High In-Hospital Mortality in COVID Patients Receiving ECMO in Germany - A Critical Analysis

Experience with ECMO therapy for acute respiratory distress syndrome treatment throughout the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

To analyze our experience with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) therapy for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

Retrospective, observational, single center study.

SETTING

Third-level hospital in Spain.

PATIENTS

Adult patients with COVID-19 ARDS treated with an ECMO system in our center between March 2020 and March 2023.

INTERVENTIONS

Retrospective collection of variables during hospital admission and follow-up.

MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST

Demographic variables, clinical history, variables related to ECMO therapy, COVID-19 wave number, in-hospital mortality, adverse events, ICU and hospital length of stay, and functional status at follow-up were collected.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients were included. Of these, 61 patients (75%) died during hospitalization. Patients who died were older and had more comorbidities. During the second, third, and sixth waves, mortality was higher. In the multivariate analysis, the only independent predictor of mortality was age (OR 1.24 95% CI (1.027-1.5, P = 0.025). After discharge, 40% of patients had difficulties returning to normal life due to respiratory failure requiring oxygen and arthropathies.

CONCLUSION

In-hospital mortality increased during the pandemic. Older age was the only independent predictor of mortality. After discharge, no deaths were recorded during the first 18 months of follow-up, although 40% of surviving patients had respiratory and motor sequelae making it difficult for them to return to a normal life.

Is an extended dose of subcutaneous nadroparin anticoagulation equally safe and feasible compared to unfractionated heparin anticoagulation during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in critically ill COVID-19 patients?

INTRODUCTION

Unfractionated heparin (UFH) is the traditional anticoagulant of choice in critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Nadroparin, a low molecular weight heparin, potentially offers advantages such as predictable pharmacokinetics and reduced bleeding risks compared to UFH, with complex pharmacokinetics, influencing activated partial thromboplastin and causing substantial haemorrhagic risks. Bleeding, the most common adverse event during ECMO, is associated by many with increased activated partial thromboplastin time.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective, bicentric analysis involved 38 consecutive ECMO-supported COVID-19 patients from two Polish hospitals. The study compared 27 patients receiving UFH and 11 patients treated with 5700 IU of nadroparin administered subcutaneously twice daily. Thrombotic and haemorrhagic complications were assessed to determine the safety and feasibility of each anticoagulant.

RESULTS

Resistance to flow throughout the therapy in the ECMO membrane oxygenator was significantly lower in the group anticoagulated with UFH (1.74 mmHg × minute × L-1 [1.38-2.6] vs. 6.13 mmHg × minute × L-1 [5.93-14.81]; P < 0.001). However, the number of transfused red blood cell packs in the aforementioned group was significantly greater (10 units [5-17] vs. 4 units [2-8]; P = 0.027), and the haemoglobin level after ECMO therapy was significantly lower (7.8 g dL-1 [6.9-8.8] vs. 10.2 g dL-1 [8.5-12.2]; P = 0.003). Moreover, there was a higher number of life-threatening events in the UFH group.

CONCLUSIONS

UFH anticoagulation may provide better flow optimization in the oxygenator, but the risk of life-threatening bleeding may increase. The present findings need to be fully elucidated in prospective studies on a larger critically ill population supported with respiratory ECMO.

Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time and Anti-IIa Monitoring in Argatroban Anticoagulation in COVID-19 Patients on Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

Unfractionated heparin has long been considered the standard anticoagulation in ECMO, despite some pitfalls such as heparin resistance, heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), etc Recently, some centres started to increasingly use argatroban for this purpose, typically using activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) for its monitoring. Direct monitoring of the efficacy of argatroban using Anti-IIa is not yet an established method, although it might be more appropriate as it targets the same pathway.An observational study was performed in adult veno-venous ECMO patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection anticoagulated with argatroban to an aPTT target of 40-60 s and Anti-IIa target of 0.4-0.6 µg/mL. Bleeding and thrombotic complications were monitored.Forty-four VV ECMO patients were included, with an overall hospital mortality of approx. 50%. No life-threatening thrombotic events were recorded. The risk of bleeding complications significantly increased with aPTT above 52.7 s and with Anti-IIa values over 0.78 µg/mL. Using the above cut-offs for both the aPTT and Anti-IIa and their combination, the negative predictive value for bleeding was approximately 90%.It seems that the generally recommended limits for Anti-IIa of 1.5 µg/mL may be high. However, further data are needed to confirm lower limits.Trial Registration:retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06038682.

Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 related in-hospital mortality, ICU admission and mechanical ventilation of 1.4 million patients in Germany and Switzerland, 2019 to 2022

PURPOSE

In the 2020 emergence of SARS-CoV-2, global response lacked unified treatment and surveillance, resulting in diverse impacts due to varied healthcare resources and national guidelines. Germany and Switzerland curbed the virus initially by promptly tracking and testing, bolstered by strong governmental capacity. This study aimed to assess country-specific healthcare disparities and their impact on ICU admission rates, mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

To enhance healthcare quality using real-world data, the "Initiative of Quality Medicine" (IQM) was established. Pseudonymised routine data from participating hospitals, during 01/01/2019-31/12/2022, was retrospectively analysed, focusing on patients with SARI ± SARS-CoV-2-infection (U07.1). Cohorts were matched based on various factors and multivariable analyses included logistic regression.

RESULTS

1.421.922 cases of SARI ± U07.1 involving 386 German and 41 Swiss hospitals were included. Patients in Germany were older (mean: 69.4 vs. 66.5 years) and had more comorbidities than in Switzerland (p < .001). Patients in Germany were also more likely to be treated on ICU (28% vs. 20%, OR 1.5 95% CI 1.5-1.6, p < .001) and mechanically ventilated (20% vs. 15%, OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.4-1.5, p < .001). The in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in Germany than in Switzerland (21% vs. 12%, OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.9-2.0, p < .001). Matched cohorts showed reduced differences, but Germany still exhibited higher in-hospital mortality. Discrepancies were evident in both pre-pandemic and pandemic analyses, highlighting existing disparities between both countries.

CONCLUSION

IQM data from Swiss and German hospitals reveals country-specific differences in SARI ± U07.1 outcomes, highlighting higher in-hospital mortality in Germany, with uncertain causes suggesting varied treatments and resources.

[Prognostic factors in an individualised approach to non-pharmacological therapy of COVID-19: from oxygen and mechanical ventilation to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation]

BACKGROUND

Our centre followed a stepwise approach in the nonpharmacological treatment of respiratory failure in COVID-19 in accordance with German national guidelines, escalating non-invasive measures before invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The aim of this study was to analyse this individualized approach to non-pharmacologic therapy in terms of patient characteristics and clinical features that may help predict more severe disease, particularly the need for intensive care.

METHOD

This retrospective single-centre study of COVID-19 inpatients between March 2020 and December 2021 analysed anthropometric data, non-pharmacological maximum therapy and survival status via a manual medical file review.

RESULTS

Of 1052 COVID-19-related admissions, 835 patients were included in the analysis cohort (54% male, median 58 years); 34% (n=284) received no therapy, 40% (n=337) conventional oxygen therapy (COT), 3% (n=22) high flow nasal cannula (NHFC), 9% (n=73) continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), 7% (n=56) non-invasive ventilation (NIV), 4% (n=34) intermittent mandatory ventilation (IMV), and 3% (n=29) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Of 551 patients treated with at least COT, 12.3% required intubation. A total of 183 patients required ICU treatment, and 106 (13%) died. 25 (74%) IMV patients and 23 (79%) ECMO patients died. Arterial hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidemia was more prevalent in non-survivors. Binary logistic analysis revealed the following risk factors for increased mortality: an oxygen supplementation of ≥2 L/min at baseline (OR 6.96 [4.01-12.08]), age (OR 1.09 [1.05-1.14]), and male sex (OR 2.23 [0.79-6.31]).

CONCLUSION

The physician's immediate clinical decision to provide oxygen therapy, along with other recognized risk factors, plays an important role in predicting the severity of the disease course and thus aiding in the management of COVID-19.

In-hospital mortality, comorbidities, and costs of one million mechanically ventilated patients in Germany: a nationwide observational study before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Even more than hospital care in general, intensive care and mechanical ventilation capacities and its utilization in terms of rates, indications, ventilation types and outcomes vary largely among countries. We analyzed complete and nationwide data for Germany, a country with a large intensive care sector, before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Analysis of administrative claims data, provided by the German health insurance, from all hospitals for all individual patients who were mechanically ventilated between 2019 and 2022. The data included age, sex, diagnoses, length of stay, procedures (e.g., form and duration of mechanical ventilation), outcome (dead vs. alive) and costs. We included all patients who were at least 18 years old at the time of discharge from January 1st, 2019 to December 31st, 2022. Patients were grouped according to year, age group and the form of mechanical ventilation. We further analyzed subgroups of patients being resuscitated and those being COVID-19 positive (vs. negative).

Findings

During the four years, 1,003,882 patients were mechanically ventilated in 1395 hospitals. Rates per 100,000 inhabitants varied across age groups from 110 to 123 (18-59 years) to 1101-1275 (>80 years). The top main diagnoses were other forms of heart diseases, pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), ischemic heart diseases and cerebrovascular diseases. 43.3% (437,031/1,003,882) of all mechanically ventilated patients died in hospital with a remarkable increase in mortality with age and from 2019 to 2022 by almost 5%-points. The in-hospital mortality of ventilated COVID-19 patients was 53.7% (46,553/86,729), while it was 42.6% (390,478/917,153) in non-COVID patients. In-hospital mortality varied from 27.0% in non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) only to 53.4% in invasive mechanical ventilation only cases, 59.4% with early NIV failure, 68.6% with late NIV failure, to 74.0% in patients receiving VV-ECMO and 80.0% in VA-ECMO. 17.5% of mechanically ventilated patients had been resuscitated before, of whom 78.2% (153,762/196,750) died. Total expenditure was around 6 billion Euros per year, i.e. 0.17% of the German GDP.

