Captured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“The evidence base for VA-ECMO remains sobering. Findings from the ECLS-SHOCK trial—the largest VA-ECMO RCT in AMI-CS—showed no mortality reduction with early, unselected implantation, 5 and findings from the ECMO-CS (Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the Therapy of Cardiogenic Shock) trial s...”
Finds extracorporeal life support does not reduce 30-day mortality in infarct-related cardiogenic shock, questioning routine mechanical support in this setting.
In patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock with planned early revascularization, the risk of death from any cause at the 30-day follow-up was not lower among the patients who received ECLS therapy than among those who received medical therapy alone. (Funded by the Else Kröner Fresenius Foundation and others; ECLS-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03637205.).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thiele et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: