Search

Background: As the pandemic progressed, the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome increased, and patient triage and transfer to ECMO centers became important to optimize patient outcomes. Our objectives are to identify predictors of patient transfer for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) evaluation as well as to describe the outcomes of accepted patients., Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective analysis of V-V ECMO transfer requests for adult patients with known or suspected COVID-19 and respiratory failure from March 2020 until March 2021. Data were collected prospectively during the triage process for transfer requests as part of clinical patient care at our institution., Results: Of 341 referred patients, 112 (33%) were accepted for transfer to our facility, whereas 229 (67%) patients were declined for transfer. The Classification and Regression Tree analysis showed that patients' high pressure during airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) and age were the variables most significantly associated with the decision to accept or decline patients for transfer., Conclusions: Our triage process enabled one-third of referred patients to be transferred for evaluation, with nearly 70% of those patients ultimately receiving ECMO support. High ventilator settings on APRV and young age were associated with acceptance for transfer. Accepted patients also had a higher incidence of adjunctive therapies (proning and paralysis) prior to transfer request, less cardiac or renal dysfunction, and a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation. Further research is warranted to investigate the outcomes of nontransferred patients., (© 2024 International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Some patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) require prolonged mechanical ventilation. An early tracheostomy strategy while on ECMO has appeared to be beneficial for these patients. This study aims to explore the safety of tracheostomy in ECMO patients., Methods: This is a retrospective observational single-center study., Results: Hundred and nine patients underwent tracheostomy (76 percutaneous and 33 surgical) during V-V ECMO support over an 8-year period. Patients with a percutaneous tracheostomy showed a significantly shorter ECMO duration [25.5 (17.3-40.1) vs 37.2 (26.5-53.2) days, p = 0.013] and a shorter ECMO-to-tracheostomy time [13.3 (8.5-19.7) vs 27.8 (16.3-36.9) days, p < 0.001] compared to those who underwent a surgical approach. There was no difference between the two strategies regarding both major and minor/no bleeding (p = 0.756). There was no difference in survival rate between patients who underwent percutaneous or surgical tracheostomy (p = 0.173). Patients who underwent an early tracheostomy (within 10 days from ECMO insertion) showed a significantly shorter hospital stay (p < 0.001) and a shorter duration of V-V ECMO support (p < 0.001). Our series includes 24 patients affected by COVID-19, who did not show significantly higher rates of major bleeding when compared to non-COVID-19 patients (p = 0.297). Within the COVID-19 subgroup, there was no difference in major bleeding rates between surgical and percutaneous approach (p = 1.0)., Conclusions: Percutaneous and surgical tracheostomy during ECMO have a similar safety profile in terms of bleeding risk and mortality. Percutaneous tracheostomy may favor a shorter duration of ECMO support and hospital stay and can be considered a safe alternative to surgical tracheostomy, even in COVID-19 patients, if relevant clinical expertise is available., (© 2023 The Authors. Artificial Organs published by International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) is a lifesaving support modality for severe respiratory failure, but its resource-intensive nature led to significant controversy surrounding its use during the COVID-19 pandemic. We report the performance of several ECMO mortality prediction and severity of illness scores at discriminating survival in a large COVID-19 V-V ECMO cohort., Methods: We validated ECMOnet, PRESET (PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy-Score), Roch, SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment), APACHE II (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation), 4C (Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium), and CURB-65 (Confusion, Urea nitrogen, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure, age >65 years) scores on the ISARIC (International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium) database. We report discrimination via Area Under the Receiver Operative Curve (AUROC) and Area under the Precision Recall Curve (AURPC) and calibration via Brier score., Results: We included 1147 patients and scores were calculated on patients with sufficient variables. ECMO mortality scores had AUROC (0.58-0.62), AUPRC (0.62-0.74), and Brier score (0.286-0.303). Roch score had the highest accuracy (AUROC 0.62), precision (AUPRC 0.74) yet worst calibration (Brier score of 0.3) despite being calculated on the fewest patients (144). Severity of illness scores had AUROC (0.52-0.57), AURPC (0.59-0.64), and Brier Score (0.265-0.471). APACHE II had the highest accuracy (AUROC 0.58), precision (AUPRC 0.64), and best calibration (Brier score 0.26)., Conclusion: Within a large international multicenter COVID-19 cohort, the evaluated ECMO mortality prediction and severity of illness scores demonstrated inconsistent discrimination and calibration highlighting the need for better clinically applicable decision support tools., (© 2023 International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: The criteria for the selection of COVID-19 patients that could benefit most from ECMO organ support are yet to be defined. In this study, we evaluated the predictive performance of ECMO mortality predictive models in patients with COVID-19. We also performed a cost-benefit analysis depending on the mortality predicted probability. We conducted a retrospective cohort study in COVID-19 patients who received ECMO at two tertiary care hospitals between March 2020 to July 2021., Materials and Methods: We evaluated the discrimination (C-statistic), calibration (Cox calibration), and accuracy of the prediction of death due to severe ARDS in V-V ECMO score (PRESERVE), the Respiratory Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Survival Score (RESP) score, and the PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy-Score (PRESET) score. In addition, we compared the RESP score with Plateau pressure instead of Peak pressure., Results: We included a total of 36 patients, 29 (80%) of them male and with a median (IQR) APACHE of 10 (8-15). The PRESET score had the highest discrimination (AUROCs 0.81 [95%CI 0.67-0.94]) and calibration (calibration-in-the-large 0.5 [95%CI -1.4 to 0.3]; calibration slope 2.2 [95%CI 0.7/3.7]). The RESP score with Plateau pressure had higher discrimination than the conventional RESP score. The cost per QALY in the USA, adjusted to life expectancy, was higher than USD 100 000 in patients older than 45 years with a PRESET > 10., Conclusion: The PRESET score had the highest predictive performance and could help in the selection of patients that benefit most from this resource-demanding and highly invasive organ support., (© 2022 International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Veno-venous extracorporeal life support (V-V ECLS or V-V ECMO) has been adopted as a rescue support in severe cases of COVID-19 ARDS. Initial reports on the use of V-V ECLS in COVID-19 patients reported very high mortality rates (57%-94%), but subsequent studies showed much lower rates (30%-40%). The aim of this study is to analyze demographic features, clinical course and outcomes of COVID-19 treated with V-V ECLS during the Italian 'third wave', in which the alpha variant was prevalent in the country., Methods: Single-center, retrospective observational study conducted at the ECLS referral center of a teaching hospital in Italy from January 1st, 2021 and October 31st, 2021., Results: Between January and October 2021, 18 consecutive adult patients who underwent V-V ECLS for severe ARDS due to COVID-19 were enrolled. Thirteen patients (72.2%) were male, and their median age was 50 years; the median P/F ratio before V-V ECLS initiation was 43 mm Hg (IQR, 40; 56), and the median RESP score was 0.5 (IQR, -2.25; 1.0). The mortality rate at 90 days was 55.6, compared to 55.7% in non-COVID patients in our center (p > 0.05); the median duration of ECLS was 29 days (IQR, 11; 32), compared to 10 days (IQR, 8; 15), in non-COVID patients (p = 0.004). Incidence of complications was high., Conclusions: In patients with COVID-19 ARDS receiving V-V ECLS, unadjusted mortality was similar to pre-pandemic V-V ECLS cases, while the duration of ECLS was almost three times longer and with frequent complications. This could be partly explained by the selection of very sick patients at the baseline that evolved to multiorgan failure during the course of ECLS., (© 2022 International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has shown variable results in COVID-19 pneumonia however, some evidence supports benefit. Here we compare our institution's ECMO outcomes across multiple waves of the COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: All patients who received ECMO for COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and March 1, 2021, were reviewed. Patients received venovenous (VV) or right ventricular assist device (RVAD/ECMO) ECMO. Early (March 1-July 6, 2020, Era 1) and late (July 7, 2020-March 1, 2021, Era 2) pandemic RVAD/ECMO patients were compared., Results: Fifty-four patients received ECMO of which 16 (29.6%) patients received VV ECMO and 38 (70.4%) RVAD/ECMO. Median age was 53.0 years, body mass index 36.1 kg/m 2 , 41.2% female, and 49% Caucasian. The most common pre-cannulation treatments included steroids (79.6%) and convalescent plasma (70.4%). Median time from admission to cannulation was 7.0 days. Median support time was 30.5 days (VV ECMO 35.0 days, RVAD/ECMO 26.0 days). In- hospital mortality was 42.6% (39.5% RVAD/ECMO, 50.0% VV ECMO). Significant morbidities included infection (80.8%), bleeding events (74.5%), and renal replacement therapy (30.8%). Cumulative mortality 120-days post-cannulation was 45.7% (VV ECMO 60.8%, RVAD/ECMO 40.0%). RVAD/ECMO