Interpretation

Mechanical ventilation was widely used, before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany, reaching more than 1000 patients per 100,000 inhabitants per year in the age over 80 years. In-hospital mortality rates in this nationwide and complete cohort exceeded most of the data known by far.

Funding

This research did not receive any dedicated funding.

Changes in Therapy and Outcome of Patients Requiring Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for COVID-19

BACKGROUND

 Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) is related with poor outcome, especially in Germany. We aimed to analyze whether changes in vv-ECMO therapy during the pandemic were observed and lead to changes in the outcome of vv-ECMO patients.

METHODS

 All patients undergoing vv-ECMO support for COVID-19 between 2020 and 2021 in a single center (n = 75) were retrospectively analyzed. Weaning from vv-ECMO and in-hospital mortality were defined as primary and peri-interventional adverse events as secondary endpoints of the study.

RESULTS

 During the study period, four infective waves were observed in Germany. Patients were assigned correspondingly to four study groups: ECMO implantation between March 2020 and September 2020: first wave (n = 11); October 2020 to February 2021: second wave (n = 23); March 2021 to July 2021: third wave (n = 25); and August 2021 to December 2021: fourth wave (n = 20). Preferred cannulation technique changed within the second wave from femoro-femoral to femoro-jugular access (p < 0.01) and awake ECMO was implemented. Mean ECMO run time increased by more than 300% from 10.9 ± 9.6 (first wave) to 44.9 ± 47.0 days (fourth wave). Weaning of patients was achieved in less than 20% in the first wave but increased to approximately 40% since the second one. Furthermore, we observed a continuous numerically decrease of in-hospital mortality from 81.8 to 57.9% (p = 0.61).

CONCLUSION

 Preference for femoro-jugular cannulation and awake ECMO combined with preexisting expertise and patient selection are considered to be associated with increased duration of ECMO support and numerically improved ECMO weaning and in-hospital mortality.

Web-based Dashboard on ECMO Utilization in Germany: An Interactive Visualization, Analyses, and Prediction Based on Real-life Data

In Germany, a comprehensive reimbursement policy for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) results in the highest per capita use worldwide, although benefits remain controversial. Public ECMO data is unstructured and poorly accessible to healthcare professionals, researchers, and policymakers. In addition, there are no uniform policies for ECMO allocation which confronts medical personnel with ethical considerations during health crises such as respiratory virus outbreaks.Retrospective information on adult and pediatric ECMO support performed in German hospitals was extracted from publicly available reimbursement data and hospital quality reports and processed to create the web-based ECMO Dashboard built on Open-Source software. Patient-level and hospital-level data were merged resulting in a solid base for ECMO use analysis and ECMO demand forecasting with high spatial granularity at the level of 413 county and city districts in Germany.The ECMO Dashboard ( https://www.ecmo-dash.de/ ), an innovative visual platform, presents the retrospective utilization patterns of ECMO support in Germany. It features interactive maps, comprehensive charts, and tables, providing insights at the hospital, district, and national levels. This tool also highlights the high prevalence of ECMO support in Germany and emphasizes districts with ECMO surplus - where patients from other regions are treated, or deficit - origins from which ECMO patients are transferred to other regions. The dashboard will evolve iteratively to provide stakeholders with vital information for informed and transparent resource allocation and decision-making.Accessible public routine data could support evidence-informed, forward-looking resource management policies, which are urgently needed to increase the quality and prepare the critical care infrastructure for future pandemics.

Association between ICU quality and in-hospital mortality of V-V ECMO-supported patients-the ECMO quality improvement action (EQIA) study: a national cohort study in China from 2017 to 2019

This cohort study was performed to explore the influence of intensive care unit (ICU) quality on in-hospital mortality of veno-venous (V-V) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)-supported patients in China. The study involved all V-V ECMO-supported patients in 318 of 1700 tertiary hospitals from 2017 to 2019, using data from the National Clinical Improvement System and China National Critical Care Quality Control Center. ICU quality was assessed by quality control indicators and capacity parameters. Among the 2563 V-V ECMO-supported patients in 318 hospitals, a significant correlation was found between ECMO-related complications and prognosis. The reintubation rate within 48 hours after extubation and the total ICU mortality rate were independent risk factors for higher in-hospital mortality of V-V ECMO-supported patients (cutoff: 1.5% and 7.0%; 95% confidence interval: 1.05-1.48 and 1.04-1.45; odds ratios: 1.25 and 1.23; P = 0.012 and P = 0.015, respectively). Meanwhile, the V-V ECMO center volume was a protective factor (cutoff of ≥ 50 cases within the 3-year study period; 95% confidence interval: 0.57-0.83, odds ratio: 0.69, P = 0.0001). The subgroup analysis of 864 patients in 11 high-volume centers further strengthened these findings. Thus, ICU quality may play an important role in improving the prognosis of V-V ECMO-supported patients.

