Dataset Information

Physical Therapy and Sedation While on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for COVID-19-Associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

This study aimed to determine whether patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) achieved lower rates of physical therapy participation and required more sedation than those on ECMO without COVID-19.

Design

Retrospective, observational, matched-cohort study.

Setting

Bicenter academic quaternary medical centers.

Participants

All adults on ECMO for severe COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) during 2020 and matched (matched 1:1 based on age ± 15 years and medical center) adults on ECMO for ARDS not associated with COVID-19.

Interventions

Observational only.

Measurements and main results

Measurements were collected retrospectively during the first 20 days of ECMO support and included daily levels of physical therapy activity, number of daily sedation infusions and doses, and level of sedation and agitation (Richmond Agitation and Sedation Score). During the first 20 days of ECMO support, the 22 patients who were on ECMO for COVID-19-associated ARDS achieved a similar proportion of days with active physical therapy participation while on ECMO compared to matched patients on ECMO for non-COVID-19 ARDS (22.5% v 7.5%, respectively; p value 0.43), a similar proportion of days with Richmond Agitation and Sedation Score ≥-2 while on ECMO (47.5% v 27.5%, respectively; p value 0.065), and a similar proportion of days with chemical paralysis while on ECMO (8.4% v 18.0%, respectively; p value 0.35).

Conclusions

The results of this matched cohort study supported that sedation requirements were not dramatically greater and did not significantly limit early physical therapy for patients who had COVID-19-associated ARDS and were on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) versus those without COVID-19-associated ARDS who were on VV-ECMO.

SUBMITTER: Bohman JK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8240447 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Patients on extracorporeal support for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome may require a prolonged period of deep sedation. In these patients, volatile sedation may represent a valid alternative to IV drugs. The aim of our study was to describe the feasibility of volatile sedation in a large cohort of acute respiratory distress syndrome patients undergoing venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and ultraprotective ventilation.DesignRetrospective monocentric study.SettingAdult ICU, ASST Monza, Italy.PatientsAdult patients who underwent volatile sedation with isoflurane during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation between 2009 and 2019.InterventionsIsoflurane was delivered via the AnaConDa system. The sedation level, hemodynamics, and laboratory tests were compared between the volatile sedation phase and the IV sedation phases before and after the isoflurane sedation period.Measurements and main resultsAbout 74 patients (50 yr [43-56 yr]) were included. Median duration of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support was 22 days (14-51 d). Volatile sedation started on day 3 (2-6) of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, and its median duration was 7 days (4-13 d), ranging from 1 to 38 days. A total of 970 venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation days were analyzed. During the volatile phase, the sedation level was slightly deeper (bispectral index 39 ± 6) compared with the IV phase before and after isoflurane (42 ± 8 and 43 ± 9, respectively, p < 0.001). Requirements of fentanyl and remifentanyl were reduced during the volatile phase. Minor differences in hemodynamics were observed during volatile sedation: mean arterial pressure was lower (75 ± 13 vs 79 ± 14 and 80 ± 15; p < 0.001), whereas cardiac output was higher (8.5 ± 1.9 vs 7.9 ± 1.8 and 8.0 ± 1.8; p = 0.003). Aspartate aminotransferase levels were lower during the volatile sedation phases (p < 0.001), whereas alanine aminotransferase, triglycerides, and creatine phosphokinase were more altered during the IV sedation phase before isoflurane (p < 0.001).ConclusionsVolatile sedation represents an alternative to IV agents to achieve long-term deep sedation in critically ill patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation undergoing ultraprotective ventilation.

Project description:Objective: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has supported oxygen delivery and carbon dioxide removal in neonatal severe respiratory failure for more than 4 decades. The definition and diagnosis of neonatal acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was made according to the criteria first established by a Montreux Conference in 2017. By far, there has been no ECMO efficiency studies in neonatal ARDS. We aimed to compare the outcomes of neonates with severe ARDS supported with and without ECMO. Design: Retrospective pair-matched study. Setting: In the present retrospective pair-matched study, the outcomes of severe ARDS with ECMO support and without ECMO support were analyzed and compared. Propensity score matching was conducted. The study subjects were selected from a China Neonatal ECMO (CNECMO) study. In total, five hospitals were included in the CNECMO study. The patients were matched with demographic and clinical data. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included ventilator-time, ICU stay, hospitalization costs and cranial MRI results. Patients: 145 neonates with severe ARDS (Oxygenation Index, OI ≥16) from 5 hospitals. Interventions: No interventions. Measurements and Main Results: We collected the data of 145 neonates with severe ARDS (Oxygenation Index, OI≥16) from 5 hospitals. Among them, 42 neonates received venoarterial (VA) ECMO support, and the remaining 103 neonates were treated with conventional mechanical ventilation. The mortality of ECMO-supported neonates was not significantly different compared with the ESLO neonatal respiratory-supported from 2012 to 2018 (23.8 vs. 32.5%, p = 0.230). After matching with the propensity score we got 31 pairs. The ECMO-supported neonates had a lower in-hospital mortality (6 of 31, 19.4%) vs. non ECMO-supported patients (18 of 31, 58.1%) (p = 0.002). Hospitalization costs of survivors in ECMO-supported neonates were significantly higher than that of non-ECMO-supported neonates (p < 0.001). There was no difference of ventilator-times (p = 0.206), ICU stay (p = 0.879) and cranial MRI (p = 0.899) between the survivors of ECMO-supported and non-ECMO-supported neonates with ARDS. Conclusions: By far, there has been no ECMO efficiency studies in neonatal ARDS. This study found that ECMO-support have superior outcomes compared with non-ECMO-support in neonates with severe ARDS.