Six Month Mortality in Patients with COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Viral Pneumonitis Managed with Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

Survival difference in patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in COVID-19 vs. non-COVID ARDS: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has emphasized the need for effective management of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) using veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). This meta-analysis aims to compare the effectiveness and outcomes of ECMO in patients with COVID-19 ARDS versus those with non-COVID ARDS, assessing its role in different respiratory virus infections.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and other relevant databases up to June 30, 2023, to identify studies comparing ECMO use in COVID-19 and non-COVID ARDS cases. This analysis adheres to PRISMA guidelines, with studies rigorously selected based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and assessed for bias using validated tools.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The meta-analysis included 24 studies with 2,121 patients, revealing that non-COVID ARDS patients treated with ECMO had a lower mortality risk compared to those with COVID-19 ARDS. Specifically, the overall pooled risk difference in survival was -0.11 (95% CI: -0.17 to -0.05, P<0.001), indicating a statistically significant advantage for non-COVID patients. The standardized mean difference for ECMO duration was significantly longer in COVID-19 patients (SMD=0.70, 95% CI: 0.32 to 1.08, P<0.001), reflecting more prolonged treatment needs.

CONCLUSIONS

ECMO serves as a vital intervention in severe ARDS, with differential effectiveness observed between COVID-19 and non-COVID patients. The study's findings underline the need for precise patient selection and tailored ECMO application across different viral etiologies. These insights are crucial for enhancing clinical strategies and resource allocation during ongoing and future pandemics.

Complications during Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Background: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) presents a significant challenge in critical care settings, characterized by compromised gas exchange, necessitating in the most severe cases interventions such as veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) when conventional therapies fail. Critically ill ARDS patients on vv-ECMO may experience several complications. Limited data exist comparing complication rates between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS patients undergoing vv-ECMO. This retrospective observational study aimed to assess and compare complications in these patient cohorts. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of all patients receiving vv-ECMO for ARDS between March 2020 and March 2022. We recorded the baseline characteristics, the disease course and complication (barotrauma, bleeding, thrombosis) before and after ECMO cannulation, and clinical outcomes (mechanical ventilation and ECMO duration, intensive care unit, and hospital lengths of stay and mortalities). Data were compared between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. In addition, we compared survived and deceased patients. Results: Sixty-four patients were included. COVID-19 patients (n = 25) showed higher rates of pneumothorax (28% vs. 8%, p = 0.039) with subcutaneous emphysema (24% vs. 5%, p = 0.048) and longer non-invasive ventilation duration before vv-ECMO cannulation (2 [1; 4] vs. 0 [0; 1] days, p = <0.001), compared to non-COVID-19 patients (n = 39). However, complication rates and clinical outcomes post-vv-ECMO were similar between groups. Survival analysis revealed no significant differences in pre-vv-ECMO complications, but non-surviving patients had a trend toward higher complication rates and more pleural effusions post-vv-ECMO. Conclusions: COVID-19 patients on vv-ECMO exhibit higher pneumothorax rates with subcutaneous emphysema pre-cannulation; post-cannulation complications are comparable to non-COVID-19 patients.

Status of COVID-19 Patients Treated With Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Japan: Nationwide Database Analysis

Background The report of epidemiological data on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients treated using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in Japan has been limited. Our study seeks to fill the existing gap in knowledge by providing an in-depth analysis of the clinical epidemiological characteristics and diverse medical outcomes of COVID-19 patients treated with ECMO in Japan. Methods This study used the COVID-19 Registry Japan nationwide database. We included patients aged 18 years or older enrolled between March 17, 2020, and February 1, 2022, with traceable ECMO data. The items on clinical epidemiological characteristics and various medical outcomes were collected. Statistical analysis included a median and interquartile range (IQR) for continuous variables and frequencies for categorical variables. Results The number of participating hospitals was 731, and the number of patients enrolled for analysis was 49,590. Of these, 196 (0.4%) patients received ECMO. Hospital mortality was 33.2%, and discharge to home was 23.0% in the ECMO group. The complications during hospitalization included pneumothorax (9.7%), seizures (4.1%), stroke (4.6%), and pulmonary thromboembolism (2.0%). At discharge, 38.3% had worsened self-care ability, and 38.8% had worsened ambulatory function. Conclusions The results of ECMO treatment in Japan showed that the mortality and complication rates were well-controlled compared with those worldwide.