Era 1 demonstrated a significantly lower cumulative mortality (16.2%) compared to Era 2 (60.4%). Competing risk analysis found age (HR 0.95, [95% CI 0.92, 0.98] p = 0.005) to be a protective factor for survival., Conclusion: ECMO support for COVID-19 is beneficial but carries significant morbidity. RVAD/ECMO support demonstrated consistent advantages in survival to VV-ECMO, but with declining efficacy across time during the COVID-19 pandemic., (© 2022 International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Despite increasing knowledge about the optimal treatment for patients with severe COVID-19, data from different cohorts suggested that survival of patients treated with ECMO seemed to decline over the course of the pandemic., Methods: In this non-interventional retrospective single-center registry study we analyzed all consecutive patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection and supported with VV ECMO in our center during the first three waves of the pandemic. From March 2020 through June 2021, 59 patients have been included., Results: Overall 90-day survival was 32%. Besides changes in drug treatment for COVID-19 and a lower PaO 2 /FiO 2 ratio before ECMO initiation during the third wave, all other patient baseline characteristics were similar during the three waves. Survival rate was highest during the first wave and lowest during the third wave, yet this difference was not statistically significant., Conclusions: VV ECMO has shown to be a feasible and safe support option for patients with severe respiratory failure due to COVID-19. The results from this single-center study confirm findings from other cohorts showing declining survival rates of patients treated with VV ECMO during the COVID-19 pandemic, however, the specific reasons for this finding remain unclear., (© 2022 The Authors. Artificial Organs published by International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Around 5% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients develop critical disease, with severe pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In these cases, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) may be considered when conventional therapy fails. This study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 patients with ARDS refractory to lung-protective ventilation and prone positioning on ECMO support, as well as to review the available literature on ECMO use and COVID-19 patients' outcome. Patients from this case series were selected from the Brazilian COVID-19 Registry. From the 7646 patients included in the registry, only eight received ECMO support (0.1%), in four hospitals. The median age of the entire sample was 59 (interquartile range 54.2-64.4) years old and 87.5% were male. Hypertension (50.0%), diabetes mellitus (50.0%) and obesity (37.5%) were the most frequent comorbidities. The indications for ECMO were PaO 2 /FiO 2 ratio <80 mm Hg for more than 6 h or PaO 2 /FiO 2 ratio <60 mm Hg for more than 3 h. The mortality rate was 87.5%. In conclusion, in this case series of COVID-19 patients with ARDS refractory to conventional therapy who received ECMO support, a very high mortality was observed. Our findings are not different from previous studies including a small number of patients; however, there is a huge difference from Extracorporeal Life Support Organization results, which encourages us to keep looking for improvement., (© 2021 International Center for Artificial Organs and Transplantation and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

The role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in the management of critically ill COVID-19 patients remains unclear. Our study aims to analyze the outcomes and risk factors from patients treated with ECMO. This retrospective, single-center study includes 17 COVID-19 patients treated with ECMO. Univariate and multivariate parametric survival regression identified predictors of survival. Nine patients (53%) were successfully weaned from ECMO and discharged. The incidence of in-hospital mortality was 47%. In a univariate analysis, only four out of 83 pre-ECMO variables were significantly different; IL-6, PCT, and NT-proBNP were significantly higher in non-survivors than in survivors. The Respiratory Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Survival Prediction (RESP) score was significantly higher in survivors. After a multivariate parametric survival regression, IL-6, NT-proBNP and RESP scores remained significant independent predictors, with hazard ratios (HR) of 1.069 [95%-CI: 0.986-1.160], P = .016 1.001 [95%-CI: 1.000-1.001], P = .012; and .843 [95%-CI: 0.564-1.260], P = .040, respectively. A prediction model comprising IL-6, NT-proBNP, and RESP score showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.87, with a sensitivity of 87.5% and 77.8% specificity compared to an AUC of 0.79 for the RESP score alone. The present study suggests that ECMO is a potentially lifesaving treatment for selected critically ill COVID-19 patients. Considering IL-6 and NT-pro-BNP, in addition to the RESP score, may enhance outcome predictions., (© 2020 International Center for Artificial Organs and Transplantation and Wiley Periodicals, LLC.)

