owed by failure to wean ventilation and post-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation decannulation.

126 orted acute brain injury during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation decreased from 10% t

127 ory distress syndrome patients on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation despite the delivery

128 Nearly a third of patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation develop vascular com

129 ratio, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.16-2.22; p = 0.004), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation duration (adjusted o

130 e a road map for standardizing international extracorporeal membrane oxygenation education and practi

131 ficant variability and limitations in global extracorporeal membrane oxygenation education exist.

132 is two-fold: first, to describe the state of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation education worldwide,

133 c injury in patients undergoing venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for cardiac arrest a

134 ns of the United States reported no cases of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for poisoning.

135 d 347 (7.2%) were assisted with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory postc

136 ation in adult patients requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for respiratory fail

137 tically ill patients supported by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe acute res

138 ively maintained database of all patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation from 2012 to 2018 at

139 patients bridged to heart transplantation on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation had similar survival

140 cardiac or respiratory failure supported on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation had survival rates o

141 tation in patients supported by venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has been associated

142 We evaluated the venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation impact on macrocircu

143 We aimed to determine whether the timing of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation implantation influen

144 parameter changes found before venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation implantation regress

145 during the first 48 hours after venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation implantation were ex

146 e, within 10 days following the venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation implantation, of a s

147 ampled before, and 1, 24, and 48 hours after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation implantation.

148 pump in 14 patients (67%), Impella CP in 2, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in 2, extracorporeal

149 ld focus on refining criteria for the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in poisoning.

150 n arterial carbon dioxide tension tension at extracorporeal membrane oxygenation initiation and in-ho

151 weak recommendations in five topic areas of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation initiation and manag

152 before, and 2, 4, 12, 24, and 48 hours after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation initiation, respecti

153 ulmonary resuscitation prior to venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation initiation, with 18%

154 Thrombocytopenia is already common at extracorporeal membrane oxygenation initiation.

155 ciated deep vein thrombosis after venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is a frequent compli

156 Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is an effective inte

157 However, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is associated with a

158 A common theme of the recommendations is extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is best performed by

159 Pre-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation macrocirculation, ec

160 A specific protocol for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation management encompass

161 Early implantation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation may help prevent acu

162 tor, hemodynamic and biochemical parameters, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation mode, duration, and

163 ostmortem neuropathologic evaluation, 68% of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation nonsurvivors develop

164 implantation regressed within 12 hours after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation onset.

165 One patient per group (venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or venoarterial extr

166 patients compared with 95 in 459 venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients (odds ratio

167 poreal membrane oxygenation and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients and are bes

168 plication occurred in three of 10 venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients and in four

169 but was normal in 83% compared with 42.3% of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients at day 10.

170 vascular complications in 6,124 venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients compared wi

171 Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients had more is

172 Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients had more ov

173 Physical disability in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients plays a sig

174 Of 10,342 venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients, 401 (3.9%)

175 brain injury was more common in venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients, the rates

176 ith mortality in this cohort of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients.

177 n patients and in four of eight venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients.

178 embrane oxygenation compared to venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients.

179 brane oxygenation and 37.5% for venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients.

180 eparin-induced thrombocytopenia was lower in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients.

181 In multivariable analysis, lower pre-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation pH (adjusted odds ra

182 dated assessment tools in the development of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation practitioner certifi

183 ood samples drawn from pediatric patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation receiving anticoagul

184 distress syndrome supported with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation remains high, and th

185 ts were followed until death or venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation removal.

186 luated 6 hours before and after venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation removal.

187 ge and familiarity of the issues surrounding extracorporeal membrane oxygenation selection, cannulati

188 Before extracorporeal membrane oxygenation start, patients were

189 cute rejection before discharge and need for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support post-transpl

190 The median extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support time was 96

191 After a median of 3 days (1-13 d) on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, 37 patients

192 circulation determinants during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, before futu

193 Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation survivors experience

194 Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation survivors' physical

195 onings were less likely to survive following extracorporeal membrane oxygenation than those with othe

196 The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to support criticall

197 Despite the increasing use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to treat severe card

198 vs 9%, P = 0.08) but increased rate of early extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use (12% vs 7%, P =

199 found substantial geographical variation in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use by geospatially

200 Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use in poisoned pati

201 latory support, despite the highest rates of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use.

202 , we switched from monitoring heparin during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation using activated clot

203 patients post cardiopulmonary bypass and on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was 56.25% (18/32) a

204 Late implantation of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was independently as

205 Mortality was higher when extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was used for metabol

206 Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was used in the care

207 Patients weaned-off extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were also evaluated

208 tension (> 20 mm Hg) from the initiation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were associated with

209 Only 24% of the days on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were free of any hem

210 patient died, and all patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were successfully we

211 rporeal membrane oxygenation or venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) had surgery before

212 receiving invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation), 433 (90.4%) comple

213 r analysis at the initiation of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, 4,918 of these pati

214 ults not receiving mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, a 5-day course of r

215 ventilation, sepsis, pulmonary hypertension, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and cardiac arrest.

