Balloon atrial septostomy versus left atrial cannulation for left heart decompression in children with dilated cardiomyopathy and myocarditis on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: An ELSO registry analysis.

Abstract

In children with myocarditis or dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for cardiogenic shock, it is often necessary to decompress the left heart to minimize distension and promote myocardial recovery. We compare outcomes in those who underwent balloon atrial septostomy (BAS) versus direct left atrial (LA) drainage for left heart decompression in this population. Retrospective study of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) multicenter registry of patients ≤ 18years with myocarditis or DCM on ECMO who underwent LA decompression. Descriptive and univariate statistics assessed association of patient factors with decompression type. Multivariable logistic regression sought independent associations with outcomes. 369 pediatric ECMO runs were identified. 52% myocarditis, 48% DCM, overall survival 74%. 65% underwent BAS and 35% LA drainage. Patient demographics including age, weight, gender, race/ethnicity, diagnosis, pre-ECMO pH, mean airway pressure, and arrest status were similar. 89% in the BAS group were peripherally cannulated onto ECMO, versus 3% in the LA drainage group (p < .001). On multivariable analysis, LA drainage (OR 3.96; 95% CI, 1.47-10.711; p = .007), renal complication (OR 2.37; 95% CI, 1.41-4.01; p = .001), cardiac complication (OR 3.14; 95% CI, 1.70-5.82; p < .001), and non-white race/ethnicity (OR 1.75; 95% CI, 1.04-2.94; p = .035) were associated with greater odds of mortality. There was a trend toward more episodes of pulmonary hemorrhage in BAS (n = 17) versus LA drainage group (n = 3), p = .08. Comparing only those with central cannulation, LA drainage group was more likely to be discontinued from ECMO due to recovery (72%) versus the BAS group (48%), p = .032. In children with myocarditis or DCM, there was a three times greater likelihood for mortality with LA drainage versus BAS for LA decompression. When adjusted for central cannulation groups only, there was better recovery in the LA drainage group and no difference in mortality. Further prospective evaluation is warranted.