Outcomes of Severe ARDS COVID-19 Patients Denied for Venovenous ECMO Support: A Prospective Observational Comparative Study

Background: Few data are available concerning the outcome of patients denied venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) relative to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19. Methods: We compared the 90-day survival rate of consecutive adult patients for whom our center was contacted to discuss VV-ECMO indication. Three groups of patients were created: patients for whom VV-ECMO was immediately indicated (ECMO-indicated group), patients for whom VV-ECMO was not indicated at the time of the call (ECMO-not-indicated group), and patients for whom ECMO was definitely contraindicated (ECMO-contraindicated group). Results: In total, 104 patients were referred for VV-ECMO support due to severe COVID-19 ARDS. Among them, 32 patients had immediate VV-ECMO implantation, 28 patients had no VV-ECMO indication, but 1 was assisted thereafter, and 44 patients were denied VV-ECMO for contraindication. Among the 44 patients denied, 30 were denied for advanced age, 24 for excessive prior duration of mechanical ventilation, and 16 for SOFA score >8. The 90-day survival rate was similar for the ECMO-indicated group and the ECMO-not-indicated group at 62.1 and 61.9%, respectively, whereas it was significantly lower (20.5%) for the ECMO-contraindicated group. Conclusions: Despite a low survival rate, 50% of patients were at home 3 months after being denied for VV-ECMO for severe ARDS due to COVID-19.

[ARDS Diagnostics and Treatment after the Coronavirus Pandemic - Everything as it was?]

ARDS is a syndrome that can develop as a result of various underlying diseases. For a long time, the prevailing belief was that the course of the disease was comparable regardless of the underlying disease. However, even before the COVID-19 pandemic, it was suspected that there were different manifestations that could be treated more individually and thus reduce the high mortality rate of ARDS, which has remained unchanged for years. The various findings on the heterogeneity of the course of the disease in COVID-related ARDS appear to confirm these assumptions. It is therefore to be expected that the diagnosis and treatment of non-COVID-related ARDS will also have to be individualised according to such phenotypes in the future. However, as long as the effectiveness of such strategies has not been proven in clinical trials, the current recommendations for ARDS therapy will remain valid for the time being. However, the adjustments already formulated in this context to individual pathophysiological conditions with regard to respiratory mechanics, ventilation-perfusion distribution and possible cardiac dysfunction should be made more meticulously than has usually been the case to date.

Tracheostomy in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Single-Center Experience

OBJECTIVES

Novel coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) has led to over 6 million fatalities globally. An estimated 75% of COVID-19 patients who require critical care admission develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) needing invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and/or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Due to prolonged ventilation requirements, these patients often also require tracheostomy. We performed a review of clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients on ECMO at a high-volume tertiary care center in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

METHODOLOGY

We performed a retrospective case series, including 24 adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 who required IMV, veno-venous (ECMO), and tracheostomy. All patients were included from April to December 2021. We extracted demographic and clinical variables pertaining to the tracheostomy procedure and ECMO therapy. We performed descriptive statistical analyses. This study was approved by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board (14217-C).

RESULTS

We included 24 consecutive patients with COVID-19 who required tracheostomy while undergoing ECMO therapy. The mean age was 49.4 years [standard deviation (SD): 7.33], the majority of patients were male (75%), with mean body mass index of 32 (SD: 8.81). Overall mortality rate was 33.3%. Percutaneous tracheostomy was performed most frequently (83.3%) and, similar to open tracheostomy, was associated with a low rate of perioperative bleeding complications. Within surviving patients, the mean time to IMV weaning and decannulation was 60.2 (SD: 24.6) and 49.4 days (SD: 21.8), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous tracheostomy appears to be safe in COVID-19 patients on ECMO and holding anticoagulation 24 hours prior to and after tracheostomy may limit bleeding events in these patients.

Early acute kidney injury and transition to renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 requiring veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

BACKGROUND

Critically ill patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) requiring veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) are at risk for acute kidney injury (AKI). Currently, the incidence of AKI and progression to kidney replacement therapy (RRT) in critically ill patients with vv-ECMO for severe COVID-19 and implications on outcome are still unclear.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (Germany) between March 1st, 2020 and July 31st, 2021. Demographics, clinical parameters, AKI, type of organ support, length of ICU stay, mortality and severity scores were assessed.

RESULTS

Ninety-one critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 requiring ECMO were included. The median age of the study population was 57 (IQR 49-64) years and 67% (n = 61) were male. The median SAPS II and SOFA Score on admission were 40 (34-46) and 12 (10-14) points, respectively. We observed that 45% (n = 41) developed early-AKI, 38% (n = 35) late-AKI and 16% (n = 15) no AKI during the ICU stay. Overall, 70% (n = 64) of patients required RRT during the ICU stay, 93% with early-AKI and 74% with late-AKI. Risk factors for early-AKI were younger age (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.99, p = 0.02) and SAPS II (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.06-1.19, p < 0.001). Patients with and without RRT were comparable regarding baseline characteristics. SAPS II (41 vs. 37 points, p < 0.05) and SOFA score (13 vs. 12 points, p < 0.05) on admission were significantly higher in patients receiving RRT. The median duration of ICU (36 vs. 28 days, p = 0.27) stay was longer in patients with RRT. An ICU mortality rate in patients with RRT in 69% (n = 44) and in patients without RRT of 56% (n = 27) was observed (p = 0.23).

