Impact of the location of the initial admitting intensive care unit on the delivery of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in Australia and New Zealand.

Access to centers with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) capabilities varies by region and may affect overall outcomes. We assessed the outcomes of trauma patients requiring ECMO support and compared the overall survival of all patients with trauma at facilities with and without ECMO capabilities. A retrospective review of the National Trauma Data Bank was performed to identify all trauma patients receiving care at ECMO and non-ECMO centers. Baseline patient characteristics and outcomes were analyzed. Adjusted odds ratio (OR) was used to compare survival at ECMO and non-ECMO facilities. Between 2007 and 2015, a total of 5 781 123 patients with trauma were identified with 1 983 986 (34%) admitted to an ECMO facility and 3 797 137 (66%) admitted to a non-ECMO facility. A total of 522 (0.03%) patients required ECMO. Both the number of patients with trauma requiring ECMO support and the number of trauma facilities utilizing ECMO increased over the 9-year-study period (4.9 to 13.8 patients per 100 000 admissions, and 18 to 77 centers, respectively). The mortality for ECMO patients was 40.5%. Patients with trauma admitted to ECMO facilities had more severe injuries (injury severity score: 9.0 vs 8.0; P < .001). The overall mortality was 3.3%. The adjusted OR for mortality associated with admission to an ECMO facility vs a non-ECMO facility was 0.96 (95% confidence interval: 0.95-0.97; adjusted P < .001). The use of ECMO for patients with trauma is expanding. Our study demonstrates a survival benefit associated with admission to a facility with ECMO capabilities. Thus, access to ECMO is a potential quality metric for trauma centers.

Acute Care Nurse Practitioner-Led Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Simulation Training.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Opportunities for Expanding Nurses' Roles.

Neonatal and pediatric ECMO organization in France: A national survey

Critically ill patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) frequently require interhospital transfer to a center that has ECMO capabilities. Patients receiving ECMO were evaluated to determine whether interhospital transfer was a risk factor for subsequent development of a nosocomial infection. Retrospective cohort study. A 425-bed academic tertiary-care hospital. All adult patients who received ECMO for >48 hours between May 2012 and May 2020. The rate of nosocomial infections for patients receiving ECMO was compared between patients who were cannulated at the ECMO center and patients who were cannulated at a hospital without ECMO capabilities and transported to the ECMO center for further care. Additionally, time to infection, organisms responsible for infection, and site of infection were compared. In total, 123 patients were included in analysis. For the primary outcome of nosocomial infection, there was no difference in number of infections per 1,000 ECMO days (25.4 vs 29.4; P = .03) by univariate analysis. By Cox proportional hazard analysis, transport was not significantly associated with increased infections (hazard ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-4.2; P = .20). In this study, we did not identify an increased risk of nosocomial infection during subsequent hospitalization. Further studies are needed to identify sources of nosocomial infection in this high-risk population.

Activities of an ECMO Center for Severe Respiratory Failure: ECMO Retrieval and Beyond, A 4-Year Experience

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Children with Coronavirus Disease 2019: Preliminary Report from the Collaborative European Chapter of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Prospective Survey.

