Systematic review finds higher early mortality in neonates needing ECMO after Norwood procedure, indicating a high-risk group.
Background Survival following the Norwood procedure has improved substantially, but outcomes for the high-risk subgroup requiring postoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) remain unclear. We explored short- and intermediate-term outcomes in these neonates. Main Body We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central and Web of Science (final search: 25 February 2025). Comparative studies reporting outcomes for patients with versus without postoperative ECMO were included. Primary outcomes were short-term mortality, secondary outcomes included stages-2-and-3 palliation completion, operative times, recovery parameters, and complications. Statistical analysis used RevMan 5.4 to calculate pooled risk ratio (RR), odds ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals employing random-effects models; heterogeneity was assessed using I² statistics and Cochran’s Q test. Eight studies (2,612 patients: 15% with ECMO) were included. In-hospital mortality was five times greater in the ECMO group (RR = 5.53, CI = 4.41–6.93, p = 0.0003), though survival to Glenn and Fontan completion were comparable. Cardiopulmonary bypass duration was significantly longer in the ECMO group (MD = 28.07 min, CI = 18.19–37.95, p = 0.0004). Postoperative ICU recovery was significantly prolonged for ECMO patients (MD = 10.56 days, CI = 1.28–19.83, p = 0.03), though hospital recovery was similar. Postoperative atrioventricular valve regurgitation, Norwood reoperation, delayed chest closure, unplanned reoperation or death/transplantation were comparable. Risk of bias (ROBINS-I) was formally assessed. Conclusion Our analysis supports that ECMO use post-Norwood procedure identifies a high-risk subgroup with significantly higher early-mortality and resource utilisation. However, this association must be interpreted cautiously due to heterogenous ECMO indications. Future efforts should focus on identifying modifiable risk factors to improve outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Almehandi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: