The effect of tracheostomy on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation outcomes.

The optimal timing for pursuing tracheostomy in patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation with either veno-arterial (VA) or veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a discussion of risk versus benefit. Depending on the etiology, cardiothoracic surgical patients carry some of the highest risk for respiratory failure postprocedure. Given that patients with end-stage cardiopulmonary status may be fraught with substantial comorbidities, it is critically important to manage the risk-benefit profile of performing a tracheostomy procedure on a patient requiring ECMO support. These cohorts have risk factors that may depend on each patient's inflammatory state, lung de-recruitment peri-procedure and postprocedure and bleeding requiring transfusions to name a few. We provide a descriptive analysis of ECMO patients on both VA and VV configurations who survived to hospital discharge receiving tracheostomy either during or after their ECMO course. A retrospective single-institutional study collected all consecutive patients age 18 and above who received any form of ECMO between 2016 and 2020. Five hundred forty-five patients were screened based on having received ECMO. Patients with mixed EMCO modality were excluded due to heterogeneity of disease process. A total of 521 patients received either VV or VA ECMO. A total of 54 patients received tracheostomy and had sufficiently clean data for analysis. Tracheostomy patients were compared based on survival to discharge, tracheostomy surgical complications, ECMO duration, ECMO configuration, inotrope and vasopressor use, transfusion rates, total ventilator days, total days on intravenous sedation, and history of cardiotomy or heart transplant were assessed. Baseline characteristics of race, age, gender, and body mass index (BMI) were also collected. A total of 54 patients received tracheostomy. Twenty-nine of those patients received tracheostomy during the course of their ECMO, of whom 13 were on VV ECMO, 16 on VA ECMO. Another 25 patients underwent tracheostomy after successful ECMO explant; 8 of those were VV ECMO with the remaining 17 were on VA ECMO before explantation, with mean delay to tracheostomy, 10 and 19 days after explant between both modalities, respectively. A statistically significantly greater proportion of VV ECMO patients received a tracheostomy at any point versus VA ECMO patients (25.93% vs. 8.35%, p ≤ .0001). No statistically significant difference was noted in timing of tracheostomy when stratified by EMCO modality (VA 51.51% after explant vs. VV 38.10% after explant, p = .33). There was a greater frequency of minor tracheostomy complications in patients who were on ECMO at the time of their tracheostomy (p = .014) than in those who received their tracheostomy after being explanted. However, these minor complications did not contribute to a change in survival to hospital discharge (p = .58). Similarly, the small number of major complications (n = 13) did not impair survival to hospital discharge (p = .84). Finally, mean duration of ECMO was longer in those who received tracheostomy during ECMO versus after ECMO. (488.45 vs. 259.72 h, p < .01). Tracheostomy is known to increase patient mobility, clinical participation, and overall decrease in sedation use. Pursuing tracheostomy during ECMO is feasible, does not result in major bleeding, and is associated with only minor complications that overall do not decrease survival. While there is an increased duration of ECMO support in the tracheostomy cohort, this may be due to existing patient conditions, and may not be causal. Research is needed to further determine the external patient factors and specific timing to optimize both VV and VA ECMO courses. We hope that our analysis will pave the initial pathway for an evidence-based guideline on optimal timing of tracheostomy in ECMO patients, whether initiated during or after ECMO and taking into consideration ECMO configuration, its expected duration, and patient comorbidities.

Jones A ，Olverson G ，Hwang J ，Bhagat R ，McGann K ，Bradburn K ，Miller M ，Louis C ... -  《-》

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in infants with meconium aspiration syndrome: a decade of experience with venovenous ECMO.

Kugelman A ，Gangitano E ，Taschuk R ，Garza R ，Riskin A ，McEvoy C ，Durand M ... -  《-》

Venovenous Versus Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membranous Oxygenation in Inotrope Dependent Pediatric Patients With Respiratory Failure.

Patients with respiratory failure requiring inotropes or vasopressors are often placed on venoarterial (VA) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), as venovenous (VV) ECMO does not provide direct circulatory support. This retrospective multicenter study compared outcomes for 103 pediatric patients, with hemodynamic compromise, placed on VV ECMO for respiratory failure to those placed on VA ECMO. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Fifty-seven (55%) study participants were supported on VV ECMO. The two groups had similar PRISM III scores at pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admission, and vasoactive-inotropic scores at ECMO cannulation. More VV ECMO patients received inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) (54.4 vs. 34.8%; p = 0.04) and had a higher oxygenation index (median 41.5 vs. 19.5; p = 0.04) pre-ECMO. More VA ECMO patients had cardiac dysfunction and cardiac arrest pre-ECMO (50 vs. 14%; p < 0.0001). In univariable analysis, survival to hospital discharge was higher in the VV vs. VA ECMO group (72 vs. 44%; p = 0.005), however, in multivariable models, cannulation type was confounded by cardiopulmonary resuscitation and was not independently associated with survival. VV survivors had longer ECMO duration compared with VA survivors (median, 7 vs. 4.5 days; p = 0.036) but similar PICU and hospital days. No significant difference was noted in functional outcomes or comorbidities at discharge. Cannulation type is not independently associated with survival to hospital discharge in pediatric patients on vasoactive infusions at the time of ECMO cannulation for respiratory indications.

