Use of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as Bridge to Replacement Therapies in Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization

Background: There has been increasing use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as bridge to heart transplant (orthotopic heart transplant [OHT]) or left ventricular assist device (LVAD) over the last decade. We aimed to provide insights on the population, outcomes, and predictors for the selection of each therapy. Methods: Using the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry between 2010 and 2019, we compared in-hospital mortality and length of stay, predictors of OHT versus LVAD, and predictors of in-hospital mortality for patients with cardiogenic shock that were bridged with ECMO to OHT or LVAD. One hundred sixty-seven patients underwent LVAD versus 234 patients who underwent OHT. Results: The overall use of ECMO has increased from 1.7% in 2010 to 22.2% in 2019. Mortality was similar between groups (LVAD: 28.7% versus OHT: 29.1%) while length of stay was longer for OHT (LVAD: 49.6 versus OHT: 59.5 days, P =0.05). Factors associated with OHT included prior transplant (odds ratio [OR]=31.26 [CI, 3.84–780.5]), use of a temporary pacemaker (OR=6.5 [CI, 1.39–50.15]), and increased use of inotropes on ECMO (OR=3.77 [CI, 1.39–11.07]), whereas LVAD use was associated with weight (OR=0.98 [CI, 0.97–0.99]), cardiogenic shock presentation (OR=0.40 [CI, 0.21–0.78]), previous LVAD (OR=0.01 [CI, 0.0001–0.22]), respiratory failure (OR=0.28 [CI, 0.11–0.70]), and milrinone infusion (OR=0.32 [CI, 0.15–0.67]). Older age (OR=1.07 [CI, 1.02–1.12]), cannulation bleeding (OR=26.1 [CI, 4.32–221.3]), and surgical bleeding (OR=6.7 [CI, 1.26–39.9]) in patients receiving LVAD and respiratory failure (OR=5 [CI, 1.17–23.1]) and continuous renal replacement therapy (OR=3.82 [CI, 1.28–11.9]) in patients receiving OHT were associated with increased mortality. Conclusions: ECMO use as a bridge to advanced therapies has increased over time, with more patients undergoing LVAD than OHT. Mortality was equal between the 2 groups while length of stay was longer for OHT.

Repeat Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support Is Appropriate in Selected Children With Cardiac Disease: An Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Study

Objective: Children requiring multiple consecutive extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) runs likely have ongoing cardiac pathology (eg, residual lesions, myocardial dysfunction) and are exposed to increased complications and end-organ failure. Often, repeat back-to-back ECMO is suggested to be futile due to poor reported survival. Methods: Using Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) data (2011-2019), we evaluated children (n = 669) who received multiple cardiac ECMO runs (≥2) within 30 days interval. Factors associated with hospital mortality were evaluated using multivariable regression analysis. Results: Median ECMO runs was 2 (range: 2-5) including 294 (44%) patients who received extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). There were 250 (37%) hospital survivors. Survivors were more likely older, Caucasian, and less likely to have hypoplastic left heart syndrome, require >2 runs, receive longer support duration, require inotropes or have acidosis while on ECMO, or develop renal and neurological complications. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with death included neonates (odds ratio [OR] = 3.6, 95% CI = 1.8-7.5, P = .0002), African Americans (OR = 2.7, 95% CI = 1.4-4.9, P = .0307), longer ECMO duration (OR = 1.1, 95% CI = 1.05-1.11, P < .0001, per 10 hours), central cannulation at initial run (OR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.1-2.8, P = .0285), renal failure (OR = 3.0, 95% CI = 1.9-4.6, P < .0001), and neurological complications (OR = 3.8, 95% CI = 2.2-6.8, P < .0001). Conclusions: In selected children with cardiac pathology, multiple back-to-back ECMO and/or ECPR runs are associated with 37% hospital survival. Although registry data limit the ability to clearly determine selection criteria for repeat ECMO, our findings suggest that in properly selected patients, repeat ECMO support is not futile. Ongoing assessment of support adequacy, end-organ function, and cardiopulmonary recovery is necessary as longer support and emerging complications are associated with poor survival.