Single-center experience of temporary-permanent pacemaker use in COVID-19 patients supported with veno-venous ECMO: A case series

INTRODUCTION

In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, nine out of 129 patients (7%) developed life-threatening bradycardia episodes ultimately requiring a TPPM, whilst being supported with VV-ECMO for severe COVID-19 ARDS in our tertiary cardio-pulmonary failure center.

ANALYSIS

All subjects had asystole due to sinus node dysfunction and experienced at least one episode involving cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Most bradycardic events were seen in the context of vagal hypersensitivity. Mean time from general ICU admission to TPPM insertion was 20.6 ± 8.9 days. One patient developed a large chest wall hematoma weeks after TPPM implantation, no other TPPM-related issues were observed. No patient required a long-term pacing system. Six-months survival rate was high (89%).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggested that transient life-threatening sinus node disease is not uncommon in ECMO-dependent COVID-19 ARDS patients. TPPM with an active fixation lead is sometimes needed to facilitate ongoing ICU care, however, long-term permanent pacing was not required.

Safety of tracheostomy during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Some patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) require prolonged mechanical ventilation. An early tracheostomy strategy while on ECMO has appeared to be beneficial for these patients. This study aims to explore the safety of tracheostomy in ECMO patients.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational single-center study.

RESULTS

Hundred and nine patients underwent tracheostomy (76 percutaneous and 33 surgical) during V-V ECMO support over an 8-year period. Patients with a percutaneous tracheostomy showed a significantly shorter ECMO duration [25.5 (17.3-40.1) vs 37.2 (26.5-53.2) days, p = 0.013] and a shorter ECMO-to-tracheostomy time [13.3 (8.5-19.7) vs 27.8 (16.3-36.9) days, p < 0.001] compared to those who underwent a surgical approach. There was no difference between the two strategies regarding both major and minor/no bleeding (p = 0.756). There was no difference in survival rate between patients who underwent percutaneous or surgical tracheostomy (p = 0.173). Patients who underwent an early tracheostomy (within 10 days from ECMO insertion) showed a significantly shorter hospital stay (p < 0.001) and a shorter duration of V-V ECMO support (p < 0.001). Our series includes 24 patients affected by COVID-19, who did not show significantly higher rates of major bleeding when compared to non-COVID-19 patients (p = 0.297). Within the COVID-19 subgroup, there was no difference in major bleeding rates between surgical and percutaneous approach (p = 1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous and surgical tracheostomy during ECMO have a similar safety profile in terms of bleeding risk and mortality. Percutaneous tracheostomy may favor a shorter duration of ECMO support and hospital stay and can be considered a safe alternative to surgical tracheostomy, even in COVID-19 patients, if relevant clinical expertise is available.

Ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is employed to support critically ill COVD-19 patients. The occurrence of ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), as well as the implementation of anticoagulation strategies under the dual influence of ECMO and COVID-19 remain unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to describe the ischemic stroke, ICH and overall in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients receiving ECMO and summarize the anticoagulation regimens.

METHODS

EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus were searched for studies examining ischemic stroke, ICH, and mortality in COVID-19 patients supported with ECMO. The outcomes were incidences of ischemic stroke, ICH, overall in-hospital mortality and anticoagulation regimens. We calculated the pooled proportions and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to summarize the results.

RESULTS

We analyzed 12 peer-reviewed studies involving 6039 COVID-19 patients. The incidence of ischemic stroke had a pooled estimate of 2.2% (95% CI: 1.2%-3.2%). The pooled prevalence of ICH was 8.0% (95% CI: 6.3%-9.6%). The pooled estimate of overall in-hospital mortality was 40.3% (95% CI: 33.1%-47.5%). The occurrence of ICH was significantly higher in COVID-19 patients supported with ECMO than in other respiratory ECMO [relative risk=1.75 (95% CI: 1.00-3.07)]. Unfractionated heparin was the most commonly used anticoagulant, and anticoagulation monitoring practice varied among centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Ischemic stroke and ICH were common under the double "hit" of COVID-19 and ECMO. The prevalence of ICH was significantly higher in COVID-19 patients supported with ECMO than non-COVID-19 patients requiring ECMO. Individualized anticoagulation regimens may be a good choice to balance thrombosis and bleeding. More detailed research and further exploration are needed to clarify the underlying mechanism and clinical management decisions.