CONCLUSION

Critically ill patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 related ARDS requiring vv-ECMO are at high risk of early acute kidney injury. Early-AKI is associated with age and severity of illness, and presents with high need for RRT. Mortality in patients with RRT was comparable to patients without RRT.

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19 and influenza H1N1 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: A comparative cohort study in China

Background

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) has been demonstrated to be effective in treating patients with virus-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, whether the management of ECMO is different in treating H1N1 influenza and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated ARDS patients remains unknown.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study. We included 12 VV-ECMO-supported COVID-19 patients admitted to The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Eighth People's Hospital, and Wuhan Union Hospital West Campus between January 23 and March 31, 2020. We retrospectively included VV-ECMO-supported patients with COVID-19 and H1N1 influenza-associated ARDS. Clinical characteristics, respiratory mechanics including plateau pressure, driving pressure, mechanical power, ventilatory ratio (VR) and lung compliance, and outcomes were compared.

Results

Data from 25 patients with COVID-19 (n=12) and H1N1 (n=13) associated ARDS who had received ECMO support were analyzed. COVID-19 patients were older than H1N1 influenza patients (P=0.004). The partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO2) and VR before ECMO initiation were significantly higher in COVID-19 patients than in H1N1 influenza patients (P <0.001 and P=0.004, respectively). COVID-19 patients showed increased plateau and driving pressure compared with H1N1 subjects (P=0.013 and P=0.018, respectively). Patients with COVID-19 remained longer on ECMO support than did H1N1 influenza patients (P=0.015). COVID-19 patients who required ECMO support also had fewer intensive care unit and ventilator-free days than H1N1.

Conclusions

Compared with H1N1 influenza patients, COVID-19 patients were older and presented with increased PaCO2 and VR values before ECMO initiation. The differences between ARDS patients with COVID-19 and influenza on VV-ECMO detailed herein could be helpful for obtaining a better understanding of COVID-19 and for better clinical management.

Effects of adding the second drainage cannula in severely hypoxemic patients supported with VV ECMO due to COVID-19-associated ARDS

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a recognized method of support in patients with severe and refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection. While veno-venous (VV) ECMO is the most common type, some patients with severe hypoxemia may require modifications to the ECMO circuit. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of adding a second drainage cannula to the circuit in patients with refractory hypoxemia, on their gas exchange, mechanical ventilation, ECMO settings, and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted an observational retrospective study based on a single-center institutional registry including all consecutive cases of COVID-19 patients requiring ECMO admitted to the Centre of Extracorporeal Therapies in Warsaw between March 1, 2020 and March 1, 2022. We selected patients who had an additional drainage cannula inserted. Changes in ECMO and ventilator settings, blood oxygenation, and hemodynamic parameters, as well as clinical outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 138 VV ECMO patients, 12 (9%) patients met the inclusion criteria. Ten patients (83%) were men, and mean age was 42.2 ± 6.8. An addition of drainage cannula resulted in a significant raise in ECMO blood flow (4.77 ± 0.44 to 5.94 ± 0.81 [L/min]; p = 0.001), and the ratio of ECMO blood flow to ECMO pump rotations per minute (RPM), whereas the raise in ECMO RPM alone was not statistically significant (3432 ± 258 to 3673 ± 340 [1/min]; p = 0.064). We observed a significant drop in ventilator FiO2 and a raise in PaO2 to FiO2 ratio, while blood lactates did not change significantly. Nine patients died in hospital, one was referred to lung transplantation center, two were discharged uneventfully.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of an additional drainage cannula in severe ARDS associated with COVID-19 allows for an increased ECMO blood flow and improved oxygenation. However, we observed no further improvement in lung-protective ventilation and poor survival.

Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for circulatory failure in COVID-19 patients: insights from the ECMOSARS registry

OBJECTIVES

The clinical profile and outcomes of patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) who require veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) or veno-arterial-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VAV-ECMO) are poorly understood. We aimed to describe the characteristics and outcomes of these patients and to identify predictors of both favourable and unfavourable outcomes.

METHODS

ECMOSARS is a multicentre, prospective, nationwide French registry enrolling patients who require veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)/VA-ECMO in the context of COVID-19 infection (652 patients at 41 centres). We focused on 47 patients supported with VA- or VAV-ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock.

