Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19 during first and second waves.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Broman LM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8331087 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:We aimed to compare the outcomes of patients under veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) for COVID-19-Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (CARDS) between the first and the second wave. From 1 March 2020 to 30 November 2020, fifty patients requiring a V-V ECMO support for CARDS were included. Patient demographics, pre-ECMO, and day one, three, and seven on-ECMO data and outcomes were collected. The 90-day mortality was 11% higher during the second wave (18/26 (69%)) compared to the first wave (14/24 (58%) (p = 0.423). During the second wave, all of the patients were given steroids compared to 16.7% during the first wave (p < 0.001). The second wave's patients had been on non-invasive ventilation support for a longer period than in the first wave, with the median time from ICU admission to ECMO implantation being significantly higher (14 (11-20) vs. 7.7 (5-12) days; p < 0.001). Mechanical properties of the lung were worsened in the second wave's CARDS patients before ECMO implantation (median static compliance 20 (16-26) vs. 29 (25-37) mL/cmH2O; p < 0.001) and during ECMO days one, three, and seven. More bacterial co-infections before implantation and under ECMO were documented in the second wave group. Despite a better evidence-driven critical care management, we depicted fewer encouraging outcomes during the second wave.
| S-EPMC8584595 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8896737 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8009624 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a worldwide pandemic with a high mortality rate among patients requiring mechanical ventilation. The limited data that exist regarding the utility of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in these critically ill patients show poor overall outcomes. This report describes our institutional practice regarding the application and management of ECMO support for patients with COVID-19 and reports promising early outcomes.MethodsAll critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19 evaluated for ECMO support from March 10, 2020, to April 24, 2020, were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were evaluated for ECMO support based on a partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio of less than 150 mm Hg or pH of less than 7.25 with a partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide exceeding 60 mm Hg with no life-limiting comorbidities. Patients were cannulated at bedside and were managed with protective lung ventilation, early tracheostomy, bronchoscopies, and proning, as clinically indicated.ResultsAmong 321 patients intubated for COVID-19, 77 patients (24%) were evaluated for ECMO support, and 27 patients (8.4%) were placed on ECMO. All patients were supported with venovenous ECMO. Current survival is 96.3%, with only 1 death to date in more than 350 days of total ECMO support. Thirteen patients (48.1%) remain on ECMO support, and 13 patients (48.1%) have been successfully decannulated. Seven patients (25.9%) have been discharged from the hospital. Six patients (22.2%) remain in the hospital, of which 4 are on room air. No health care workers who participated in ECMO cannulation developed symptoms of or tested positive for COVID-19.ConclusionsThe early outcomes presented here suggest that the judicious use of ECMO support in severe COVID-19 may be clinically beneficial.
| S-EPMC7366119 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This SuperSeries is composed of the SubSeries listed below.
2024-10-15 | GSE182609 | GEO
Project description:An extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) program is an important component in the management of patients with COVID-19, but it is imperative to implement a system that is well-supported by the institution and staffed with well-trained clinicians to both optimize patient outcomes and to keep providers safe. There are many unknowns related to COVID-19, and one of the most challenging aspects for clinicians is the lack of predictive knowledge as to why some patients fail medical therapy and require advanced support such as ECMO. These factors can create challenges during a time of resource scarcity and interruptions in the supply chain. In the current environment, in which resources are limited and an ongoing pandemic, healthcare practitioners need to focus on evidence-based best practice for supportive care of patients with COVID-19 in refractory respiratory or cardiac failure. with As experience is gained, a greater understanding will develop in this cohort of patients regarding need and timing of ECMO. As this pandemic continues, it will be important to compile and analyze multicentered data pertaining to patient-specific outcomes to help guide clinicians caring for patients with COVID-19 undergoing ECMO support. In this paper, the authors demonstrate the strategies utilized by a major quaternary care center in the utilization and management of ECMO for patients with COVID-19.