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) is used to sustain blood oxygenation and decarboxylation in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). It is under debate if V-V ECMO is as appropriate for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) ARDS as it is for influenza. In this retrospective study, we analyzed all patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 or influenza A/B infection, ARDS and V-V ECMO, treated at our medical intensive care unit (ICU) between October 2010 and June 2020. Baseline and procedural characteristics as well as survival 30 days after ECMO cannulation were analyzed. A total of 62 V-V ECMO patients were included (15 with Covid-19 and 47 with influenza). Both groups had similar baseline characteristics at cannulation. Thirty days after ECMO cannulation, 13.3% of all patients with Covid-19 were discharged alive from our ICU compared to 44.7% with influenza (P = .03). Patients with Covid-19 had fewer ECMO-free days (0 (0-9.7) days vs. 13.2 (0-22.1) days; P = .05). Cumulative incidences of 30-day-survival showed no significant differences (48.6% in Covid-19 patients, 63.7% in influenza patients; P = .23). ICU treatment duration was significantly longer in ARDS patients with V-V ECMO for Covid-19 compared to influenza. Thirty-day mortality was higher in Covid-19, but not significant., (© 2020 The Authors. Artificial Organs published by International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is a means to support patients with acute respiratory failure. Initially, recommendations to treat severe cases of pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with ECLS have been restrained. In the meantime, ECLS has been shown to produce similar outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 compared to existing data on ARDS mortality. We performed an international email survey to assess how ECLS providers worldwide have previously used ECLS during the treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19. A questionnaire with 45 questions (covering, e.g., indication, technical aspects, benefit, and reasons for treatment discontinuation), mostly multiple choice, was distributed by email to ECLS centers. The survey was approved by the European branch of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO); 276 ECMO professionals from 98 centers in 30 different countries on four continents reported that they employed ECMO for very severe COVID-19 cases, mostly in veno-venous configuration (87%). The most common reason to establish ECLS was isolated hypoxemic respiratory failure (50%), followed by a combination of hypoxemia and hypercapnia (39%). Only a small fraction of patients required veno-arterial cannulation due to heart failure (3%). Time on ECLS varied between less than 2 and more than 4 weeks. The main reason to discontinue ECLS treatment prior to patient's recovery was lack of clinical improvement (53%), followed by major bleeding, mostly intracranially (13%). Only 4% of respondents reported that triage situations, lack of staff or lack of oxygenators, were responsible for discontinuation of ECLS support. Most ECLS physicians (51%, IQR 30%) agreed that patients with COVID-19-induced ARDS (CARDS) benefitted from ECLS. Overall mortality of COVID-19 patients on ECLS was estimated to be about 55%. ECLS has been utilized successfully during the COVID-19 pandemic to stabilize CARDS patients in hypoxemic or hypercapnic lung failure. Age and multimorbidity limited the use of ECLS. Triage situations were rarely a concern. ECLS providers stated that patients with severe COVID-19 benefitted from ECLS., (© 2021 International Center for Artificial Organs and Transplantation and Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Patients with severe respiratory failure due to COVID‐19 who are not under mechanical ventilation may develop severe hypoxemia when complicated with spontaneous pneumomediastinum (PM). These patients may be harmed by invasive ventilation. Alternatively, veno‐venous (V‐V) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) may be applied. We report on the efficacy of V‐V ECMO and invasive ventilation as initial advanced respiratory support in patients with COVID‐19 and acute respiratory failure due to spontaneous PM. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study performed between March 2020 and January 2022. Enrolled patients had COVID‐19 and acute respiratory failure due to spontaneous PM and were not invasively ventilated. Patients were treated in the intensive care unit (ICU) with invasive ventilation (invasive ventilation group) or V‐V ECMO support (V‐V ECMO group) as the main therapeutic option. The primary outcomes were mortality and ICU discharge at 90 days after ICU admission. Results: Twenty‐two patients were included in this study (invasive ventilation group: 13 [59%]; V‐V ECMO group: 9 [41%]). The V‐V ECMO strategy was significantly associated with lower mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.33 [95% CI 0.12–0.97], p = 0.04). Five (38%) patients in the V‐V ECMO group were intubated and eight (89%) patients in the invasive ventilation group required V‐V ECMO support within 30 days from ICU admission. Three (33%) patients in the V‐V ECMO group were discharged from ICU within 90 days compared to one (8%) patient in the invasive ventilation group (HR 4.71 [95% CI 0.48–45.3], p = 0.18). Conclusions: Preliminary data suggest that V‐V ECMO without invasive ventilation may improve survival in COVID‐19‐related acute respiratory failure due to spontaneous PM. The study's retrospective design and limited sample size underscore the necessity for additional investigation and warrant caution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The leading causes of maternal mortality include respiratory failure, cardiovascular events, infections, and hemorrhages. The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as rescue therapy in the peripartum period for cardiopulmonary failure is expanding in critical care medicine. Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted on a nationwide cohort in Israel. During the 3‐year period, between September 1, 2019, and August 31, 2022, all women in the peripartum period who had been supported by ECMO for respiratory or circulatory failure at 10 large Israeli hospitals were identified. Indications for ECMO, maternal and neonatal outcomes, details of ECMO support, and complications were collected. Results: During the 3‐year study period, in Israel, there were 540 234 live births, and 28 obstetric patients were supported by ECMO, with an incidence of 5.2 cases per 100 000 or 1 case per 19 000 births (when excluding patients with COVID‐19, the incidence will be 2.5 cases per 100 000 births). Of these, 25 were during the postpartum period, of which 16 (64%) were connected in the PPD1, and 3 were during pregnancy. Eighteen patients (64.3%) were supported by V‐V ECMO, 9 (32.1%) by V‐A ECMO, and one (3.6%) by a VV‐A configuration. Hypoxic respiratory failure (ARDS) was the most common indication for ECMO, observed in 21 patients (75%). COVID‐19 was the cause of ARDS in 15 (53.7%) patients. The indications for the V‐A configuration were cardiomyopathy (3 patients), amniotic fluid embolism (2 patients), sepsis, and pulmonary hypertension. The maternal and fetal survival rates were 89.3% (n = 25) and 100% (n = 28). The average ECMO duration was 17.6 ± 18.6 days and the ICU stay was 29.8 ± 23.8 days. Major bleeding complications requiring surgical intervention were observed in one patient. Conclusions: The incidence of using ECMO in the peripartum period is low. The maternal and neonatal survival rates in patients treated with ECMO are high. These results show that ECMO remains an important treatment option for obstetric patients with respiratory and/or cardiopulmonary failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a recognized method of support in patients with severe and refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) caused by SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. While veno‐venous (VV) ECMO is the most common type, some patients with severe hypoxemia may require modifications to the ECMO circuit. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of adding a second drainage cannula to the circuit in patients with refractory hypoxemia, on their gas exchange, mechanical ventilation, ECMO settings, and clinical outcomes. Methods: We conducted an observational retrospective study based on a single‐center institutional registry including all consecutive cases of COVID‐19 patients requiring ECMO admitted to the Centre of Extracorporeal Therapies in Warsaw between March 1, 2020 and March 1, 2022. We selected patients who had an additional drainage cannula inserted. Changes in ECMO and ventilator settings, blood oxygenation, and hemodynamic parameters, as well as clinical outcomes were assessed. Results: Of 138 VV ECMO patients, 12 (9%) patients met the inclusion criteria. Ten patients (83%) were men, and mean age was 42.2 ± 6.8. An addition of drainage cannula resulted in a significant raise in ECMO blood flow (4.77 ± 0.44 to 5.94 ± 0.81 [L/min]; p = 0.001), and the ratio of ECMO blood flow to ECMO pump rotations per minute (RPM), whereas the raise in ECMO RPM alone was not statistically significant (3432 ± 258 to 3673 ± 340 [1/min]; p = 0.064). We observed a significant drop in ventilator FiO2 and a raise in PaO2 to FiO2 ratio, while blood lactates did not change significantly. Nine patients died in hospital, one was referred to lung transplantation center, two were discharged uneventfully. Conclusions: The use of an additional drainage cannula in severe ARDS associated with COVID‐19 allows for an increased ECMO blood flow and improved oxygenation. However, we observed no further improvement in lung‐protective ventilation and poor survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Antithrombogenicity of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) devices, particularly oxygenators, is a current problem, with numerous studies and developments underway. However, there has been limited progress in developing methods to accurately compare the antithrombogenicity of oxygenators. Animal experiments are commonly conducted to evaluate the antithrombogenicity of devices; however, it is challenging to maintain a steady experimental environment. We propose an innovative experimental animal model to evaluate different devices in a constant experimental environment in real‐time. Methods: This model uses two venous–arterial ECMO circuits attached to one animal (one by jugular vein and carotid artery, one by femoral vein and artery) and real‐time assessment of thrombus formation in the oxygenator by indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging. Comparison studies were conducted using three pigs: one to compare different oxygenators (MERA vs. CAPIOX) (Case 1), and two to compare antithrombotic properties of the oxygenator (QUADROX) when used under different hydrodynamic conditions (continuous flow vs. pulsatile flow) (Cases 2 and 3). Results: Thrombi, visualized using ICG imaging, appeared as black dots on a white background in each oxygenator. In Case 1, differences in the site of thrombus formation and rate of thrombus growth were observed in real‐time in two oxygenators. In Case 2 and 3, the thrombus region was smaller in pulsatile than in continuous conditions. Conclusions: We devised an innovative experimental animal model for comparison of antithrombogenicity in ECMO circuits. This model enabled simultaneous evaluation of two different ECMO circuits under the same biological conditions and reduced the number of sacrificed experimental animals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Severe COVID‐19 can necessitate multiple organ support including veno‐venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vvECMO) and renal replacement therapy. The therapy can be complicated by venous thromboembolism due to COVID‐19‐related hypercoagulability, thus restricting vascular access beyond the vvECMO cannula. Although continuous renal replacement therapy can be performed via a vvECMO circuit, studies addressing sustained low‐efficiency dialysis (SLED) integration into vvECMO circuits are scarce. Here we address the lack of evidence by evaluating feasibility of SLED integration into vvECMO circuits. Methods: Retrospective cohort study on nine