RESULTS

The median age was 49. Fourteen percent of patients had a prior diagnosis of heart failure. The most common aetiologies of cardiogenic shock were acute pulmonary embolism (30%), myocarditis (28%) and acute coronary syndrome (4%). Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (E-CPR) occurred in 38%. In-hospital survival was 28% in the whole cohort, and 43% when E-CPR patients were excluded. ECMO cannulation was associated with significant improvements in pH and FiO2 on day 1, but non-survivors showed significantly more severe acidosis and higher FiO2 than survivors at this point (P = 0.030 and P = 0.006). Other factors associated with death were greater age (P = 0.02), higher body mass index (P = 0.03), E-CPR (P = 0.001), non-myocarditis aetiology (P = 0.02), higher serum lactates (P = 0.004), epinephrine (but not noradrenaline) use before initiation of ECMO (P = 0.003), haemorrhagic complications (P = 0.001), greater transfusion requirements (P = 0.001) and more severe Survival after Veno-Arterial ECMO (SAVE) and Sonographic Assessment of Intravascular Fluid Estimate (SAFE) scores (P = 0.01 and P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

We report the largest focused analysis of VA- and VAV-ECMO recipients in COVID-19. Although relatively rare, the need for temporary mechanical circulatory support in these patients is associated with poor prognosis. However, VA-ECMO remains a viable solution to rescue carefully selected patients. We identified factors associated with poor prognosis and suggest that E-CPR is not a reasonable indication for VA-ECMO in this population.

Analysis of an Individualised Stepwise Approach to Non-Pharmacological Therapy in COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Early intubation versus use of conventional or high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (COT/HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has been debated throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Our centre followed a stepwise approach, in concordance with German national guidelines, escalating non-invasive modalities prior to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), rather than early or late intubation.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of the study were to investigate the real-life usage of these modalities and analyse patient characteristics and survival.

METHOD

A retrospective monocentric observation was conducted of all consecutive COVID-19 hospital admissions between March 2020 and December 2021 at a university-affiliated pulmonary centre in Germany. Anthropometric data, therapy, and survival status were descriptively analysed.

RESULTS

From 1,052 COVID-19-related admissions, 835 patients were included (54% male, median 58 years). Maximum therapy was as follows: 34% (n = 284) no therapy, 40% (n = 337) COT, 3% (n = 22) HFNC, 9% (n = 73) CPAP, 7% (n = 56) NIV, 4% (n = 34) IMV, and 3% (n = 29) ECMO. Of 551 patients treated with at least COT, 12.3% required intubation. Overall, 183 patients required intensive unit care, and 106 (13%) died. Of the 68 patients who received IMV/ECMO, 48 died (74%). The strategy for non-pharmacological therapy was individual but remained consistent throughout the studied period.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides valuable insight into COVID-19 care in Germany and shows how the majority of patients could be treated with the maximum treatment required according to disease severity following the national algorithm. Escalation of therapy modality is interlinked with disease severity and thus associated with mortality.

Validation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation mortality prediction and severity of illness scores in an international COVID-19 cohort

BACKGROUND

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) is a lifesaving support modality for severe respiratory failure, but its resource-intensive nature led to significant controversy surrounding its use during the COVID-19 pandemic. We report the performance of several ECMO mortality prediction and severity of illness scores at discriminating survival in a large COVID-19 V-V ECMO cohort.

METHODS

We validated ECMOnet, PRESET (PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy-Score), Roch, SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment), APACHE II (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation), 4C (Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium), and CURB-65 (Confusion, Urea nitrogen, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure, age >65 years) scores on the ISARIC (International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium) database. We report discrimination via Area Under the Receiver Operative Curve (AUROC) and Area under the Precision Recall Curve (AURPC) and calibration via Brier score.

RESULTS

We included 1147 patients and scores were calculated on patients with sufficient variables. ECMO mortality scores had AUROC (0.58-0.62), AUPRC (0.62-0.74), and Brier score (0.286-0.303). Roch score had the highest accuracy (AUROC 0.62), precision (AUPRC 0.74) yet worst calibration (Brier score of 0.3) despite being calculated on the fewest patients (144). Severity of illness scores had AUROC (0.52-0.57), AURPC (0.59-0.64), and Brier Score (0.265-0.471). APACHE II had the highest accuracy (AUROC 0.58), precision (AUPRC 0.64), and best calibration (Brier score 0.26).

CONCLUSION

Within a large international multicenter COVID-19 cohort, the evaluated ECMO mortality prediction and severity of illness scores demonstrated inconsistent discrimination and calibration highlighting the need for better clinically applicable decision support tools.

Validation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation mortality prediction and severity of illness scores in an international COVID‐19 cohort

Background

Veno‐venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V‐V ECMO) is a lifesaving support modality for severe respiratory failure, but its resource‐intensive nature led to significant controversy surrounding its use during the COVID‐19 pandemic. We report the performance of several ECMO mortality prediction and severity of illness scores at discriminating survival in a large COVID‐19 V‐V ECMO cohort.

Methods

We validated ECMOnet, PRESET (PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy‐Score), Roch, SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment), APACHE II (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation), 4C (Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium), and CURB‐65 (Confusion, Urea nitrogen, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure, age >65 years) scores on the ISARIC (International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium) database. We report discrimination via Area Under the Receiver Operative Curve (AUROC) and Area under the Precision Recall Curve (AURPC) and calibration via Brier score.