Jaber B ，Bembea MM ，Loftis LL ，Spinella PC ，Zhang L ，Simpson PM ，Hanson SJ ，the Pediatric ECMO (PediECMO) Subgroup of the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators (PALISI) Network and the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) ... -  《-》

Intraoperative extracorporeal support during lung transplantation in patients bridged with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is the preferred configuration for bridging respiratory failure patients while awaiting lung transplantation. However, there is no consensus on intraoperative extracorporeal cardiopulmonary support during lung transplantation in these patients. The configuration of the intraoperative extracorporeal circuit after VV ECMO bridge was reviewed and correlated with clinical outcomes. This retrospective cohort study performed at our university hospital included 34 patients who were successfully bridged solely with VV ECMO to lung transplantation during the period 2007 to 2016. Indications to switch to intraoperative venoarterial (VA) ECMO were hemodynamic compromise (systemic hypotension or mean pulmonary artery pressure >40 mm Hg) or when this scenario was thought to be highly likely. The median duration of bridging was 12 (IQR 7 to 19) days. Intraoperatively, 3 patients (8.8%) required cardiopulmonary bypass. Twenty patients (58.8%) stayed on VV ECMO and 11 (32.3%) were switched to central VA ECMO. Between the 2 types of intraoperative ECMO (VV vs VA), there were no significant differences in post-operative ECMO duration, chest reopening for bleeding, or renal replacement therapy. There was no significant difference in 90-day mortality (0% and 9.0%, p = 0.35) or in long-term survival (p = 0.59). The intraoperative transfusion of red blood cells tended to be higher in the VA group (5 [4 to 9] vs 8 [6 to 13] units, p = 0.06). Use of intraoperative VA ECMO was associated with the use of low-flow VV device bridging and lobar transplantation. Using the existing VV ECMO bridge intraoperatively during lung transplantation is feasible and provides comparable outcomes to patients converted to central VA ECMO for compromised hemodynamics.

Hashimoto K ，Hoetzenecker K ，Yeung JC ，Jeagal L ，Donahoe L ，Pierre A ，de Perrot M ，Yasufuku K ，Waddell TK ，Keshavjee S ，Cypel M ... -  《-》

Current aspects of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in a tertiary referral centre: determinants of survival at follow-up.

To describe the clinical results (both early and at follow-up) of patients currently receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) therapy for cardiac and/or pulmonary failure. To assess the effect of indications, clinical presentations and ECMO modalities on early/late clinical outcomes. To identify baseline factors associated with worse survival at follow-up. We reviewed the prospectively collected data of 325 patients receiving ECMO therapy at a tertiary referral centre during the 2005-2013 period. Follow-up was prospectively conducted by dedicated personnel (average: 84 ± 86 days, 100% complete). Survival was analysed by stratified Kaplan-Meier curves. Veno-arterial (VA) ECMO was employed in 80% of cases (due to early graft failure (EGF) in 13% of cases, post-cardiotomy in 29%, primary cardiogenic shock in 42% for miscellaneous aetiologies, other indications in 15.4%) and veno-venous (VV) ECMO in the remainders (adult respiratory distress syndrome). In the VA and VV groups, weaning rates were 59 and 53%, survival at 30th postimplantation day was 44 and 45% and survival at the end of the follow-up was 41 and 45%, respectively. Implantation under advanced life support (ALS) occurred in 15% of cases (26% survival at 30 days). VA patients had a higher rate of thrombotic/haemorrhagic complications and of transfusion of blood products and shorter ventilation time. Worse early and follow-up survival were observed among patients aged ≥65 years, having pH ≤ 7, lactates >12 mmol/l, creatinine >200 μmol/l at implantation or receiving ECMO under ALS. No difference in survival was noted among VA vs VV patients. Patients receiving ECMO for EGF displayed better early and late survival (64% at 30 days and 53% at 6 months) than post-cardiotomy (36 and 34%, respectively), post-acute myocardial infarction (48 and 40%) and the remaining patients (46 and 45%). Despite most critical baseline conditions, ECMO therapy is confirmed useful for the treatment of patients with acute cardiopulmonary failure refractory to conventional treatments. The ECMO modality (VA vs VV), as well as indications to support, identifies different patient profiles and dissimilar outcomes. Preimplantation markers of gravity and end-organ damage are useful in the stratification of expected survival. These may facilitate clinical decision-making and appropriate allocation of hospital resources.

Flécher E ，Anselmi A ，Corbineau H ，Langanay T ，Verhoye JP ，Félix C ，Leurent G ，Le Tulzo Y ，Malledant Y ，Leguerrier A ... -  《-》