Intracranial hemorrhage in patients treated for SARS-CoV-2 with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is routinely used in patients with severe respiratory failure and has been increasingly needed during the COVID-19 pandemic. In patients treated with ECMO, significant intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) risk exists due to circuit characteristics, anticoagulation, and disease characteristics. ICH risk may be substantially higher in COVID-19 patients than patients treated with ECMO for other indications.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed current literature regarding ICH during ECMO treatment of COVID-19. We utilized Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases. Meta-analysis was performed for included comparative studies. Quality assessment was performed using MINORS criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 54 studies with 4000 ECMO patients were included, all retrospective. Risk of bias was increased via MINORS score primarily due to retrospective designs. ICH was more likely in COVID-19 patients (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.23, 2.42). Mortality among COVID patients on ECMO with ICH was 64.0%, compared with 41% in patients without ICH (RR1.9, 95% 1.44, 2.51).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests increased hemorrhage rates in COVID-19 patients on ECMO compared to similar controls. Hemorrhage reduction strategies may include atypical anticoagulants, conservative anticoagulation strategies, or biotechnology advances in circuit design and surface coatings.

COVID-19 outcomes of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory failure vs historical cohort of non-COVID-19 viral infections

INTRODUCTION

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has become a support modality for patients with acute respiratory failure refractory to standard therapies. VV ECMO has been increasingly used during the current COVID-19 pandemic for patients with refractory respiratory failure. The object of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of VV ECMO in patients with COVID-19 compared to patients with non-COVID-19 viral infections.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients supported with VV ECMO between 8/2014 and 8/2020 whose etiology of illness was a viral pulmonary infection. The primary outcome of this study was to evaluate in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included length of ECMO course, ventilator duration, hospital length of stay, incidence of adverse events through ECMO course.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine patients were included (35 COVID-19 vs 54 non-COVID-19). Forty (74%) of the non-COVID-19 patients had influenza virus. Prior to cannulation, COVID-19 patients had longer ventilator duration (3 vs 1 day, p = .003), higher PaCO2 (64 vs 53 mmHg, p = .012), and white blood cell count (14 vs 9 ×103/μL, p = .004). Overall in-hospital mortality was 33.7% (n = 30). COVID-19 patients had a higher mortality (49% vs. 24%, p = .017) when compared to non-COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 survivors had longer median time on ECMO than non-COVID-19 survivors (24.4 vs 16.5 days p = .03) but had a similar hospital length of stay (HLOS) (41 vs 48 Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenationdays p = .33).

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 patients supported with VV ECMO have a higher mortality than non-COVID-19 patients. While COVID-19 survivors had significantly longer VV ECMO runs than non-COVID-19 survivors, HLOS was similar. This data add to a growing body of literature supporting the use of ECMO for potentially reversible causes of respiratory failure.

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for coronavirus disease 2019 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Although the application of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is accumulating, the feasibility and safety of this therapy remain controversial. We aimed to evaluate the effect of VV-ECMO in the treatment of these patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform databases through November 2021. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the included studies were screened, and meta-analysis was performed by R software (version 4.0.2).

RESULTS

Forty-two studies including 2037 COVID-19 patients supported with VV-ECMO due to ARDS were identified. The pooled analysis revealed that 30-, 60-, and 90-day mortality among patients were respectively 46% (95% CI 37%-57%, I2 = 66%), 46% (95% CI 30%-70%, I2 = 93%), and 49% (95% CI 43%-58%, I2 = 52%), and the pooled incidence rate of in-hospital mortality, major bleeding, hemorrhagic stroke, thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, and renal replacement therapy were respectively 35%, 39%, 11%, 40%, 15%, 21%, and 44%.

CONCLUSION

Although COVID-19 patients may have a higher risk of bleeding, hemorrhagic stroke, and acute kidney injury during ECMO therapy, the survival rate was more than half of the cases. Our data may support the application of VV-ECMO in COVID-19 patients.

A Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Managed With Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the First and Second Waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVES

Early studies of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in COVID-19 have revealed similar outcomes to historical cohorts. Changes in the disease and treatments have led to differences in the patients supported on venovenous ECMO in the first and second waves. We aimed to compare these two groups in both the acute and follow-up phase.

