scholarly journals Potential use of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for cardiogenic shock refractory to mechanical assist devices: baseline physiology and mortality data

Critical Care ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. P167
Author(s):  
C Vimalanathan ◽  
N Barrett ◽  
N Ioannou ◽  
C Langrish ◽  
C Meadows ◽  
...  
BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. e031697
Author(s):  
Audrey Jacquot ◽  
Xavier Lepage ◽  
Ludovic Merckle ◽  
Nicolas Girerd ◽  
Bruno Levy

IntroductionVenoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is widely used to support the most severe forms of cardiogenic shock (CS). Nevertheless, despite extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use, mortality still remains high (50%). Moderate hypothermia (MH) (33°C–34°C) may improve cardiac performance and decrease ischaemia–reperfusion injuries. The use of MH during VA-ECMO is strongly supported by experimental and preliminary clinical data.Methods and analysisThe Hypothermia-Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (HYPO-ECMO) study is a multicentre, prospective, controlled randomised trial between an MH group (33°C≤T°C≤34°C) and normothermia group (36°C≤T°C≤37°C). The primary endpoint is all-cause mortality at day 30 following randomisation. The study will also assess as secondary endpoints the effects of targeted temperature management strategies on (1) mortality rate at different time points, (2) organ failure and supportive treatment use and (3) safety. All intubated adults with refractory CS supported with VA-ECMO will be screened. Exclusion criteria are patients having undergone cardiac surgery for heart transplantation or left or biventricular assist device implantation, acute poisoning with cardiotoxic drugs, pregnancy, uncontrolled bleeding and refractory cardiac arrest.Three-hundred and thirty-four patients will be randomised and followed up to 6 months to detect a 15% difference in mortality. Data analysis will be intention to treat. The differences between the two study groups in the risk of all-cause mortality at day 30 following randomisation will be studied using logistic regression analysis adjusted for postcardiotomy setting, prior cardiac arrest, prior myocardial infarction, age, vasopressor dose, Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and lactate at randomisation.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval has been granted by the Comité de Protection des Personnes Est III Ethics Committee. The trial has been approved by the French Health Authorities (Agence Nationale de la Sécurité du Médicament et des Produits de Santé). Dissemination of results will be performed via journal articles and presentations at national and international conferences. Since this study is also the first step in the constitution of an ‘ECMO Trials Group’, its results will also be disseminated by the aforementioned group.Trial registration numberNCT 02754193.


2017 ◽  
Vol 01 (01) ◽  
pp. 010-014
Author(s):  
Venkat Goyal ◽  
Pranay Oza

AbstractIn critical care units, doctors usually witness patients coming with single organ failure and subsequently suffer multiorgan failure before they succumb to the destiny. It is well-known that hardly a few patients die of single organ failure, and with addition of every organ, the risk of mortality increases by 10%. The multiorgan failure is secondary to inadequate organ function, tissue perfusion, and oxygenation or due to iatrogenic causes. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is not a treatment by itself but a mechanical assist device or rather a replacement therapy to sustain life, to give rest to the organs, and to maintain adequate perfusion and oxygenation. There are various articles discussing the outcomes of ECMO in cardiogenic shock with varied etiology. ECMO support can rescue 40% of patients with otherwise fatal cardiogenic shock (mortality without ECMO is > 80%). As per ELSO data January 2017, 10,982 patients were reported in adult cardiac ECMO, out of whom 56% survived ECLS and 40% survived to discharge. The newer scoring system named SAVE score (its online calculator [www.save-score.com]) offers a validated tool to predict survival for patients receiving ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Maestro-Benedicto ◽  
A Duran-Cambra ◽  
M Vila-Perales ◽  
J Sans-Rosello ◽  
J Carreras-Mora ◽  
...  

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. INTRODUCTION Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is an essential tool for the management of refractory cardiogenic shock. Little is known about the incidence of thromboembolic events after V-A ECMO decannulation, although some studies report a high incidence of cannula-related venous thrombosis after venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). Due to this fact, in our institution anticoagulation therapy is systematically prescribed for at least 3 months after VA-ECMO per protocol.  AIM The main objective of this study was to explore the feasibility of 3-month anticoagulation therapy after VA-ECMO decannulation. METHODS We performed a prospective study that included 27 consecutive patients who were successfully treated with VA-ECMO in a medical ICU between 2016 and 2019 and were prescribed 3-month anticoagulation therapy per protocol after decannulation. Exclusion criteria was dying on ECMO or while on the ICU. Data analysis included demographics, mean days on ECMO, 3-month survival, and thromboembolic and bleeding events (excluding immediate post-decannulation bleeding, since anticoagulation was prescribed 24h after). RESULTS Our cohort consisted mainly of men (N = 21, 78%), with a mean age of 60 ± 11 years and a mean time on VA-ECMO of 8 ± 3 days, who primarily suffered from post-cardiotomy cardiogenic shock (N = 9, 34%) or acute myocardial infarction (N = 6, 23%). 5 patients (18%) received a heart transplant. Regarding anticoagulation, 15 patients (60%) had other indications apart from the protocol, like incidental thrombus diagnosis (N = 7, 26%) or valve surgery (N = 5, 18%). Anticoagulation therapy was not feasible in 1 patient (4%) with severe thrombopenia. No patients had severe or life-threatening bleeding events in the follow-up, although 8 patients (30%) had bleeding events, mainly gastrointestinal bleeding (N = 4, 15%), requiring withdrawal of anticoagulation in 1 patient. The incidence of thromboembolic events was 7%; two patients with low-risk pulmonary embolisms. During the 3-month follow-up survival rate was 95%. CONCLUSIONS This is the only study to date addressing the strategy of 3-month anticoagulation therapy after VAECMO, showing it is feasible and safe and may be helpful in reducing or ameliorate thromboembolic complications in the follow-up, although it is not exempt of complications. Abstract Figure. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document