Dataset Information

Outcomes of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Following Traumatic Injury: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the overall occurrence of inhospital mortality in trauma patients who were placed on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation following the complication of the acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Design

Observational cohort study.

Setting

The data of all patients who were traumatically injured and developed the complication of acute respiratory distress syndrome were accessed from the Trauma Quality Improvement Program database from the calendar years of 2013 to 2016.

Patients

Patients 16 years old and less than 90 years old were included in the study. Variables included patient demography, Injury Severity Score, Glasgow Coma Scale score, Abbreviated Injury Scale score, and outcomes.

Interventions

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Measurements and main results

Propensity-matched analysis was performed between two groups: patients placed on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and patients placed on conventional mode of ventilation. The primary outcome was inhospital mortality. Out of 6,121 patients who developed acute respiratory distress syndrome, 118 patients (1.93%) were placed on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The pair matched analysis showed significant difference between the two groups (extracorporeal membrane oxygenation vs conventional mode of ventilation) for overall inhospital mortality (35.6% vs 14.4%; p < 0.001). There were significant differences found between the two groups for the median hospital length of stay (41 [35-49] vs 27 [24-33]), ICU days (35 [30-41] vs 19 [17-24]), and ventilator days (30 [27-34] vs 15 [13-18]). All p values are less than 0.001.

Conclusions

Approximately 2% of acute respiratory distress syndrome patients were placed on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The overall inhospital mortality remained high despite patients being placed on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

SUBMITTER: Ahmed N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8133149 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn patients with severe respiratory failure from COVID-19, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) treatment can facilitate lung-protective ventilation and may improve outcome and survival if conventional therapy fails to assure adequate oxygenation and ventilation. We aimed to perform a confirmatory propensity-matched cohort study comparing the impact of ECMO and maximum invasive mechanical ventilation alone (MVA) on mortality and complications in severe COVID-19 pneumonia.Materials and methodsAll 295 consecutive adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) from March 13th, 2020, to July 31st, 2021 were included. At admission, all patients were classified into 3 categories: (1) full code including the initiation of ECMO therapy (AAA code), (2) full code excluding ECMO (AA code), and (3) do-not-intubate (A code). For the 271 non-ECMO patients, match eligibility was determined for all patients with the AAA code treated with MVA. Propensity score matching was performed using a logistic regression model including the following variables: gender, P/F ratio, SOFA score at admission, and date of ICU admission. The primary endpoint was ICU mortality.ResultsA total of 24 ECMO patients were propensity matched to an equal number of MVA patients. ICU mortality was significantly higher in the ECMO arm (45.8%) compared with the MVA cohort (16.67%) (OR 4.23 (1.11, 16.17); p=0.02). Three-month mortality was 50% with ECMO compared to 16.67% after MVA (OR 5.91 (1.55, 22.58); p < 0.01). Applied peak inspiratory pressures (33.42 ± 8.52 vs. 24.74 ± 4.86 mmHg; p < 0.01) and maximal PEEP levels (14.47 ± 3.22 vs. 13.52 ± 3.86 mmHg; p=0.01) were higher with MVA. ICU length of stay (LOS) and hospital LOS were comparable in both groups.ConclusionECMO therapy may be associated with an up to a three-fold increase in ICU mortality and 3-month mortality compared to MVA despite the facilitation of lung-protective ventilation settings in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. We cannot confirm the positive results of the first propensity-matched cohort study on this topic. This trial is registered with NCT05158816.