critically ill COVID‐19 patients, treated with integrated ECMO‐SLED on a single intensive care unit at a tertiary healthcare facility between December 2020 and November 2021. The SLED circuits were established between the accessory arterial oxygenator outlets of a double‐oxygenator vvECMO setup. Data on filter survival, quality of dialysis, and volume management were collected and compared with an internal control group receiving single SLED. Results: This study demonstrates general feasibility of SLED integration into existing vvECMO circuits. Filter lifespans of ECMO‐SLED compared with single SLED are significantly prolonged (median 18.3 h vs. 10.3 h, p < 0.01). ECMO‐SLED treatment is furthermore able to sufficiently normalize creatinine, blood urea nitrogen, and serum sodium, and allows for adequate ultrafiltration rates. Conclusions: We can show that ECMO‐SLED is practical, safe, results in adequate dialysis quality and enables sufficient electrolyte and volume management. Our data indicate that SLED devices can serve as potential alternative to continuous‐veno‐venous‐hemodialysis for integration in vvECMO circuits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To determine if a cannulation method for venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V‐V ECMO) is related to patient outcome. Methods: A retrospective, multicenter study of adult patients (≥18 years old) placed on V‐V ECMO for severe respiratory failure due to COVID‐19 between March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021. Patients were divided into the following three groups based on the initial cannulation method: (1) femoral vein‐femoral vein or femoral vein‐internal jugular vein (dual‐site, C‐DS), (2) single, dual‐lumen cannula in internal jugular vein with tip positioned in the pulmonary artery (C‐PA), and (3) single, dual‐lumen cannula in internal jugular vein with tip positioned in the inferior vena cava (C‐IVC). The primary outcome was in‐hospital mortality assessed by a time‐to‐event analysis. Results: Overall, 435 patients from 17 centers comprised the study cohort. C‐DS was performed in 247 (57%, age: 49, IQR:39–57 years; 30% female) cases, 99 (23%, age: 53, IQR: 42–59 years; 26% female) received C‐PA, and 89 (20%) patients got C‐IVC (age: 46, IQR 35–54; 33% female). At 90‐days, in‐hospital mortality was 60% (C‐DS), 41% (C‐PA), and 61% (C‐IVC), p = 0.06. After adjustment for clinical characteristics, the likelihood of in‐hospital mortality in comparison to C‐DS, was lower with C‐PA (aHR: 0.52, 95%CI 0.32–0.85, p = 0.009) and similar with C‐IVC (aHR: 0.96, 95%CI 0.63–1.47, p = 0.86). Conclusion: Catheter‐directed flow into the PA bypassing the right ventricle with a single dual‐lumen cannula is associated with reduced mortality during V‐V ECMO for COVID‐19. These findings are limited by residual confounding and site‐clustering. Further investigation is urgently warranted with randomized studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Myocardial damage occurs in up to 25% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) cases. While veno‐venous extracorporeal life support (V‐V ECLS) is used as respiratory support, mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may be required for severe cardiac dysfunction. This systematic review summarizes the available literature regarding MCS use rates, disease drivers for MCS initiation, and MCS outcomes in COVID‐19 patients. Methods: PubMed/EMBASE were searched until October 14, 2021. Articles including adults receiving ECLS for COVID‐19 were included. The primary outcome was the rate of MCS use. Secondary outcomes included mortality at follow‐up, ECLS conversion rate, intubation‐to‐cannulation time, time on ECLS, cardiac diseases, use of inotropes, and vasopressors. Results: Twenty‐eight observational studies (comprising both ECLS‐only populations and ECLS patients as part of larger populations) included 4218 COVID‐19 patients (females: 28.8%; median age: 54.3 years, 95%CI: 50.7–57.8) of whom 2774 (65.8%) required ECLS with the majority (92.7%) on V‐V ECLS, 4.7% on veno‐arterial ECLS and/or Impella, and 2.6% on other ECLS. Acute heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and cardiac arrest were reported in 7.8%, 9.7%, and 6.6% of patients, respectively. Vasopressors were used in 37.2%. Overall, 3.1% of patients required an ECLS change from V‐V ECLS to MCS for heart failure, myocarditis, or myocardial infarction. The median ECLS duration was 15.9 days (95%CI: 13.9–16.3), with an overall survival of 54.6% and 28.1% in V‐V ECLS and MCS patients. One study reported 61.1% survival with oxy‐right ventricular assist device. Conclusion: MCS use for cardiocirculatory compromise has been reported in 7.3% of COVID‐19 patients requiring ECLS, which is a lower percentage compared to the incidence of any severe cardiocirculatory complication. Based on the poor survival rates, further investigations are warranted to establish the most appropriated indications and timing for MCS in COVID‐19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Veno‐venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V‐V ECMO) support is increasingly used in the management of COVID‐19‐related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the clinical decision‐making to initiate V‐V ECMO for severe COVID‐19 still remains unclear. In order to determine the optimal timing and patient selection, we investigated the outcomes of both COVID‐19 and non‐COVID‐19 patients undergoing V‐V ECMO support. Methods: Overall, 138 patients were included in this study. Patients were stratified into two cohorts: those with COVID‐19 and non‐COVID‐19 ARDS. Results: The survival in patients with COVID‐19 was statistically similar to non‐COVID‐19 patients (p =.16). However, the COVID‐19 group demonstrated higher rates of bleeding (p =.03) and thrombotic complications (p <.001). The duration of V‐V ECMO support was longer in COVID‐19 patients compared to non‐COVID‐19 patients (29.0 ± 27.5 vs 15.9 ± 19.6 days, p <.01). Most notably, in contrast to the non‐COVID‐19 group, we found that COVID‐19 patients who had been on a ventilator for longer than 7 days prior to ECMO had 100% mortality without a lung transplant. Conclusions: These findings suggest that COVID‐19‐associated ARDS was not associated with a higher post‐ECMO mortality than non‐COVID‐19‐associated ARDS patients, despite longer duration of extracorporeal support. Early initiation of V‐V ECMO is important for improved ECMO outcomes in COVID‐19 ARDS patients. Since late initiation of ECMO was associated with extremely high mortality related to lack of pulmonary recovery, it should be used judiciously or as a bridge to lung transplantation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose: The coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic posed severe difficulties in managing critically ill patients in hospital care settings. