Search

Introduction: In the United States, venovenous extracorporeal life support has traditionally been performed with atrial drainage and femoral reinfusion (atrio-femoral flow). Although flow reversal (femoro-atrial flow) may alter recirculation and extracorporeal flow, no direct comparison of these 2 modes has been undertaken., Objective: Our goal was to prospectively compare atrio-femoral and femoro-atrial flow in adult venovenous extracorporeal life support for respiratory failure., Methods: A modified bridge enabling conversion between atrio-femoral and femoro-atrial flow was incorporated in the extracorporeal circuit. Bypass was initiated in the direction that provided the highest pulmonary arterial mixed venous oxygen saturation, and the following measurements were taken: (1) maximum extracorporeal flow, (2) highest achievable pulmonary arterial mixed venous oxygen saturation, and (3) flow required to maintain the same pulmonary arterial mixed venous oxygen saturation in both directions. Flow direction was then reversed, and the measurements were repeated. Data were compared with paired t tests and are presented as mean +/- standard deviation., Results: Ten patients were studied, and 9 were included in the data analysis. Femoro-atrial bypass provided (1) higher maximal extracorporeal flow (femoro-atrial flow = 55.6 +/- 9.8 mL/kg per minute, atrio-femoral flow = 51.1 +/- 11.1 mL/kg per minute; P = .04) and (2) higher pulmonary arterial mixed venous oxygen saturation (femoroatrial flow = 89.9% +/- 6.6%, atrio-femoral flow = 83.2% +/- 4.2%; P = .006); (3) furthermore, it required less flow to maintain an equivalent pulmonary arterial mixed venous oxygen saturation (femoro-atrial flow = 37.0 +/- 12.2 mL/kg per minute, atrio-femoral flow = 46.4 +/- 8.8 mL/kg per minute; P = .04)., Conclusions: During venovenous extracorporeal life support, femoro-atrial bypass provided higher maximal extracorporeal flow, higher pulmonary arterial mixed venous oxygen saturation, and required comparatively less flow to maintain an equivalent mixed venous oxygen saturation than did atrio-femoral bypass.

Traditionally, adult sepsis has been considered a contraindication to extracorporeal life support (ECLS). The objective of this study was to review the authors' institutional experience with a subgroup of adult patients requiring ECLS for severe respiratory failure and sepsis. Hospital records from 100 consecutive adult patients with respiratory failure placed on ECLS between 1990 and 1996 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with sepsis as a primary indication were identified, and blood culture data reviewed. Data were analyzed with t tests and chi-square and are presented as mean +/- standard deviation. Multiple logistic regression determined the impact of sepsis and positive blood cultures (PBCs) on survival. Fourteen patients required ECLS for sepsis; 36 had PBCs during hospitalization (15 before or during ECLS). Septic patients had lower pre-ECLS PaO2/FIO2 ratios (septic: 53 +/- 14 mmHg, nonseptic: 70 +/- 68 mmHg, p = 0.04). Patients with PBCs before or during ECLS were younger (PBC: 29 +/- 6 years, no PBC: 35 +/- 13 years, p = 0.003), remained on ECLS longer (PBC: 485 +/- 336 hours, no PBC: 232 +/- 212 hours, p = 0.01), and were more frequently cannulated within 12 hours (PBC: 15/15, no PBC 60/85 p = 0.02). Neither group differed in organ dysfunction (incidence or type), frequency of respiratory recovery, or survival. Neither sepsis nor positive blood cultures were independently predictive of mortality. Sepsis and positive blood cultures do not adversely affect outcome in adult patients with respiratory failure requiring ECLS.

Objectives: The purpose of this article is to evaluate outcome in adult patients with severe respiratory failure managed with an approach using (1) limitation of end inspiratory pressure, (2) inverse ratio ventilation, (3) titration of PEEP by SvO2, (4) intermittent prone positioning, (5) limitation of FiO2, (6) diuresis, (7) transfusion, and (8) extracorporeal life support (ECLS) if patients failed to respond., Patients and Methods: This study was designed as a retrospective review in the intensive care unit of a tertiary referral hospital. One-hundred forty-one consecutive patients with hypoxic (n = 135) or hypercarbic (n = 6) respiratory failure referred for consideration of ECLS between 1990 and 1996. Overall, initial PaO2/FiO2 (P/F) ratio was 75+/-5 (median = 66)., Results: Lung recovery occurred in 67% of patients and 62% survived. Forty-one patients improved without ECLS (83% survived); 100 did not and were supported with ECLS (54% survived). Survival was greater in patients cannulated within 12 hours of arrival (59%) compared with those cannulated after 12 hours (40%, P < .05). Multiple logistic regression identified age, duration of mechanical ventilation before transfer, four or more dysfunctional organs, and the requirement for ECLS as independent predictors of mortality., Conclusions: An approach that emphasizes lung protection and early implementation of extracorporeal life support is associated with high rates of survival in patients with severe respiratory failure.