| S-EPMC9087154 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7836959 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA life-threatening complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) refractory to conventional management. Venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (VV-ECMO) is used to support patients with ARDS in whom conventional management fails. Scoring systems to predict mortality in VV-ECMO remain unvalidated in COVID-19 ARDS. This report describes a large single-center experience with VV-ECMO in COVID-19 and assesses the utility of standard risk calculators.MethodsA retrospective review of a prospective database of all patients with COVID-19 who underwent VV-ECMO cannulation between March 15 and June 27, 2020 at a single academic center was performed. Demographic, clinical, and ECMO characteristics were collected. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; survivor and nonsurvivor cohorts were compared by using univariate and bivariate analyses.ResultsForty patients who had COVID-19 and underwent ECMO were identified. Of the 33 patients (82.5%) in whom ECMO had been discontinued at the time of analysis, 18 patients (54.5%) survived to hospital discharge, and 15 (45.5%) died during ECMO. Nonsurvivors presented with a statistically significant higher Prediction of Survival on ECMO Therapy (PRESET)-Score (mean ± SD, 8.33 ± 0.8 vs 6.17 ± 1.8; P = .001). The PRESET score demonstrated accurate mortality prediction. All patients with a PRESET-Score of 6 or lowers survived, and a score of 7 or higher was associated with a dramatic increase in mortality.ConclusionsThese results suggest that favorable outcomes are possible in patients with COVID-19 who undergo ECMO at high-volume centers. This study demonstrated an association between the PRESET-Score and survival in patients with COVID-19 who underwent VV-ECMO. Standard risk calculators may aid in appropriate selection of patients with COVID-19 ARDS for ECMO.
| S-EPMC7825896 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) often requires extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Recent German health insurance data revealed low ICU survival rates. Patient characteristics and experience of the ECMO center may determine intensive care unit (ICU) survival. The current study aimed to identify factors affecting ICU survival of COVID-19 ECMO patients.Methods673 COVID-19 ARDS ECMO patients treated in 26 centers between January 1st 2020 and March 22nd 2021 were included. Data on clinical characteristics, adjunct therapies, complications, and outcome were documented. Block wise logistic regression analysis was applied to identify variables associated with ICU-survival.ResultsMost patients were between 50 and 70 years of age. PaO2/FiO2 ratio prior to ECMO was 72 mmHg (IQR: 58-99). ICU survival was 31.4%. Survival was significantly lower during the 2nd wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A subgroup of 284 (42%) patients fulfilling modified EOLIA criteria had a higher survival (38%) (p = 0.0014, OR 0.64 (CI 0.41-0.99)). Survival differed between low, intermediate, and high-volume centers with 20%, 30%, and 38%, respectively (p = 0.0024). Treatment in high volume centers resulted in an odds ratio of 0.55 (CI 0.28-1.02) compared to low volume centers. Additional factors associated with survival were younger age, shorter time between intubation and ECMO initiation, BMI > 35 (compared to < 25), absence of renal replacement therapy or major bleeding/thromboembolic events.ConclusionsStructural and patient-related factors, including age, comorbidities and ECMO case volume, determined the survival of COVID-19 ECMO. These factors combined with a more liberal ECMO indication during the 2nd wave may explain the reasonably overall low survival rate. Careful selection of patients and treatment in high volume ECMO centers was associated with higher odds of ICU survival.Trial registrationRegistered in the German Clinical Trials Register (study ID: DRKS00022964, retrospectively registered, September 7th 2020, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00022964 .
| S-EPMC9238175 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVeno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) support is increasingly used in the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the clinical decision-making to initiate V-V ECMO for severe COVID-19 still remains unclear. In order to determine the optimal timing and patient selection, we investigated the outcomes of both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients undergoing V-V ECMO support.MethodsOverall, 138 patients were included in this study. Patients were stratified into two cohorts: those with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS.ResultsThe survival in patients with COVID-19 was statistically similar to non-COVID-19 patients (p = .16). However, the COVID-19 group demonstrated higher rates of bleeding (p = .03) and thrombotic complications (p < .001). The duration of V-V ECMO support was longer in COVID-19 patients compared to non-COVID-19 patients (29.0 ± 27.5 vs 15.9 ± 19.6 days, p < .01). Most notably, in contrast to the non-COVID-19 group, we found that COVID-19 patients who had been on a ventilator for longer than 7 days prior to ECMO had 100% mortality without a lung transplant.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that COVID-19-associated ARDS was not associated with a higher post-ECMO mortality than non-COVID-19-associated ARDS patients, despite longer duration of extracorporeal support. Early initiation of V-V ECMO is important for improved ECMO outcomes in COVID-19 ARDS patients. Since late initiation of ECMO was associated with extremely high mortality related to lack of pulmonary recovery, it should be used judiciously or as a bridge to lung transplantation.
| S-EPMC8653196 | biostudies-literature