The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2009
DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(09)61069-2
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficacy and economic assessment of conventional ventilatory support versus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe adult respiratory failure (CESAR): a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

55
2,333
11
126

Year Published

2009
2009
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2,990 publications
(2,525 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
55
2,333
11
126
Order By: Relevance
“…5 Similar to some of the above reports, these investigators showed a significantly higher survival without disability in ECMO vs conventional management (63 vs 47%, respectively; relative risk, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.97; P = 0.03). These results, however, were not without several caveats.…”
supporting
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…5 Similar to some of the above reports, these investigators showed a significantly higher survival without disability in ECMO vs conventional management (63 vs 47%, respectively; relative risk, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.97; P = 0.03). These results, however, were not without several caveats.…”
supporting
confidence: 76%
“…5 Tout comme dans certaines des études citées ci-dessus, les chercheurs de CESAR ont démontré un taux de survie sans handicap significativement plus élevé lors de l'utilisation d'ECMO par rapport à une prise en charge traditionnelle (63 vs 47 %, respectivement; risque relatif, 0,69; IC 95 %, 0,05 à 0,97; P = 0,03). Avec ces résultats viennent toutefois plusieurs mises en garde.…”
unclassified
“…Unfortunately, available data come from case series [1-5, 18, 52] and only one randomized clinical trial tested the efficacy of ECMO in patients with severe ARDS [53]. Table 4 presents the main ECMO criteria of these studies together with the ECMO criteria proposed by the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization guidelines [15][16][17][18][19][20] 20±0 17 [15][16][17][18][19][20] 12 [11][12][13][14] 15 [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] n. …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The conventional ventilation versus ECMO for severe adult respiratory failure (CESAR) trial first reported a significant improvement in 6 months disability‐free survival in the ECMO group, when compared to conventional ventilation patients 5. Since then, several studies have shown the effectiveness of ECMO for influenza A (H1N1)‐related severe acute respiratory failure in 2009–2010 6, 7.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%