Results

We included 1147 patients and scores were calculated on patients with sufficient variables. ECMO mortality scores had AUROC (0.58–0.62), AUPRC (0.62–0.74), and Brier score (0.286–0.303). Roch score had the highest accuracy (AUROC 0.62), precision (AUPRC 0.74) yet worst calibration (Brier score of 0.3) despite being calculated on the fewest patients (144). Severity of illness scores had AUROC (0.52–0.57), AURPC (0.59–0.64), and Brier Score (0.265–0.471). APACHE II had the highest accuracy (AUROC 0.58), precision (AUPRC 0.64), and best calibration (Brier score 0.26).

Conclusion

Within a large international multicenter COVID‐19 cohort, the evaluated ECMO mortality prediction and severity of illness scores demonstrated inconsistent discrimination and calibration highlighting the need for better clinically applicable decision support tools.

Long-Term Outcomes of Extracorporeal Life Support in Respiratory Failure

Although extracorporeal life support is an expensive method with serious risks of complications, it is nowadays a well-established and generally accepted method of organ support. In patients with severe respiratory failure, when conventional mechanical ventilation cannot ensure adequate blood gas exchange, veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is the method of choice. An improvement in oxygenation or normalization of acid-base balance by itself does not necessarily mean an improvement in the outcome but allows us to prevent potential negative effects of mechanical ventilation, which can be considered a crucial part of complex care leading potentially to an improvement in the outcome. The disconnection from ECMO or discharge from the intensive care unit should not be viewed as the main goal, and the long-term outcome of the ECMO-surviving patients should also be considered. Approximately three-quarters of patients survive the veno-venous ECMO, but various (both physical and psychological) health problems may persist. Despite these, a large proportion of these patients are eventually able to return to everyday life with relatively little limitation of respiratory function. In this review, we summarize the available knowledge on long-term mortality and quality of life of ECMO patients with respiratory failure.

COVID-19 Is an Independent Risk Factor for Detrimental Invasive Fungal Disease in Patients on Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Retrospective Study

Invasive fungal disease (IFD) is associated with the mortality of patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Several risk factors for IFD have been identified in patients with or without ECMO. Here, we assessed the relevance of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) for the occurrence of IFD in patients on veno-venous (V-V) ECMO for respiratory failure. In a retrospective analysis of all ECMO cases between January 2013 and December 2022 (2020-2022 for COVID-19 patients), active COVID-19 and the type, timing and duration of IFD were investigated. Demographics, hospital, ICU length of stay (LoS), duration of ECMO, days on invasive mechanical ventilation, prognostic scores (Respiratory ECMO Survival Prediction (RESP) score, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System (TISS)-10, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score and Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS)-II) and length of survival were assessed. The association of COVID-19 with IFD was investigated using propensity score matching and uni- and multivariable logistic regression analyses. We identified 814 patients supported with ECMO, and 452 patients were included in further analyses. The incidence of IFD was 4.8% and 11.0% in patients without and with COVID-19, respectively. COVID-19 status represented an independent risk factor for IFD (OR 4.30; CI 1.72-10.85; p: 0.002; multivariable regression analysis). In patients with COVID-19, 84.6% of IFD was candidemia and 15.4% represented invasive aspergillosis (IA). All of these patients died. In patients on V-V ECMO, we report that COVID-19 is an independent risk factor for IFD, which is associated with a detrimental prognosis. Further studies are needed to investigate strategies of antifungal therapy or prophylaxis in these patients.

Outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease versus other lung infections requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Background

Patients with Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) often develop severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation (MV), and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO).Mortality in COVID-19 patients on V-V ECMO was exceptionally high; therefore, whether survival can be ameliorated should be investigated.

Methods

We collected data from 85 patients with severe ARDS who required ECMO support at the University Hospital Magdeburg from 2014 to 2021. The patients were divided into the COVID-19 group (52 patients) and the non-COVID-19 group (33 patients). Demographic and pre-, intra-, and post-ECMO data were retrospectively recorded. The parameters of mechanical ventilation, laboratory data before using ECMO, and during ECMO were compared.

Results

There was a significant difference between the two groups regarding survival: 38.5% of COVID-19 patients and 63.6% of non-COVID-19 patients survived 60 days (p = 0.024). COVID-19 patients required V-V ECMO after 6.5 days of MV, while non-COVID-19 patients required V-V ECMO after 2.0 days of MV (p = 0.048). The COVID-19 group had a greater proportion of patients with ischemic heart disease (21.2% vs 3%, p = 0.019). The rates of most complications were comparable in both groups, whereas the COVID-19 group showed a significantly higher rate of cerebral bleeding (23.1 vs 6.1%, p = 0.039) and lung bacterial superinfection (53.8% vs 9.1%, p = <0.001).

Conclusion

The higher 60-days mortality among patients with COVID-19 with severe ARDS was attributable to superinfection, a higher risk of intracerebral bleeding, and the pre-existing ischemic heart disease.