DESIGN

Retrospective single-center cohort study comparing mortality at censoring date (November 30, 2021) and decannulation, patient characteristics, complications and lung function and quality of life (QOL-by European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 3 Level Version) at first follow-up in patients supported on venovenous ECMO between wave 1 and wave 2 of the COVID-19 pandemic.

SETTING

Critical care department of a severe acute respiratory failure service.

PATIENTS

Patients supported on ECMO for COVID-19 between wave 1 (March 17, 2020, to August 31, 2020) and wave 2 (January 9, 2020, to May 25, 2021).

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

One hundred twenty-three patients were included in our analysis. Survival at censoring date (χ 2 , 6.35; p = 0.012) and decannulation (90.4% vs 70.0%; p < 0.001) was significantly lower in the second wave, while duration of ECMO run was longer (12.0 d [18.0-30.0 d] vs 29.5 d [15.5-58.3 d]; p = 0.005). Wave 2 patients had longer application of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) prior to ECMO and a higher frequency of barotrauma. Patient age and NIV use were independently associated with increased mortality (odds ratio 1.07 [1.01-1.14]; p = 0.025 and 3.37 [1.12-12.60]; p = 0.043, respectively). QOL and lung function apart from transfer coefficient of carbon monoxide corrected for hemoglobin was similar at follow-up across the waves.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients with COVID-19 supported on ECMO in both waves survived in the short and longer term. At follow-up patients had similar lung function and QOL across the two waves. This suggests that ECMO has an ongoing role in the management of a carefully selected group of patients with COVID-19.

Health Disparities in Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Utilization and Outcomes: A Scoping Review and Methodologic Critique of the Literature

OBJECTIVES

To map the scope, methodological rigor, quality, and direction of associations between social determinants of health (SDoH) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) utilization or outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for citations from January 2000 to January 2023, examining socioeconomic status (SES), race, ethnicity, hospital and ECMO program characteristics, transport, and geographic location (context) with utilization and outcomes (concept) in ECMO patients (population).

STUDY SELECTION

Methodology followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses scoping review extension. Two reviewers independently evaluated abstracts and full text of identified publications. Exclusion criteria included non-English, unavailable, less than 40 patients, and periprocedural or mixed mechanical support.

DATA EXTRACTION

Content analysis used a standardized data extraction tool and inductive thematic analysis for author-proposed mediators of disparities. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of 8,214 citations screened, 219 studies were identified. Primary analysis focuses on 148 (68%) including race/ethnicity/SES/payer variables including investigation of ECMO outcomes 114 (77%) and utilization 43 (29%). SDoH were the primary predictor in 15 (10%). Overall quality and methodologic rigor was poor with advanced statistics in 7%. Direction of associations between ECMO outcomes or utilization according to race, ethnicity, SES, or payer varied. In 38% adverse outcomes or lower use was reported in underrepresented, under-resourced or diverse populations, while improved outcomes or greater use were observed in these populations in 7%, and 55% had no statistically significant result. Only 26 studies (18%) discussed mechanistic drivers of disparities, primarily focusing on individual- and hospital-level rather than systemic/structural factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Associations between ECMO utilization and outcomes with SDoH are inconsistent, complicated by population heterogeneity and analytic shortcomings with limited consideration of systemic contributors. Findings and research gaps have implications for measuring, analyzing, and interpreting SDoH in ECMO research and healthcare.

Mortality in patients with COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19- related acute respiratory distress syndrome: A single center retrospective observational cohort study