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support has been proven to be lifesaving support during the SARS‐CoV‐2 outbreak. The purpose of this review was to describe the rehabilitative treatments provided to patients undergoing ECMO support during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods: We searched PubMed and Scopus for English‐language studies published from the databases' inception until June 30, 2021. We excluded editorials, letters to the editor, and studies that did not describe rehabilitative procedures during ECMO support. We also excluded those articles not written in English. Results: A total of 50 articles were identified. We ultimately included nine studies, seven of which were case reports. Only two studies had more than one patient; an observational design analyzing the clinical course of 19 patients and a case series of three patients. Extracorporeal support duration varied from 9 to 49 days, and the primary indication was acute respiratory distress syndrome COVID‐19‐related. Rehabilitative treatment mainly consisted of in‐bed mobilization, postural transfers (including sitting), and respiratory exercises. After hospital discharge, patients were referred to rehabilitation facilities. Physiotherapeutic interventions provided during ECMO support and after its discontinuation were feasible and safe. Conclusion: The physiotherapeutic treatment of patients undergoing ECMO support includes several components and must be provided in a multidisciplinary context. The optimal approach depends on the patient's status, including sedation, level of consciousness, ECMO configuration, types of cannulas, and cannulation site. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) plays an important role in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Management of thrombi in ECMO is generally an important issue; especially in ECMO for COVID‐19 patients who are prone to thrombus formation, the thrombus formation in oxygenators is an unresolved issue, and it is very difficult to deal with. To prevent thromboembolic complications, it is necessary to develop a method for early thrombus detection. We developed a novel method for detailed real‐time observation of thrombi formed in oxygenators using indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging. The purpose of this study was to verify the efficacy of this novel method through animal experiments. The experiments were performed three times using three pigs equipped with veno‐arterial ECMO comprising a centrifugal pump (CAPIOX SL) and an oxygenator (QUADROX). To create thrombogenic conditions, the pump flow rate was set at 1 L/min without anticoagulation. The diluted ICG (0.025 mg/mL) was intravenously administered at a dose of 10 mL once an hour. A single dose of ICG was 0.25mg. The oxygenator was observed with both an optical detector (PDE‐neo) and the naked eye every hour after measurement initiation for a total of 8 hours. With this dose of ICG, we could observe it by fluorescence imaging for about 15 minutes. Under ICG imaging, the inside of the oxygenator was observed as a white area. A black dot suspected to be the thrombus appeared 6‐8 hours after measurement initiation. The thrombus and the black dot on ICG imaging were finely matched in terms of morphology. Thus, we succeeded in real‐time thrombus detection in an oxygenator using ICG imaging. The combined use of ICG imaging and conventional routine screening tests could compensate for each other's weaknesses and significantly improve the safety of ECMO. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prognosis of patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is poor. This is especially true for immunosuppressed patients. It is controverisal whether these patients should receive veno‐venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) while evidence on this topic is sparse. We report retrospective data of a single‐center registry of patients with severe ARDS requiring ECMO support between October 2010 and June 2019. Patients were analyzed by their status of immunosuppression. ECMO weaning success and hospital survival were analyzed before and after propensity score matching (PSM). Moreover, ventilator free days (VFD) were compared. A total of 288 patients were analyzed (age 55 years, 67% male), 88 (31%) presented with immunosuppression. Survival rates were lower in immunosuppressed patients (27% vs. 53%, P <.001 and 27% vs. 48% after PSM, P =.006). VFD (60 days) were lower for patients with immunosuppression (11.9 vs. 22.4, P <.001), and immunosuppression was an independent predictor for mortality in multivariate analysis. Hospital survival was 20%, 14%, 35%, and 46% for patients with oncological malignancies, solid organ transplantation, autoimmune diseases, and HIV, respectively. In this analysis immunosuppression was an independent predictor for mortality. However, there were major differences in the weaning and survival rates between the etiologies of immunosuppression which should be considered in decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Veno‐venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) is an effective and proven adjunct support for various severe respiratory failures requiring invasive mechanical ventilation and cardiovascular support. In response to the rapidly increasing number of COVID‐19 patients in Japan, we launched an ECMO support team comprised of multidisciplinary experts including physicians, nurses, perfusionists, and bioethicists in preparation for the threat