Search

Purpose: Patients receiving venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) frequently develop arterial hyperoxaemia, which may be harmful. However, lower oxygen saturation targets may also lead to harmful episodes of hypoxaemia. Methods: In this registry-embedded, multicentre trial, we randomly assigned adult patients receiving VA-ECMO in an intensive care unit (ICU) to either a conservative (target SaO2 92–96%) or to a liberal oxygen strategy (target SaO2 97–100%) through controlled oxygen administration via the ventilator and ECMO gas blender. The primary outcome was the number of ICU-free days to day 28. Secondary outcomes included ICU-free days to day 60, mortality, ECMO and ventilation duration, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, and functional outcomes at 6 months. Results: From September 2019 through June 2023, 934 patients who received VA-ECMO were reported to the EXCEL registry, of whom 300 (192 cardiogenic shock, 108 refractory cardiac arrest) were recruited. We randomised 149 to a conservative and 151 to a liberal oxygen strategy. The median number of ICU-free days to day 28 was similar in both groups (conservative: 0 days [interquartile range (IQR) 0–13.7] versus liberal: 0 days [IQR 0–13.7], median treatment effect: 0 days [95% confidence interval (CI) – 3.1 to 3.1]). Mortality at day 28 (59/159 [39.6%] vs 59/151 [39.1%]) and at day 60 (64/149 [43%] vs 62/151 [41.1%] were similar in conservative and liberal groups, as were all other secondary outcomes and adverse events. The conservative group experienced 44 (29.5%) major protocol deviations compared to 2 (1.3%) in the liberal oxygen group (P < 0.001). Conclusions: In adults receiving VA-ECMO in ICU, a conservative compared to a liberal oxygen strategy, did not affect the number of ICU-free days to day 28. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) is an integral part of the management algorithm of patients with severe respiratory failure refractory to evidence-based conventional treatments. Right ventricular injury (RVI) pertaining to abnormalities in the dimensions and/or function of the right ventricle (RV) in the context of VV-ECMO significantly influences mortality. However, in the absence of a universally accepted RVI definition and evidence-based guidance for the management of RVI in this very high-risk patient cohort, variations in clinical practice continue to exist. Methods: Following a systematic search of the literature, an international Steering Committee consisting of eight healthcare professionals involved in the management of patients receiving ECMO identified domains and knowledge gaps pertaining to RVI definition and management where the evidence is limited or ambiguous. Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 52 Experts developed Expert position statements in those areas. The process also conferred RV-centric overarching open questions for future research. Consensus was defined as achieved when 70% or more of the Experts agreed or disagreed on a Likert-scale statement or when 80% or more of the Experts agreed on a particular option in multiple‐choice questions. Results: The Delphi process was conducted through four rounds and consensus was achieved on 31 (89%) of 35 statements from which 24 Expert position statements were derived. Expert position statements provided recommendations for RVI nomenclature in the setting of VV-ECMO, a multi-modal diagnostic approach to RVI, the timing and parameters of diagnostic echocardiography, and VV-ECMO settings during RVI assessment and management. Consensus was not reached on RV-protective driving pressure thresholds or the effect of prone positioning on patient-centric outcomes. Conclusion: The proposed definition of RVI in the context of VV-ECMO needs to be validated through a systematic aggregation of data across studies. Until further evidence emerges, the Expert position statements can guide informed decision-making in the management of these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bedside ultrasound represents a well-suited diagnostic and monitoring tool for patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) who may be too unstable for transport to other hospital areas for diagnostic tests. The role of ultrasound, however, starts even before ECMO initiation. Every patient considered for ECMO should have a thorough ultrasonographic assessment of cardiac and valvular function, as well as vascular anatomy without delaying ECMO cannulation. The role of pre-ECMO ultrasound is to confirm the indication for ECMO, identify clinical situations for which ECMO is not indicated, rule out contraindications, and inform the choice of ECMO configuration. During ECMO cannulation, the use of vascular and cardiac ultrasound reduces the risk of complications and ensures adequate cannula positioning. Ultrasound remains key for monitoring during ECMO support and troubleshooting ECMO complications. For instance, ultrasound is helpful in the assessment of drainage insufficiency, hemodynamic instability, biventricular function, persistent hypoxemia, and recirculation on venovenous (VV) ECMO. Lung ultrasound can be used to monitor signs of recovery on VV ECMO. Brain ultrasound provides valuable diagnostic and prognostic information on ECMO. Echocardiography is essential in the assessment of readiness for liberation from venoarterial (VA) ECMO. Lastly, post decannulation ultrasound mainly aims at identifying post decannulation thrombosis and vascular complications. This review will cover the role of head-to-toe ultrasound for the management of adult ECMO patients from decision to initiate ECMO to the post decannulation phase. