Search

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) provides temporary mechanical circulatory support and simultaneous extracorporeal gas exchange for acute cardiorespiratory failure. By providing circulatory support, VA-ECMO gives treatments time to reach optimal efficacy or may be used as a bridge to a more durable mechanical solution for patients with acute cardiopulmonary failure. It is commonly used when a readily reversible etiology of decompensation is identified with very strict inclusion criteria for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation use. We present a unique case in which VA-ECMO/extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation was used after cardiac arrest with pulseless electrical activity in a patient with recurrent lymphoma of the left thigh with recent autologous stem cell transplant. • Coronary interventions and other therapeutic strategies in the setting of malignancy and pancytopenia require individualized, comprehensive, multidisciplinary approaches. • Patients with cancer who survive out-of-hospital cardiac arrest are less likely to receive postresuscitation treatment than patients without cancer. • When there is a potentially reversible cause of acute cardiopulmonary failure, VA-ECMO can provide temporary mechanical support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Outcomes of patients requiring venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) vary greatly by etiology, but large studies that incorporate the spectrum of shock supported with ECMO are rare. The purpose of this study was to describe the etiology-related outcome of patients with shock supported with peripheral VA-ECMO. All consecutive adults with peripheral VA-ECMO between January 2015 and August 2018 at Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital (Paris, France) were included in this retrospective observational study. The indication for VA-ECMO was cardiogenic shock. Rates of hospital death and neurological, renal, and pulmonary complications were evaluated according to etiology. Among 1,253 patients, hospital and 5-year survival rates were, respectively, 73.3% and 57.3% for primary graft failure, 58.6% and 54.0% for drug overdose, 53.2% and 45.3% for dilated cardiomyopathy, 51.6% and 50.0% for arrhythmic storm, 46.8% and 38.3% for massive pulmonary embolism, 44.4% and 42.4% for sepsis-induced cardiogenic shock, 37.9% and 32.9% for fulminant myocarditis, 37.3% and 31.5% for acute myocardial infarction, 34.6% and 33.3% for postcardiotomy excluding primary graft failure, 25.7% and 22.8% for other/unknown etiology, and 11.1% and 0.0% for refractory vasoplegia shock. Renal failure requiring hemodialysis developed in 50.0%, neurological complications in 16.0%, and hydrostatic pulmonary edema in 9.0%. Although the outcome differs depending on etiology, this difference is related more to the severity of the situation associated with the cause rather than the cause of the shock per se. Survival to 5 years varied by cause, which may reflect the natural course of the chronic disease and illustrates the need for long-term follow-up. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adults who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 can develop a multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-A), including fulminant myocarditis. Yet, several patients fail to meet MIS-A criteria, suggesting the existence of distinct phenotypes in fulminant COVID-19-related myocarditis.Objectives: This study sought to compare the characteristics and clinical outcome between patients with fulminant COVID-19-related myocarditis fulfilling MIS-A criteria (MIS-A+) or not (MIS-A-).Methods: A monocentric retrospective analysis of consecutive fulminant COVID-19-related myocarditis in a 26-bed intensive care unit (ICU).Results: Between March 2020 and June 2021, 38 patients required ICU admission (male 66%; mean age 32 ± 15 years) for suspected fulminant COVID-19-related myocarditis. In-ICU treatment for organ failure included dobutamine 79%, norepinephrine 60%, mechanical ventilation 50%, venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation 42%, and renal replacement therapy 29%. In-hospital mortality was 13%. Twenty-five patients (66%) met the MIS-A criteria. MIS-A- patients compared with MIS-A+ patients were characterized by a shorter delay between COVID-19 symptoms onset and myocarditis, a lower left ventricular ejection fraction, and a higher rate of in-ICU organ failure, and were more likely to require mechanical circulatory support with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (92% vs 16%; P < 0.0001). In-hospital mortality was higher in MIS-A- patients (31% vs 4%). MIS-A+ had higher circulating levels of interleukin (IL)-22, IL-17, and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), whereas MIS-A- had higher interferon-α2 (IFN-α2) and IL-8 levels. RNA polymerase III autoantibodies were present in 7 of 13 MIS-A- patients (54%) but in none of the MIS-A+ patients.Conclusion: MIS-A+ and MIS-A- fulminant COVID-19-related myocarditis patients have 2 distinct phenotypes with different clinical presentations, prognosis, and immunological profiles. Differentiating these 2 phenotypes is relevant for patients' management and further understanding of their pathophysiology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) increases left ventricular (LV) afterload, potentially provoking LV distention and impairing recovery. LV mechanical unloading (MU) with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD) can prevent LV distension, potentially at the risk of more complications, and net clinical benefit remains uncertain.Objectives: This study aims to determine the association between MU and outcomes for patients undergoing VA-ECMO.Methods: The authors queried the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry for adults receiving peripheral VA-ECMO from 2010 to 2019 and stratified them by MU with IABP or pVAD. