Search

The role of veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy (V-V ECMO) in severe COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is still under debate and conclusive data from large cohorts are scarce. Furthermore, criteria for the selection of patients that benefit most from this highly invasive and resource-demanding therapy are yet to be defined. In this study, we assess survival in an international multicenter cohort of COVID-19 patients treated with V-V ECMO and evaluate the performance of several clinical scores to predict 30-day survival. This is an investigator-initiated retrospective non-interventional international multicenter registry study (NCT04405973, first registered 28 May 2020). In 127 patients treated with V-V ECMO at 15 centers in Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Belgium, and the United States, we calculated the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Score, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II), Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) Score, Respiratory Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Survival Prediction (RESP) Score, Predicting Death for Severe ARDS on V‑V ECMO (PRESERVE) Score, and 30-day survival. In our study cohort which enrolled 127 patients, overall 30-day survival was 54%. Median SOFA, SAPS II, APACHE II, RESP, and PRESERVE were 9, 36, 17, 1, and 4, respectively. The prognostic accuracy for all these scores (area under the receiver operating characteristic-AUROC) ranged between 0.548 and 0.605. The use of scores for the prediction of mortality cannot be recommended for treatment decisions in severe COVID-19 ARDS undergoing V-V ECMO; nevertheless, scoring results below or above a specific cut-off value may be considered as an additional tool in the evaluation of prognosis. Survival rates in this cohort of COVID-19 patients treated with V‑V ECMO were slightly lower than those reported in non-COVID-19 ARDS patients treated with V-V ECMO.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been increasingly applied over recent decades to treat severe cardiogenic shock and acute lung failure and cardiac arrest of various causes. Acute intoxication with therapeutic substances or other chemical substances can cause severe cardiogenic shock or even cardiac arrest. The purpose of this study was to conduct a qualitative systematic review of ECMO use in intoxication and poisoning. We searched the PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science databases from January 1971 to December 2021 and selected appropriate studies according to our inclusion and exclusion criteria to evaluate the role of ECMO in intoxication and poisoning systematically. Survival at hospital discharge was examined to describe the outcome. The search resulted in 365 publications after removing duplicates. In total, 190 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. A total of 145 articles from 1985 to 2021 were examined in our final qualitative analysis. A total of 539 (100%) patients were included (mean age: 30.9 ± 16.6 years), with a distribution of n = 64 (11.9%) cases with venovenous (vv) ECMO, n = 218 (40.4%) cases with venoarterial (va) ECMO, and n = 257 (47.7%) cases with cardiac arrest and extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Survival at hospital discharge was 61.0% for all patients, 68.8% for vaECMO, 75% for vvECMO, and 50.9% for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. When used and reported, ECMO seems to be a valid tool for adult and pediatric patients suffering intoxication from various pharmaceutical and nonpharmaceutical substances due to a high survival rate at hospital discharge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Survival following cardiac arrest (CA) remains poor after conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR) (6–26%), and the outcomes after extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) are often inconsistent. Poor survival is a consequence of CA, low-flow states during CCPR, multi-organ injury, insufficient monitoring, and delayed treatment of the causative condition. We developed a new strategy to address these issues. Methods: This all-comers, multicenter, prospective observational study (69 patients with in- and out-of-hospital CA (IHCA and OHCA) after prolonged refractory CCPR) focused on extracorporeal cardiopulmonary support, comprehensive monitoring, multi-organ repair, and the potential for out-of-hospital cannulation and treatment. Result: The overall survival rate at hospital discharge was 42.0%, and a favorable neurological outcome (CPC 1+2) at 90 days was achieved for 79.3% of survivors (CPC 1+2 survival 33%). IHCA survival was very favorable (51.7%), as was CPC 1+2 survival at 90 days (41%). Survival of OHCA patients was 35% and CPC 1+2 survival at 90 days was 28%. The subgroup of OHCA patients with pre-hospital cannulation showed a superior survival rate of 57.1%. Conclusions: This new strategy focusing on repairing damage to multiple organs appears to improve outcomes after CA, and these findings should provide a sound basis for further research in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Regarding the overall inadequate results after cardiopulmonary resuscitation, the development of new treatment concepts is urgently needed. Controlled Automated Reperfusion of the whoLe body (CARL) represents a therapy bundle to control the conditions of reperfusion and the composition of the reperfusate after cardiac arrest (CA). The aim of this study was to investigate the plasma expander's role in the CARL priming solution and examine its mechanism of action. Methods: Viscosity, osmolality, colloid osmotic pressure (COP), pH and calcium binding of different priming solutions were measured in vitro and compared to in vivo data. N = 16 pigs were allocated to receive CARL following 20 min of untreated CA with either human albumin 20% (HA, N = 8) or gelatin polysuccinate 4% (GP, N = 8). Blood gas analyses were performed during the first hour of reperfusion and catecholamine and fluid requirements were recorded. Neurological outcome was assessed by neurological deficit scoring (NDS) on the seventh day. Results: In vitro, addition of HA to the CARL priming solution resulted in higher COP and higher calcium-binding than GP. In vivo, treatment with HA led to greater reduction of ionized calcium and higher extracorporeal flows within the first 30 min of reperfusion with no difference in catecholamine support and fluid requirement. Seven-day survival of 75% with no difference in NDS was observed in both groups. Conclusions: Our data show that the plasma expander in the CARL priming solution has a significant effect on the initial reperfusate and can potentially influence the course of resuscitation. However, seven-day survival and NDS did not differ between groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]