216 ygenation days, plasma on 34% of the days on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and cryoprecipitate

217 s (until day 21) of prone position sessions, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and inhaled nitric

218 e frequent in venoarterial versus venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, but described a var

219 py used to prevent circuit thrombosis during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, but no consensus ex

220 respiratory distress syndrome on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, compared with curre

221 ation after circulatory death, initiation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, denial of valve rep

222 During extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, hemodilution and co

223 ansplant centers listed more candidates with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, intra-aortic balloo

224 rence of brain injury in patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, it is unclear which

225 brain injury is common in patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, little is known reg

226 us extracorporeal ventricular assist system, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or a combination of

227 sitive-pressure ventilation, chest drainage, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or death).

228 were transfused on two third of the days on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, plasma on one third

229 Even before extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, plasmatic coagulati

230 ications reporting vascular complications on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, published from 1972

231 Therapy protocols for treating extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-associated coagulopa

232 The underlying factors of the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-associated coagulopa

233 ed to characterize the pathomechanism of the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-associated coagulopa

234 The extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-associated coagulopa

235 rejection-free survival and the frequency of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-related complication

236 tracorporeal membrane oxygenation as well as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-related factors that

237 tracorporeal membrane oxygenation as well as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-related factors.

238 Among venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-supported drug-refra

239 requency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

240 iming of acute brain injury in patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

241 eal membrane oxygenation) had surgery before extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

242 patients (33%) were successfully weaned-off extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

243 arin activity assay therapeutic range during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

244 of platelet recovery following cessation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

245 ired inotropic support with 28% treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

246 his relationship in patients on venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

247 embrane oxygenation compared with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

248 l membrane oxygenation and those who died on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

249 ory cardiogenic shock requiring venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

250 g, and risk factors of acute brain injury in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

251 y hemodynamics, was associated with death on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

252 ) compared with 170.4 hours (70-1,008 hr) on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

253 chieve a given anticoagulation target during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

254 coronavirus 2 patients requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

255 urvival compared with those not supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

256 arin-induced thrombocytopenia in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

257 ients undergoing venoarterial and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

258 l density thresholds for patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

259 matic vascular axis imaging after venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

260 nt safe catheter ablation under venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

261 r thrombosis in adult patients on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

262 re were 280 peripartum patients who received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

263 equired invasive ventilation, and 3 required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

264 ost severe cases, mechanical ventilation and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

265 embrane oxygenation compared with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

266 orporeal membrane oxygenation and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

267 (32%) were without acute brain injury after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

268 activity assay for heparin monitoring during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

269 nd were related to physical disability after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

270 ulation for patients successfully weaned-off extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

271 d the serotonin release assay in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

272 syndrome coronavirus 2 requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

273 stics of acute brain injury in patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

274 n pregnant and peripartum patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

275 nical circulatory support using venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

276 s (1.634; 95% CI, 0.797-3.352; p = 0.18) for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

277 ive areas related to the care of patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: patient selection,

278 he EXTRIP workgroup recommends against using extracorporeal methods to enhance elimination of these d

279 Indeed, both extracorporeal CO2 removal and extracorporeal oxygen delivery affect the respiratory qu

280 In this context, increasing extracorporeal oxygen delivery, increases the respirator

281 ain the same alveolar PO2, by increasing the extracorporeal oxygen delivery.

282 native lung has long been known, the role of extracorporeal oxygenation in dictating changes in the r

283 ular Steen solution may extend the allowable extracorporeal preservation time by a factor of 4-6 comp

284 del, carbon monoxide was added using a novel extracorporeal releasing system after resuscitation from

285 Gas exchange physiology during extracorporeal respiratory support is complex and differ

286 Extracorporeal respiratory support, including low blood

287 onoxide treatment at 0.5 hours compared with extracorporeal resuscitation alone (regional cerebral ox

288 Carbon monoxide application during extracorporeal resuscitation reduces injury patterns in

289 We hypothesize that extracorporeal resuscitation with additional carbon mono

290 eration, improved organ transplant, improved extracorporeal support and artificial organs, and improv

291 entilation strategies for patients receiving extracorporeal support but also regarding how various me

292 Few studies have assessed the role of extracorporeal therapies in the management of hyperammon

293 a formal recommendation regarding the use of extracorporeal treatments for this drug.

294 The available data do not support using extracorporeal treatments in addition to standard care f

295 determine the effect of and indications for extracorporeal treatments in cases of poisoning with the

296 The Extracorporeal Treatments in Poisoning (EXTRIP) workgrou

297 menable to clinically significant removal by extracorporeal treatments).

298 t inclusion criteria regarding the effect of extracorporeal treatments.

299 ubes in vivo using a novel model system: the extracorporeal vasculature of Botryllus schlosseri, in w

300 P only, other (such as use of a percutaneous extracorporeal ventricular assist system, extracorporeal