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes included on-support mortality and complications during VA-ECMO.Results: Among 12,734 VA-ECMO patients, 3,399 (26.7%) received MU: 2,782 (82.9%) IABP and 580 (17.1%) pVAD. MU patients were older (age 56.3 vs 52.7 years) and, before extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, more often required >2 vasopressors (41.7% vs 27.2%) and had respiratory (21.1% vs 15.9%), renal (24.6% vs 15.8%), and liver failure (4.4% vs 3.1%) (all P < 0.001). MU patients had lower in-hospital mortality (56.6% vs 59.3%, P = 0.006), which persisted in multivariable modeling (adjusted OR [aOR]: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.77-0.92; P < 0.001). MU was associated with more cannula site bleeding (aOR: 1.25; 95% CI: 1.11-1.40; P < 0.001) and hemolysis (aOR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.03-1.57; P = 0.02). Compared to pVAD, MU patients with IABP had similar mortality (aOR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.64-1.01; P = 0.06) and less medical bleeding (aOR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.31-0.64; P < 0.001), cannula site bleeding (aOR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.54-0.96; P = 0.03), and renal injury (aOR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.62-0.98; P = 0.03).Conclusions: Among adults receiving VA-ECMO, MU was associated with lower in-hospital mortality despite increased complications including hemolysis and cannulation site bleeding. Compared to pVAD, MU with IABP was associated with similar mortality and lower complication rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The decision to implant durable mechanical circulatory systems (MCSs) in patients on extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is challenging due to expected poor outcomes in these patients.Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify outcome predictors that may facilitate future patient selection and decision making.Methods: The Durable MCS after ECLS registry is a multicenter retrospective study that gathered data on consecutive patients who underwent MCS implantation after ECLS between January 2010 and August 2018 in 11 high-volume European centers. Several perioperative parameters were collected. The primary endpoint was survival at 1 year after durable MCS implantation.Results: A total of 531 durable MCSs after ECLS were implanted during this period. The average patient age was 53 ± 12 years old. ECLS cannulation was peripheral in 87% of patients and 33% of the patients had history of cardiopulmonary resuscitation before ECLS implantation. The 30-day, 1-year, and 3-year actuarial survival rates were 77%, 53%, and 43%, respectively. The following predictors for 1-year outcome have been observed: age, female sex, lactate value, Model of End-Stage Liver Disease XI score, history of atrial fibrillation, redo surgery, and body mass index >30 kg/m2. On the basis of this data, a risk score and an app to estimate 1-year mortality was created.Conclusions: The outcome in patients receiving durable MCS after ECLS remains limited, yet preoperative factors may allow differentiating futile patients from those with significant survival benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a widely used form of mechanical circulatory support in patients with refractory cardiogenic shock. A common drawback of this modality is a resultant increase in left ventricular afterload.Objectives: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy and safety of left ventricular unloading strategies during VA-ECMO in adult patients with cardiogenic shock.Methods: The authors performed a systematic search of studies examining left ventricular unloading during VA-ECMO in Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included limb ischemia, bleeding, need for renal replacement therapy, multiorgan failure, stroke or transient ischemic attack, and hemolysis.Results: Of 2,221 publications identified, 17 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. In total, outcomes in 3,997 patients were included with 1,696 (42%) receiving a concomitant left ventricular unloading strategy while on VA-ECMO (intra-aortic balloon pump 91.7%, percutaneous ventricular assist device 5.5%, pulmonary vein or transseptal left atrial cannulation 2.8%). There were 2,412 deaths (60%) in the total cohort. Mortality was lower in patients with (54%) versus without (65%) left ventricular unloading while on VA-ECMO (risk ratio: 0.79; 95% confidence interval: 0.72 to 0.87; p < 0.00001). Hemolysis was higher in patients who underwent VA-ECMO with left ventricular unloading. Otherwise, secondary outcomes were not demonstrably different in patients treated with VA-ECMO with versus without left ventricular unloading.Conclusions: In observational studies, left ventricular unloading was associated with decreased mortality in adult patients with cardiogenic shock treated with VA-ECMO. In the absence of prospective randomized data, left ventricular unloading may be considered for appropriately selected patients undergoing VA-ECMO support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for both respiratory and cardiac failure in adults is evolving rapidly. Advances in technology and accumulating data are spurring greater interest and explosive growth in ECMO worldwide. Expanding indications and novel strategies are being used. Yet the use of ECMO outpaces the data. The promise of a major paradigm shift for the treatment of respiratory and cardiac failure is tempered by a need for evidence to support many current and potential future uses. The authors review cannulation strategies, indications, and evidence for ECMO in respiratory and cardiac failure in adults as well as potential applications and the impact they may have on current treatment paradigms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

TRENDS AND EXIT STRATEGIES OF VENO ARTERIAL EXTRACORPOREAL MEMBRANE OXYGENATION (VA-ECMO) IN CARDIOGENIC SHOCK PATIENTS: REPORT FORM NATIONAL INPATIENT SAMPLE. [Extracted from the article]

TRENDS AND EXIT STRATEGIES OF VENO ARTERIAL EXTRACORPOREAL MEMBRANE OXYGENATION (VA-ECMO) IN CARDIOGENIC SHOCK PATIENTS: REPORT FORM NATIONAL INPATIENT SAMPLE. [Extracted from the article]