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly used to support patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The impact of ECMO on long-term outcomes of patients with severe ARDS is unclear. Methods: We searched electronic databases from inception to January 17th 2023. We selected clinical trials and observational studies reporting on long-term outcomes of patients supported with ECMO for ARDS. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included cognitive function, mental health, functional status, respiratory symptoms, and return to work. Results: Of the 7126 screened citations, 1 randomized clinical trial and 31 observational studies were included, of which 7 compared conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) and ECMO. Overall quality of studies of the included studies was limited, with the majority being either low (45%) or fair (32%) quality. There was no significant difference in HRQoL measured with the SF-36 score between ECMO and CMV patients (physical component score [PCS]: mean difference 3.91 (− 6.22 to 14.05), mental component score [MCS] mean difference 1.33 (− 3.93 to 6.60)). There was no difference between cognitive function, mental health, functional status, and respiratory symptoms between ECMO and CMV, but data available for comparison were limited. There were high rates of disability for ECMO survivors with 49% of patients returning to work and 23% needing assistance at home on follow-up. Conclusion: Survivors of ECMO for ARDS experience significant disability in multiple domains. Further studies are needed to examine the effect of ECMO on long-term outcomes of patients compared to CMV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a complex and high-risk life support modality used in severe cardiorespiratory failure. ECMO survival scores are used clinically for patient prognostication and outcomes risk adjustment. This study aims to create the first artificial intelligence (AI)-driven ECMO survival score to predict in-hospital mortality based on a large international patient cohort. Methods: A deep neural network, ECMO Predictive Algorithm (ECMO PAL) was trained on a retrospective cohort of 18,167 patients from the international Extracorporeal Life Support Organisation (ELSO) registry (2017–2020), and performance was measured using fivefold cross-validation. External validation was performed on all adult registry patients from 2021 (N = 5015) and compared against existing prognostication scores: SAVE, Modified SAVE, and ECMO ACCEPTS for predicting in-hospital mortality. Results: Mean age was 56.8 ± 15.1 years, with 66.7% of patients being male and 50.2% having a pre-ECMO cardiac arrest. Cross-validation demonstrated an inhospital mortality sensitivity and precision of 82.1 ± 0.2% and 77.6 ± 0.2%, respectively. Validation accuracy was only 2.8% lower than training accuracy, reducing from 75.5% to 72.7% [99% confidence interval (CI) 71.1–74.3%]. ECMO PAL accuracy outperformed the ECMO ACCEPTS (54.7%), SAVE (61.1%), and Modified SAVE (62%) scores. Conclusions: ECMO PAL is the first AI-powered ECMO survival score trained and validated on large international patient cohorts. ECMO PAL demonstrated high generalisability across ECMO regions and outperformed existing, widely used scores. Beyond ECMO, this study highlights how large international registry data can be leveraged for AI prognostication for complex critical care therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly being used for patients with severe respiratory failure and has received particular attention during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Evidence from two key randomized controlled trials, a subsequent post hoc Bayesian analysis, and meta-analyses support the interpretation of a benefit of ECMO in combination with ultra-lung-protective ventilation for select patients with very severe forms of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). During the pandemic, new evidence has emerged helping to better define the role of ECMO for patients with COVID-19. Results from large cohorts suggest outcomes during the first wave of the pandemic were similar to those in non-COVID-19 cohorts. As the pandemic continued, mortality of patients supported with ECMO has increased. However, the precise reasons for this observation are unclear. Known risk factors for mortality in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients are higher patient age, concomitant extra-pulmonary organ failures or malignancies, prolonged mechanical ventilation before ECMO, less experienced treatment