Search

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: The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterized by pulmonary epithelial and endothelial barrier dysfunction and injury. In severe forms of ARDS, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is often the last option for life support. Endothelial progenitor (EPC) and mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) can regenerate damaged endothelium and thereby improve pulmonary endothelial dysfunction. However, we still lack sufficient knowledge about how ECMO might affect EPC- and MSC-mediated regenerative pathways in ARDS. Therefore, we investigated if ECMO impacts EPC and MSC numbers in ARDS patients., Methods: Peripheral blood mononuclear cells from ARDS patients undergoing ECMO (n = 16) and without ECMO support (n = 12) and from healthy volunteers (n = 16) were isolated. The number and presence of circulating EPC and MSC was detected by flow cytometry. Serum concentrations of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and angiopoietin 2 (Ang2) were determined., Results: In the ECMO group, MSC subpopulations were higher by 71% compared to the non-ECMO group. Numbers of circulating EPC were not significantly altered. During ECMO, VEGF and Ang2 serum levels remained unchanged compared to the non-ECMO group (p = 0.16), but Ang2 serum levels in non-survivors of ARDS were significantly increased by 100% (p = 0.02) compared to survivors., Conclusions: ECMO support in ARDS is specifically associated with an increased number of circulating MSC, most likely due to enhanced mobilization, but not with a higher numbers of EPC or serum concentrations of VEGF and Ang2., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: During the H1N1 pandemic of 2009 and 2010, the large number of patients with severe respiratory failure due to H1N1 infection strained the capacities of treatment facilities for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) around the world. No data on this topic have yet been published for Germany., Methods: During the pandemic, the German ARDS Network (a task force of the DIVI's respiratory failure section) kept track of the availability of ECMO treatment facilities with a day-to-day, Internet-based capacity assessment. In cooperation with the Robert Koch Institute, epidemiological and clinical data were obtained on all patients treated for influenza in intensive care units., Results: 116 patients were identified who had H1N1 disease and were treated in the intensive care units of 9 university hospitals and 3 other maximum medical care hospitals. 61 of them received ECMO. The overall mortality was 38% (44 of 116 patients); among patients receiving ECMO, the mortality was 54% (33 of 61 patients). The mortality was higher among patients who had an accompanying malignancy or immune deficiency (72.2%)., Conclusion: Even persons without any other accompanying disease developed life-threatening respiratory failure as a result of H1N1 infection, and many of these patients needed ECMO. This study reveals for the first time that the mortality of H1N1 infection in Germany is comparable to that in other countries. H1N1 patients with acute respiratory failure had a worse outcome if they also had serious accompanying diseases.

Infections with SARS-CoV-2 spread worldwide early in 2020. In previous winters, we had been treating patients with seasonal influenza. While creating a larger impact on the health care systems, comparisons regarding the intensive care unit (ICU) courses of both diseases are lacking. We compared patients with influenza and SARS-CoV-2 infections treated at a tertiary care facility offering treatment for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and being a high-volume facility for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Patients with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic (n = 64) were compared to 64 patients with severe influenza from 2016 to 2020 at our ICU. All patients were treated using a standardized protocol. ECMO was used in cases of severe ARDS. Both groups had similar comorbidities. Time in ICU and mortality were not significantly different, yet mortality with ECMO was high amongst COVID-19 patients with approximately two-thirds not surviving. This is in contrast to a mortality of less than 40% in influenza patients with ECMO. Mortality was higher than estimated by SAPSII score on admission in both groups. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be male and non-smokers than those with influenza. The outcomes for patients with severe disease were similar. The study helps to understand similarities and differences between patients treated for severe influenza infections and COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]