Search

Objectives: To determine whether randomization of patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to either therapeutic or a low-dose anticoagulation protocol results in a difference in activated partial thromboplastin time and anti-Xa.Design: Randomized, controlled, unblinded study.Setting: Two ICUs of two university hospitals.Patients: Patients admitted to the ICU, who required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (venovenous or venoarterial) and who did not have a preexisting indication for therapeutic anticoagulation.Interventions: Therapeutic anticoagulation with heparin (target activated partial thromboplastin time between 50 and 70 s) or lower dose heparin (up to 12,000 U/24 hr aiming for activated partial thromboplastin time < 45 s).Measurements and Main Results: Thirty-two patients were randomized into two study groups that were not significantly different in demographics and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation characteristics. There was a significant difference in the daily geometric mean heparin dose (11,742 U [95% CI, 8,601-16,031 U] vs 20,710 U [95% CI, 15,343-27,954 U]; p = 0.004), daily geometric mean activated partial thromboplastin time (48.1 s [95% CI, 43.5-53.2 s] vs 55.5 s [95% CI, 50.4-61.2 s]; p = 0.04), and daily geometric mean anti-Xa (0.11 international units/mL [95% CI, 0.07-0.18] vs 0.27 [95% CI, 0.17-0.42]; p = 0.01). We found similar results when considering only venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation episodes; however, no difference in daily geometric mean activated partial thromboplastin time between groups when considering only venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation episodes.Conclusions: Allocating patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to two different anticoagulation protocols led to a significant difference in mean daily activated partial thromboplastin time and anti-Xa levels between groups. When considering subgroups analyses, these results were consistent in patients on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Our results support the feasibility of a larger trial in patients undergoing venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to compare different anticoagulation protocols; however, this study does not provide evidence on the optimal anticoagulation protocol for patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Antegrade cerebral perfusion (ACP) is an essential adjunct for prolonged hypothermic circulatory arrest (HCA) during aortic arch surgery. However, it has yet to be established whether ACP should be delivered unilaterally or bilaterally. The aim of the present meta-analysis is to investigate outcomes of unilateral ACP (uACP) compared to bilateral ACP (bACP) in comparative studies.Methods: Electronic searches were performed using four databases from their inception to February 2017. Relevant comparative studies with adult patients who underwent aortic arch surgery using unilateral or bilateral ACP were included. Data was extracted by two independent researchers and analysed according to predefined endpoints using a random-effects model. Meta-regression was used to identify predictors of primary outcomes.Results: Nine comparative studies were identified, comprising 967 uACP patients and 879 bACP patients. No significant differences in age, sex, or proportion of total arch replacements were identified. The uACP cohort had a greater proportion of acute dissections (86% vs 75%, p = 0.04). Hypothermic circulatory arrest and cerebral perfusion times were similar between both groups. No significant differences were seen between unilateral and bilateral groups in terms of mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-1.48; p = 0.90; I2 = 0%), permanent neurological deficit (PND) (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.74-1.45; p = 0.85; I2 = 0%), temporary neurological deficit (p = 0.74), acute kidney injury (p = 0.36) or reoperation for bleeding (p = 0.65). No factors affecting mortality or PND were identified on meta-regression.Conclusion: For patients undergoing aortic arch surgery, the available evidence supports either uACP or bACP as an adjunct to HCA. However, there is insufficient comparative evidence available to determine the benefit of either modalities in patients with longer durations of circulatory arrest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in refractory cardiac arrest (ECPR) has increased exponentially. ECPR is a resource intensive service and its cost effectiveness has yet to be demonstrated. We sought to complete a cost analysis with modelling of cost effectiveness and quality of life outcomes. We sought to complete a cost analysis with modelling of cost effectiveness and quality of life outcomes of patients who have undergone ECPR.Methods: Using data on all extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) patients at two ECMO centres in Sydney, Australia; we completed a costing analysis of ECPR patients. A Markov model of cost, quality of life and survival outcomes was developed to examine cost per QALY estimates and incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was completed to assess the probability of cost effectiveness for base case and variations.Results: Sixty-two consecutive ECPR patients were analysed; mean age of 51.9 ± 13.6 years, 38 (61%) were in hospital cardiac arrests (IHCA). Twenty-five patients (40%) survived to hospital discharge; all with a cerebral performance category (CPC) of 1 or 2. The mean cost per ECPR patient was AUD 75,165 (€50,535; ±AUD 75,737). Over 10 years ECPR was estimated to add a mean gain of 3.0 Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) per patient with an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of AUD 25,212 (€16,890) per QALY, increasing to 4.0 QALYs and an ICER of AUD 18,829 (€12,614) over a 15-year survival scenario. Mean cost per QALY did not differ significantly by OHCA or IHCA.Conclusions: ECMO support for refractory cardiac arrests is cost effective and compares favourably to accepted cost effectiveness thresholds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]