teams and lower ECMO caseloads in the treating center. ECMO is a high resource-dependent support option; therefore, it should be used judiciously, and its availability may need to be constrained when resources are scarce. More evidence from high-quality research is required to better define the role and limitations of ECMO in patients with severe COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has become an established therapy for severe respiratory failure in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The added benefit of receiving ECMO in COVID-19 remains uncertain. The aim of this study is to analyse the impact of receiving ECMO at specialist centres on hospital mortality. Methods: A multi-centre retrospective study was conducted in COVID-19 patients from 111 hospitals, referred to two specialist ECMO centres in the United Kingdom (UK) (March 2020 to February 2021). Detailed covariate data were contemporaneously curated from electronic referral systems. We analysed added benefit of ECMO treatment in specialist centres using propensity score matching techniques. Results: 1363 patients, 243 receiving ECMO, were analysed. The best matching technique generated 209 matches, with a marginal odds ratio (OR) for mortality of 0.44 (95% CI 0.29–0.68, p < 0.001) and absolute mortality reduction of 18.2% (44% vs 25.8%, p < 0.001) for treatment with ECMO in a specialist centre. Conclusion: We found ECMO provided at specialist centres conferred significant survival benefit. Where resources and specialism allow, ECMO should be widely offered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The question of whether cancer patients with severe respiratory failure benefit from veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) remains unanswered. We, therefore, analyzed clinical characteristics and outcomes of a large cohort of cancer patients treated with vv-ECMO with the aim to identify prognostic factors. Methods: 297 cancer patients from 19 German and Austrian hospitals who underwent vv-ECMO between 2009 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. A multivariable cox proportional hazards analysis for overall survival was performed. In addition, a propensity score-matched analysis and a latent class analysis were conducted. Results: Patients had a median age of 56 (IQR 44–65) years and 214 (72%) were males. 159 (54%) had a solid tumor and 138 (47%) a hematologic malignancy. The 60-day overall survival rate was 26.8% (95% CI 22.1–32.4%). Low platelet count (HR 0.997, 95% CI 0.996–0.999; p = 0.0001 per 1000 platelets/µl), elevated lactate levels (HR 1.048, 95% CI 1.012–1.084; p = 0.0077), and disease status (progressive disease [HR 1.871, 95% CI 1.081–3.238; p = 0.0253], newly diagnosed [HR 1.571, 95% CI 1.044–2.364; p = 0.0304]) were independent adverse prognostic factors for overall survival. A propensity score-matched analysis with patients who did not receive ECMO treatment showed no significant survival advantage for treatment with ECMO. Conclusion: The overall survival of cancer patients who require vv-ECMO is poor. This study shows that the value of vv-ECMO in cancer patients with respiratory failure is still unclear and further research is needed. The risk factors identified in the present analysis may help to better select patients who may benefit from vv-ECMO. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Previous studies support the potential efficacy of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vvECMO) for improving survival in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) cases. Prone positioning (PP) has been shown to improve the outcomes of moderate-to-severe ARDS patients. Few studies and no randomized controlled trials have evaluated the effect of PP performed in ECMO patients. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effect of prone positioning for ARDS patients receiving vvECMO on survival. All authors were contacted to obtain complementary information not mentioned in the original articles. The main objective was to compare 28-day survival in vvECMO patients with PP to vvECMO patients without PP (controls). Results: Thirteen studies with a combined population of 1836 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. PP was associated with a significant improvement in 28-day survival (503 survivors among 681 patients in the PP group [74%; 95% CI 71–77] vs. 450 survivors among 770 patients in the control group [58%, 95% CI 55–62]; RR 1.31 [95% CI 1.21–1.41]; I2 22% [95% CI 0–62%]; P < 0.0001). Survival was also improved in terms of other endpoints (60-day survival, 90-day survival, ICU survival, and hospital survival). In contrast, the duration of mechanical ventilation was increased in vvECMO patients with PP (mean difference 11.4 days [95% CI 9.2–13.5]; 0.64 [95% CI 0.50–0.78]; I2 8%; P < 0.0001). Conclusion: According to this meta-analysis, survival was improved when prone positioning was used in ARDS patients receiving vvECMO. The impact of this combination on survival should be investigated in prospective randomized controlled trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]