Search

Use of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasing, but candidacy selection processes are variable and subject to bias. What are the reasons behind venovenous ECMO candidacy decisions, and are decisions made consistently across patients? Prospective observational study of all patients, admitted or outside hospital referrals, considered for venovenous ECMO at a tertiary referral center. Relevant clinical data and reasons for candidacy determination were cross-referenced with other noncandidates and candidates and were assessed qualitatively. Eighty-one consultations resulted in 44 noncandidates (54%), 29 candidates (36%; nine of whom subsequently underwent cannulation), and eight deferred decisions (10%). Fifteen unique contraindications were identified, variably present across all patients. Five contraindications were invoked as the sole reason to deny ECMO to a patient. In patients with three or more contraindications, additional contraindications were cited even if the severity was relatively minor. All but four contraindications invoked to deny ECMO to a patient were nonprohibitive for at least one other candidate. Contraindications documented in noncandidates were present but not mentioned in 21 other noncandidates (47%). Twenty-six candidates (90%) had at least one contraindication that was prohibitive in a noncandidate, including a contraindication that was the sole reason to deny ECMO. Contraindications were proposed as informing three prognostic domains, through which patterns of inconsistency could be understood better: (1) irreversible underlying pulmonary process, (2) unsurvivable critical illness, and (3) clinical condition too compromised for meaningful recovery. ECMO candidacy decisions are inconsistent. We identified four patterns of inconsistency in our center and propose a three-domain model for understanding and categorizing contraindications, yielding five lessons that may improve candidacy decision processes until further research can guide practice more definitively. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lung transplantation is a lifesaving intervention for people with advanced lung disease, but it is costly and resource-intensive. To investigate the cost-effectiveness of lung transplantation as a treatment option in pulmonary disease, we must understand costs attributable to end-of-life hospitalizations for end-stage lung disease. What are the costs associated with end-of-life hospitalizations for people with pulmonary disease, and how have these trends changed over time? Adults aged 18 to 74 years with hospitalization data in the Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample data from 2009 to 2019 with a pulmonary disease admission were included in this analysis. Those with a history of lung transplantation were excluded. International Classification of Diseases codes were used to identify pulmonary disease admissions, complications, and procedures and interventions. Total charges were calculated for hospitalizations and stratified by patient status at time of discharge. Trends in charges over time were assessed by demographic and hospital factors. One hundred nine thousand nine hundred twenty-four (4.1%) hospital admissions for pulmonary disease resulted in in-hospital mortality. Those with obstructive lung disease accounted for 94.1% of hospitalizations and 88.1% cases of in-hospital mortality. Estimated costs for end-of-life hospitalizations were $29,981 on average with wide variation in cost by diagnosis and procedure utilization. Inpatient costs were highest for younger people who received more procedures. Among the most expensive admissions, mechanical ventilation accounted for the greatest proportion of interventions. Significant increases in the use of mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and dialysis occurred over the time period. The rate of hospital transfers increased with a proportionately greater increase across admissions resulting in in-hospital mortality. Costs accrued during end-of-life hospitalizations vary across people but represent a significant health care cost that can be averted for selected people who undergo lung transplantation. These costs should be considered in studies of cost-effectiveness in lung transplantation. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]