COVID-19-related coagulopathy is a known complication of SARS-CoV-2 infection and can lead to intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), one of the most feared complications of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We sought to evaluate the incidence and etiology of ICH in patients with COVID-19 requiring ECMO. Patients at two academic medical centers with COVID-19 who required venovenous-ECMO support for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) were evaluated retrospectively. During the study period, 33 patients required ECMO support; 16 (48.5%) were discharged alive, 13 died (39.4%), and 4 (12.1%) had ongoing care. Eleven patients had ICH (33.3%). All ICH events occurred in patients who received intravenous anticoagulation. The ICH group had higher C-reactive protein (P = 0.04), procalcitonin levels (P = 0.02), and IL-6 levels (P = 0.05), lower blood pH before and after ECMO (P < 0.01), and higher activated partial thromboplastin times throughout the hospital stay (P < 0.0001). ICH-free survival was lower in COVID-19 patients than in patients on ECMO for ARDS caused by other viruses (49% vs. 79%, P = 0.02). In conclusion, patients with COVID-19 can be successfully bridged to recovery using ECMO but may suffer higher rates of ICH compared to those with other viral respiratory infections.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background The use of veno-arterial (VA) and veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has significantly increased in the last decade. However, there is substantial variability in practice patterns between institutions. To date, the optimal ECMO program model is unclear and possible differences between ECMO centers in staffing, organization and team structure have been poorly characterized. Purpose Our aim was to describe contemporary practices of care for patients undergoing ECMO in tertiary cardiac centers in North America. Methods An 11-question anonymous survey was sent to all participating sites in the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN), a prospective registry of advanced cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) in North America, coordinated by the TIMI Study Group. The survey evaluated ECMO staffing models, decision-making processes, cannulation and longitudinal care. Results The response rate was 100% (39/39) across CCCTN centers. The decision to proceed with VA ECMO was made as a team in 79% of the cases and in 58.3% of the VV ECMO cases, rather than by an individual specialty. An ECMO consult service was used in 67% of the centers, and integrated with the cardiogenic shock team in 58%. The most common specialty participating in the ECMO service was cardiothoracic surgery (CTS) (73.1%), followed by heart failure specialists (38.5%), with critical care cardiology (CCC) in only 23.1% of the centers (Figure 1A). In the majority of centers, VA ECMO cannulation was performed by CTS alone (46.2%), Interventional cardiology (IC) and CTS (38.5%), and IC alone (7.7%, Figure 1B). Cannulation for VA ECMO was not performed by intensivists at any center. VV ECMO cannulations were performed by CTS in 51.3%, intensivists in 17.9% and IC in 2.6% of the centers. VA ECMO patients were admitted to the cardiovascular surgical intensive care unit in 64.1% of centers, with 20.5 % admitted to the CICU (Figure 1C). VV ECMO patients were admitted to the cardiovascular surgical intensive care unit in 36.8% of sites, and the medical intensive care unit in 34.2%. The most common ECMO specialist model was having a perfusionist at the bedside, followed by nurse specialist (Figure 1D). Specialty services consulted within 24-48 hours of cannulation included physical therapy in 48.7%, palliative care in 30.8%, and bioethics in only 2.6% of centers. Simulation-based ECMO training is performed in 59% of the centers. Half (51.3%) of the centers perform ECPR, while 17.9% reported plans of developing a program. Conclusions Although there is significant variability in ECMO cannulation, location of care, staffing practices in advanced CICUs in North America, a multidisciplinary team approach is common in ECMO centers, with early involvement of physical therapy and palliative care specialists. Further research to establish the optimal model for ECMO programs is of high importance.

Toward Precision Delivery of ECMO in COVID-19 Cardiorespiratory Failure.

Previous studies have addressed patients in whom treatment is withheld or withdrawn after a period of intensive care unit management. However, no studies have investigated the epidemiology of patients with treatment limitations in place at the time of intensive care unit admission. To report the epidemiology and outcome of patients with treatment limitations at intensive care unit admission and to identify characteristics associated with survival and discharge to home. Retrospective database study using data from the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database. Australian and New Zealand intensive care units. One hundred eighty-seven thousand four hundred and one intensive care patients collected over a 3-yr period, 5,989 (3.2%) of whom had treatment limitations at admission to the intensive care unit. Retrospective database study with no interventions. Data collected included patient characteristics, length of stay, mortality, and discharge destination. Mean intensive care unit bed days were used as a surrogate for resource consumption. Between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2009, 5,989 (3.2%) patients were reported to the Australia and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database who had treatment limitation orders at admission to intensive care unit. Mortality was 53% (95% confidence interval 51.7%-54.3%) compared with 9% (95% confidence interval 8.9%-9.1%) in patients admitted for full active management (p ≤ .001). Overall, 30% of patients with treatment limitations were discharged directly to their homes. Intensive care unit bed day usage was similar between the two groups. Within the treatment limitation group, younger patients, those with less comorbid diseases, less acute physiological disturbance, and those admitted following elective surgery, were more likely to survive and be discharged home. Admission diagnosis was an important determinant of outcome with intracranial or subarachnoid hemorrhage predicting a extremely high mortality. Patients with treatment limitations on intensive care unit admission comprise approximately 2,000 patients per year in Australia and New Zealand. Despite such limitations, almost half of these patients survive their hospital admission and a third return directly to their home.

ECMO for ARDS due to COVID-19

Successful sequential transplantation of 2 single lungs from the same donor into 2 different recipients-use of standard cold preservation and 10 °C preservation.

When life support is pointless, stop it