scholarly journals The challenges and pitfalls of treating cardiogenic shock with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

2021 ◽  
Vol 131 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paweł Piwowarczyk ◽  
Michał Borys ◽  
Mirosław Czuczwar
Keyword(s):  
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

scholarly journals Biventricular Unloading with Impella and Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Severe Refractory Cardiogenic Shock: Implications from the Combined Use of the Devices and Prognostic Risk Factors of Survival

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 747
Author(s):  
Georgios Chatzis ◽  
Styliani Syntila ◽  
Birgit Markus ◽  
Holger Ahrens ◽  
Nikolaos Patsalis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Circulatory Support ◽  
Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Refractory Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Lactate Levels ◽  
Va Ecmo

Since mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices have become integral component in the therapy of refractory cardiogenic shock (RCS), we identified 67 patients in biventricular support with Impella and venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for RCS between February 2013 and December 2019 and evaluated the risk factors of mortality in this setting. Mean age was 61.07 ± 10.7 and 54 (80.6%) patients were male. Main cause of RCS was acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (74.6%), while 44 (65.7%) were resuscitated prior to admission. The mean Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score (SOFA) score on admission was 73.54 ± 16.03 and 12.25 ± 2.71, respectively, corresponding to an expected mortality of higher than 80%. Vasopressor doses and lactate levels were significantly decreased within 72 h on biventricular support (p < 0.05 for both). Overall, 17 (25.4%) patients were discharged to cardiac rehabilitation and 5 patients (7.5%) were bridged successfully to ventricular assist device implantation, leading to a total of 32.8% survival on hospital discharge. The 6-month survival was 31.3%. Lactate > 6 mmol/L, vasoactive score > 100 and pH < 7.26 on initiation of biventricular support, as well as Charlson comorbity index > 3 and prior resuscitation were independent predictors of survival. In conclusion, biventricular support with Impella and VA-ECMO in patients with RCS is feasible and efficient leading to a better survival than predicted through traditional risk scores, mainly via significant hemodynamic improvement and reduction in lactate levels.

Impact of Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Flow on Outcomes in Cardiogenic Shock

ASAIO Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Sameer K. Singh ◽  
Yuming Ning ◽  
Paul Kurlansky ◽  
Yuji Kaku ◽  
Yoshifumi Naka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

scholarly journals Efficacy of left ventricular unloading strategies during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with cardiogenic shock: a protocol for a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. e047046
Author(s):  
Pengbin Zhang ◽  
Shilin Wei ◽  
Kerong Zhai ◽  
Jian Huang ◽  
Xingdong Cheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Bayesian Network ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Patient Consent ◽  
Va Ecmo

IntroductionVenoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) has been widely used for patients with refractory cardiogenic shock. A common side effect of this technic is the resultant increase in left ventricular (LV) afterload which could potentially aggravate myocardial ischaemia, delay ventricular recovery and increase the risk of pulmonary congestion. Several LV unloading strategies have been proposed and implemented to mitigate these complications. However, it is still indistinct that which one is the best choice for clinical application. This Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to compare the efficacy of different LV unloading strategies during VA-ECMO.Methods and analysisPubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform will be explored from their inception to 31 December 2020. Random controlled trials and cohort studies that compared different LV unloading strategies during VA-ECMO will be included in this study. The primary outcome will be in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes will include neurological complications, haemolysis, bleeding, limb ischaemia, renal failure, gastrointestinal complications, sepsis, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of intensive care unit and hospital stays. Pairwise and NMA will respectively be conducted using Stata (V.16, StataCorp) and Aggregate Data Drug Information System (V.1.16.5), and the cumulative probability will be used to rank the included LV unloading strategies. The risk of bias will be conducted using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool or Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale according to their study design. Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis and publication bias assessment will be performed. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation will be conducted to explore the quality of evidence.Ethics and disseminationEither ethics approval or patient consent is not necessary, because this study will be based on literature. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020165093.

scholarly journals Cost-utility of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 333-341
Author(s):  
Salla Jäämaa-Holmberg ◽  
Birgitta Salmela ◽  
Raili Suojaranta ◽  
Karl B Lemström ◽  
Jyri Lommi
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Cardiogenic Shock ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life Years ◽  
Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Life Years ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Quality Adjusted Life

Background: The use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in cardiogenic shock keeps increasing, but its cost-utility is unknown. Methods: We studied retrospectively the cost-utility of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in a five-year cohort of consequent patients treated due to refractory cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest in a transplant centre in 2013–2017. In our centre, venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is considered for all cardiogenic shock patients potentially eligible for heart transplantation, and for selected postcardiotomy patients. We assessed the costs of the index hospitalization and of the one-year hospital costs, and the patients’ health-related quality of life (response rate 71.7%). Based on the data and the population-based life expectancies, we calculated the amount and the costs of quality-adjusted life years gained both without discount and with an annual discount of 3.5%. Results: The cohort included 102 patients (78 cardiogenic shock; 24 cardiac arrest) of whom 67 (65.7%) survived to discharge and 66 (64.7%) to one year. The effective costs per one hospital survivor were 242,303€. Median in-hospital costs of the index hospitalization per patient were 129,967€ (interquartile range 150,340€). Mean predicted number of quality-adjusted life years gained by the treatment was 20.9 (standard deviation 9.7) without discount, and the median cost per quality-adjusted life year was 7474€ (interquartile range 10,973€). With the annual discount of 3.5%, 13.0 (standard deviation 4.8) quality-adjusted life years were gained with the cost of 12,642€ per quality-adjusted life year (interquartile range 15,059€). Conclusions: We found the use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in refractory cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest justified from the cost-utility point of view in a transplant centre setting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document