The pathophysiology of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) varies from other pneumonia-related ARDS. We evaluated whether the mortality rates differed for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19-related ARDS in the Asian population in 2021. This single center retrospective observational cohort study included patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19-related ARDS that required invasive mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, ICU length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ventilator-free days (VFDs) during the first 28 days. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed to correct potential confounders by age, obesity or not, and ARDS severity. One-hundred-and-sixty-four patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. After 1:1 propensity score matching, there were 50 patients in each group. The all-cause in-hospital mortality of all patients was 38 (38%), and no significant differences were found between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19-related ARDS (17 [34%) vs. 21 [42%], p = 0.410). Both groups had length of stay (30.0 [20.0-46.0] vs. 27.0 [13.0-45.0] days, p = 0.312), ICU length of stay (19.0 [13.0-35.0] vs. 16.0 [10.0-32.0] days, p = 0.249), length of mechanical ventilation (19.0 [10.0-36.0] vs. 14.0 [9.0-29.0] days, p = 0.488), and ventilator-free days during the first 28 days (5.5 [0.0-17.0] vs. 0.0 [0.0-14.0] days, p = 0.320). Immunocompromised status (Hazard ratio: 3.63; 95% CI: 1.51-8.74, p = 0.004) and progress to severe ARDS (Hazard ratio: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.18-7.22, p = 0.020) were significant in-hospital mortality-related confounders. There were no significant difference in mortality among both groups. Immunocompromised status and progression to severe ARDS are two possible risk factors for patients with ARDS; COVID-19 is not a mortality-related risk exposure.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for COVID-19: Comparison of Outcomes to Non-COVID-19-Related Viral Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome From the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry

To compare complications and mortality between patients that required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 viral pathogens.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational cohort study.

SETTING

Adult patients in the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry.

PATIENTS

Nine-thousand two-hundred ninety-one patients that required ECMO for viral mediated ARDS between January 2017 and December 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcomes of interest were mortality during ECMO support and prior to hospital discharge. Time-to-event analysis and logistic regression were used to compare outcomes between the groups. Among 9,291 included patients, 1,155 required ECMO for non-COVID-19 viral ARDS and 8,136 required ECMO for ARDS due to COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19 had longer duration of ECMO (19.6 d [interquartile range (IQR), 10.1-34.0 d] vs 10.7 d [IQR, 6.3-19.7 d]; p < 0.001), higher mortality during ECMO support (44.4% vs 27.5%; p < 0.001), and higher in-hospital mortality (50.2% vs 34.5%; p < 0.001). Further, patients with COVID-19 were more likely to experience mechanical and clinical complications (membrane lung failure, pneumothorax, intracranial hemorrhage, and superimposed infection). After adjusting for pre-ECMO disease severity, patients with COVID-19 were more than two times as likely to die in the hospital compared with patients with non-COVID-19 viral ARDS.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with COVID-19 that require ECMO have longer duration of ECMO, more complications, and higher in-hospital mortality compared with patients with non-COVID-19-related viral ARDS. Further study in patients with COVID-19 is critical to identify the patient phenotype most likely to benefit from ECMO and to better define the role of ECMO in the management of this disease process.

The results of cardiac surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with previous years: a propensity weighted study of outcomes at six months

OBJECTIVES

In addition to excess mortality due to COVID-19, the pandemic has been characterised by excess mortality due to non-COVID diagnoses and consistent reports of patients delaying seeking medical treatment. This study seeks to compare the outcomes of cardiac surgery during and before the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

Our institutional database was interrogated retrospectively to identify all patients undergoing one of three index procedures during the first six months of the pandemic and the corresponding epochs of the previous five years.

SETTING

A regional cardiothoracic centre.

PARTICIPANTS

All patients undergoing surgery during weeks #13-37, 2015-2020.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Propensity score weighted analysis was employed to compare the incidence of major complications (stroke, renal failure, re-ventilation), 30-day mortality, six month survival and length of hospital stay between the two groups.

RESULTS

There was no difference in 30-day mortality (HR = 0.76 [95% CI 0.27-2.20], p = 0.6211), 6-month survival (HR = 0.94 [95% CI 0.44-2.01], p = 0.8809) and duration of stay (SHR = 1.00 (95% CI 0.90-1.12), p = 0.959) between the two eras. There were no differences in the incidence of major complications (weighted chi-square test: renal failure: p = 0.923, stroke: p = 0.991, new respiratory failure: p = 0.856).

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac surgery is as safe now as in the previous five years. Concerns over the transmission of COVID-19 in hospital are understandable but patients should be encouraged not to delay seeking medical attention. All involved in healthcare and the wider public should be reassured by these findings.

Implementing Nurse Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Specialists to Maintain a Sustainable Program

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) offers hope for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome when other treatment methods fail. However, ECMO requires continuous hourly management leading to extremely high operating costs. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the high number of patients on ECMO led to a significant increase in the costs when using perfusionists to manage ECMO. Switching to a nurse-driven model resulted in a 52% decrease in costs related to the hourly management. Changing to a nurse-driven program provided increased nursing support and sustainability, and with determination and support, other ECMO centers can also change to nurse-driven programs.

