Editorial Views  |   April 2019
Comparing Apples to Oranges?
Author Notes
  • From the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre (ANZIC-RC), Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia (C.L.H.); and the Center for Acute Respiratory Failure, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons/New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York (D.B.).
  • Accepted for publication January 9, 2019.
    Accepted for publication January 9, 2019.×
  • Corresponding article on page 572.
    Corresponding article on page 572.×
  • Address correspondence to Dr. Hodgson: carol.hodgson@monash.edu
Article Information
Editorial Views / Critical Care / Respiratory System / Thoracic Anesthesia
Editorial Views   |   April 2019
Comparing Apples to Oranges?
Anesthesiology 4 2019, Vol.130, 528-529. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000002633
Anesthesiology 4 2019, Vol.130, 528-529. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000002633
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is a lifesaving intervention used for patients with severe forms of the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), often when clinicians believe that other less invasive therapies have failed to improve severe hypoxemia.1,2  While the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has rapidly increased around the world in recent years,3,4  the focus has been on survival as the primary outcome of interest. Despite the enthusiasm in the critical care community for studying long-term outcomes after critical illness, there are few long-term follow-up data, including functional outcomes, in patients who received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for ARDS.5