of a pandemic. From April 2 to July 15, 2020, Tokyo Medical and Dental University hospital treated 104 PCR confirmed COVID‐19 patients. Among those, 34 patients were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) and 5 patients required VV ECMO. All management related to ECMO was decided by the ECMO support team in addition to participation of the ECMO support team in daily multidisciplinary rounds in the ICU. Median age was 54 years old. Duration from onset to mechanical ventilation (MV) and MV to ECMO were 8 and 7 days, respectively. Four patients (80%) were successfully weaned off from ECMO. One patient died after 81 days of ECMO run. Four patients were discharged and recovered to their prehospital quality of life without major disability. We achieved a high survival rate using ECMO in our low volume ECMO institution during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Multidisciplinary decision‐making and a team approach for the unclear pathology with an emerging infectious disease was effective and contributed to the survival rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Similarly, ECMO for COVID-19 related ARDS was discussed from the French perspective by Dr. Matthieu Schmidt from Piié Salpetrière Hospital and Dr. Keiki Shimizu the Japanese experience, Dr. Xiaotong Hou the Chinese experience, Dr. Urvi Shukla the Indian experience and Dr. Eva Marwali the Indonesian experience. Dr. Chiao-Feng Cheng from National Taiwan University received the second-place award for his abstract on ECMO in immunocompromised patients with ARDS. The Asia-Pacific Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (APELSO) is the Asia-Pacific Chapter of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO), which had its first meeting in Melbourne, July 2012, hosted by Dr. Vin Pellegrino from the Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, and Dr. Steve Conrad, then the Chair of the Global ELSO Steering Committee. [Extracted from the article]

Lung transplantation may be a final destination therapy in lung failure, but limited donor organ availability creates a need for alternative management, including artificial lung technology. This invited review discusses ongoing developments and future research pathways for respiratory assist devices and tissue engineering to treat advanced and refractory lung disease. An overview is also given on the aftermath of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and lessons learned as the world comes out of this situation. The first order of business in the future of lung support is solving the problems with existing mechanical devices. Interestingly, challenges identified during the early days of development persist today. These challenges include device‐related infection, bleeding, thrombosis, cost, and patient quality of life. The main approaches of the future directions are to repair, restore, replace, or regenerate the lungs. Engineering improvements to hollow fiber membrane gas exchangers are enabling longer term wearable systems and can be used to bridge lung failure patients to transplantation. Progress in the development of microchannel‐based devices has provided the concept of biomimetic devices that may even enable intracorporeal implantation. Tissue engineering and cell‐based technologies have provided the concept of bioartificial lungs with properties similar to the native organ. Recent progress in artificial lung technologies includes continued advances in both engineering and biology. The final goal is to achieve a truly implantable and durable artificial lung that is applicable to destination therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this document was to inform the scientific community of sparse preliminary results regarding advanced supportive therapies and technology‐driven systems in addition to highlighting the benefits and possibilities of performing concise research during challenging times. Advanced organ support for lung and heart offers the possibility to buy the time needed for recovery. However, remaining a bridging strategy, extracorporeal life support cannot act as the ultimate treatment for the underlying COVID‐19 disease. Appropriate patient selection criteria addressed by experts and scientific organizations, such as Extracorporeal Life Support Organization and World Health Organization, may provide significant help in the difficult decision‐making and to reduce mortality in patients with profound respiratory and/or cardiac failure due to COVID‐19. Severe, systemic cytokine‐mediated inflammation associated with the SARS‐CoV‐2 has also been described. Effects of crosstalk between coagulation and inflammatory pathways appear to significantly affect disease progression and lead to poor outcomes. Multiple therapeutic strategies, including antibody therapies (such as Tocilizumab, Sarilumab, Siltuximab), therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE), and blood purification techniques for direct removal of cytokines, including filtration, dialysis (diffusion), and adsorption are available. Further, we believe, that research should be facilitated and promoted, particularly under the guidance of recognized scientific societies or expert‐based multicenter investigation, with rapid communication of critical and relevant information to enhance better appraisal of patient profiles, complications, and treatment modalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

2021;593:249-54. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03506-2 B Ultrasonic b B implant can monitor post-transplant tissue oxygenation b A team of biomedical engineers from Berkeley, CA, have successfully designed a luminescent oxygenation sensor as an alternative to more invasive methods of evaluating post-transplant graft viability. B ECMO b B with Cytosorb device in COVID-19 associated with higher mortality b Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been utilized as a life-preserving measure for some patients with severe COVID-19 respiratory failure. In a single-center randomized controlled trial, 34 patients requiring ECMO were randomly assigned to receiving ECMO alone or ECMO with Cytosorb at the time of initiation. [Extracted from the article]