Thrombosis and coagulopathy in COVID-19 patients rceiving ECMO: A narrative review of current literature

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an established part of the treatment algorithm for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome. An intense inflammatory response may cause an imbalance in the coagulation cascade making both thrombosis and bleeding common and notable features of the clinical management of these patients. Large observational and retrospective studies provide a better understanding of the pathophysiology and management of bleeding and thrombosis in COVID-19 patients requiring ECMO. Clinically significant bleeding, including intracerebral hemorrhage, is an independent predictor of mortality, and thrombosis (particularly pulmonary embolism) is associated with mortality, especially if occurring with right ventricular dysfunction. The incidence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is higher than the general patient cohort with acute respiratory distress syndrome or other indications for ECMO. The use of laboratory parameters to predict bleeding or thrombosis has a limited role. In this review, the authors discuss the complex pathophysiology of bleeding and thrombosis observed in patients with COVID-19 during ECMO support, and their effects on outcomes.

Thoracic surgery in patients on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated a new type of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) arising as a complication of COVID-19 pneumonia. Extreme cases require the support of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Here we present the outcomes of patients that underwent surgical tracheostomy or thoracic surgery at a single tertiary centre whilst on ECMO support for COVID-19 related ARDS.

METHODS

18 patients requiring thoracic input whilst on ECMO support during the first wave of COVID-19 (March-June 2020) were included. Thoracic surgery was required both for performing surgical tracheostomies in the operating theatre and for treating emergencies arising under the ECMO treatment such as bleeding complications.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients underwent a surgical tracheostomy, whilst five patients had an invasive thoracic procedure. Anticoagulation was withheld for at least 12 h in the perioperative setting regardless of the indication. One patient was re-operated for haemothorax immediately after the end of the primary operation. 94.5% of the patients were successfully decannulated from ECMO support. Overall 30-day mortality in the cohort was 5.5% (1/18).

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracic surgeons can play a valuable role in supporting an ECMO unit during the COVID pandemic, by treating ECMO related complications and by safely performing surgical tracheostomies. Withholding anticoagulation in the perioperative window was not associated with increased thromboembolic events and is desirable when interventions or surgery is indicated in this patient cohort to avoid excessive bleeding.

The Year in Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Selected Highlights From 2021

This review summarizes the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) or extracorporeal life support literature published in 2021. This Selected Highlights article is not intended to be an exhaustive review of the literature, but rather a summarizing of key themes that developed in the ECMO literature during 2021. The primary topics presented include the following: ECMO for coronavirus disease 2019, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, periprocedural cardiopulmonary support with ECMO, and anticoagulation for ECMO.

A case of xenon inhalation therapy for respiratory failure and neuropsychiatric disorders associated with COVID-19

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is the main danger to the life of patients with pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2. At the same time, respiratory failure (RF) after ARDS can persist for a long time despite intensive therapy. Therefore, it is important to develop new effective approaches for restoring the ventilation function of the lungs after COVID-19. Here, we present a case report of effective application of short-term inhalations of xenon-oxygen (Xe/O₂) gas mixture for treatment of RF and neuropsychiatric disorders (NPD) associated with COVID-19. The patient inhaled a gas mixture of 70 % Xe and 30 % O₂. We used multispiral computed tomography, evaluated psychometry, studied hematological and biochemical blood parameters, and applied some other methods of clinical studies to assess the therapeutic effectiveness of Xe inhalation. Also, we studied the mechanism of action of xenon with computer modeling. The clinical case showed the high efficacy of Xe/O₂ mixture for treating severe RF and NPD after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Xenon inhalations dramatically increased oxygen saturation and the degree of pneumatization of the lungs. We found out that in coronavirus pneumonia, saturated phospholipids of surfactant are transferred to the solid-ordered phase, which disrupts the surface tension of the alveoli and alveolar gas exchange. Using molecular modeling methods, we demonstrated that the xenon atom increases the distance between the acyl chains of phospholipids due to the van der Waals dispersion interaction. These changes allow for the phase transition of phospholipids from the solid-ordered phase to the liquid phase and restore the functional activity of the surfactant. The findings suggest the feasibility of conducting studies on the effectiveness of Xe/O₂ inhalations for treating ARDS in SARS-CoV-2 infection.