Back to Search Start Over

ECLS supported transport of ICU patients: does out-of -house implantation impact survival?

Authors :
Fleissner F
Mogaldea A
Martens A
Natanov R
Rümke S
Salman J
Kaufeld T
Ius F
Beckmann E
Haverich A
Kühn C
Source :
Journal of cardiothoracic surgery [J Cardiothorac Surg] 2021 Jun 02; Vol. 16 (1), pp. 158. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Jun 02.
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

Background: Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is an established tool to stabilize severely ill patients with therapy-refractory hemodynamic or respiratory failure. Recently, we established a mobile ECLS retrieval service at our institution. However, data on the outcome of patients receiving ECLS at outside hospitals for transportation into tertiary hospitals is still sparse.<br />Methods: We have analyzed all patients receiving ECLS in outside hospitals (Transport group, TG) prior to transportation to our institution and compared the outcome to our in-house ECLS experience (Home Group, HG).<br />Results: Between 2012 and 2018, we performed 978 ECLS implantations, 243 of which were performed on-site in tertiary hospitals for ECLS supported transportation. Significantly more veno-venous systems were implanted in TG (n = 129 (53%) vs. n = 327 (45%), p = 0.012). Indication for ECLS support differed between the groups, with more pneumonia; acute respiratory distress syndromes in the TG group and of course, more postcardiotomy patients in HG. Mean age was 47 (± 20) (HG) vs. 48 (± 18) (TG) years, p = 0.477 with no change over time. No differences were seen in ECLS support time (8.03 days ±8.19 days HG vs 7.81 days ±6.71 days TG, p = 0.675). 30-day mortality (n = 379 (52%) (HG) vs. n = 119 (49%) (TG) p = 0.265) and death on ECLS support (n = 322 (44%) (HG) vs. n = 97 (40%) TG, p = 0.162) were comparable between the two groups, despite a more severe SAVE score in the v-a TG (HG: - 1.56 (± 4.73) vs. TG -3.93 (± 4.22) p < 0.001). Mortality rates did not change significantly over the years. Multivariate risk analysis revealed Influenza, Peak Insp. Pressure at implantation, pO2/FiO2 ratio and ECLS Score (SAVE/RESP) as well as ECLS support time to be independent risk factors for mortality.<br />Conclusion: Mobile ECLS support is a tremendous challenge. However, it is justified to offer 24 h/7d ECLS standby for secondary and primary hospitals as a tertiary hospital. Increasing indications and total numbers for ECLS support raise the need for further studies to evaluate outcome in these patients.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1749-8090
Volume :
16
Issue :
1
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Journal of cardiothoracic surgery
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
34078397
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13019-021-01508-9