In-hospital and Post-discharge Status in COVID-19 Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure Supported With Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

Few data from Latin American centers on clinical outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome who required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are published. Moreover, clinical and functional status after hospital discharge remains poorly explored in these patients. We evaluated in-hospital outcomes of severe COVID-19 patients who received ECMO support in two Brazilian hospitals. In one-third of the survivors, post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS), quality of life, anxiety, depression, and return to work were evaluated. Eighty-five patients were included and in-hospital mortality was 47%. Age >65 years (HR: 4.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4-16.4), diabetes (HR: 6.0; 95% CI: 1.8-19.6), ECMO support duration (HR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.05-1.12) and dialysis initiated after ECMO (HR: 3.4; 95% CI: 1.1-10.8) were independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality and mechanical ventilation (MV) duration before ECMO was not (HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.71-2.09). PACS-related symptoms were reported by two-thirds and half of patients at 30- and 90-days post-discharge, respectively. The median EQ-5D score was 0.85 (0.70-1.00) and 0.77 (0.66-1.00) at 30 and 90 days. Of the 15 responders, all previously working patients, except one, have returned to work at 90 days. In conclusion, in-hospital mortality in a large Latin American cohort was comparable to the Global extracorporeal life support organization registry.

Multi-horizon predictive models for guiding extracorporeal resource allocation in critically ill COVID-19 patients

OBJECTIVE

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) resource allocation tools are currently lacking. We developed machine learning (ML) models for predicting COVID-19 patients at risk of receiving ECMO to guide patient triage and resource allocation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We included COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units for >24 h from March 2020 to October 2021, divided into training and testing development and testing-only holdout cohorts. We developed ECMO deployment timely prediction model ForecastECMO using Gradient Boosting Tree (GBT), with pre-ECMO prediction horizons from 0 to 48 h, compared to PaO2/FiO2 ratio, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy score, logistic regression, and 30 pre-selected clinical variables GBT Clinical GBT models, with area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) and precision recall curve (AUPRC) metrics.

RESULTS

ECMO prevalence was 2.89% and 1.73% in development and holdout cohorts. ForecastECMO had the best performance in both cohorts. At the 18-h prediction horizon, a potentially clinically actionable pre-ECMO window, ForecastECMO, had the highest AUROC (0.94 and 0.95) and AUPRC (0.54 and 0.37) in development and holdout cohorts in identifying ECMO patients without data 18 h prior to ECMO.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

We developed a multi-horizon model, ForecastECMO, with high performance in identifying patients receiving ECMO at various prediction horizons. This model has potential to be used as early alert tool to guide ECMO resource allocation for COVID-19 patients. Future prospective multicenter validation would provide evidence for generalizability and real-world application of such models to improve patient outcomes.

Prognostic factors associated with mortality among patients receiving venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) can be considered for patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who continue to deteriorate despite evidence-based therapies and lung-protective ventilation. The Extracorporeal Life Support Organization has emphasised the importance of patient selection; however, to better inform these decisions, a comprehensive and evidence-based understanding of the risk factors associated with poor outcomes is necessary. We aimed to summarise the association between pre-cannulation prognostic factors and risk of mortality in adult patients requiring venovenous ECMO for the treatment of COVID-19.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE and Embase from Dec 1, 2019, to April 14, 2022, for randomised controlled trials and observational studies involving adult patients who required ECMO for COVID-19-associated ARDS and for whom pre-cannulation prognostic factors associated with in-hospital mortality were evaluated. We conducted separate meta-analyses of unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (uORs), adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs), and mean differences, and excluded studies if these data could not be extracted. We assessed the risk of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Our protocol was registered with the Open Science Framework registry, osf.io/6gcy2.

FINDINGS

Our search identified 2888 studies, of which 42 observational cohort studies involving 17 449 patients were included. Factors that had moderate or high certainty of association with increased mortality included patient factors, such as older age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2·27 [95% CI 1·63-3·16]), male sex (unadjusted odds ratio [uOR] 1·34 [1·20-1·49]), and chronic lung disease (aHR 1·55 [1·20-2·00]); pre-cannulation disease factors, such as longer duration of symptoms (mean difference 1·51 days [95% CI 0·36-2·65]), longer duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (uOR 1·94 [1·40-2·67]), higher partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide (mean difference 4·04 mm Hg [1·64-6·44]), and higher driving pressure (aHR 2·36 [1·40-3·97]); and centre factors, such as less previous experience with ECMO (aOR 2·27 [1·28-4·05].

INTERPRETATION

The prognostic factors identified highlight the importance of patient selection, the effect of injurious lung ventilation, and the potential opportunity for greater centralisation and collaboration in the use of ECMO for the treatment of COVID-19-associated ARDS. These factors should be carefully considered as part of a risk stratification framework when evaluating a patient for potential treatment with venovenous ECMO.

FUNDING

None.

Survival of Patients Treated With Extracorporeal Hemoadsorption and Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Results From a Nation-Wide Registry

Extracorporeal hemoadsorption with the CytoSorb adsorber is increasingly being used during the past years. The use in combination with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is feasible, but frequency of its use and outcomes have not been assessed in larger cohorts. We analyzed all patients treated with veno-venous (VV) ECMO either with or without CytoSorb in Germany from 2017 to 2019. Data were retrieved from a nationwide claim dataset collected by the Research Data Center of the Federal Bureau of Statistics. During this three-year episode, 7,699 patients were treated with VV ECMO. Among these, the number of CytoSorb-treated patients constantly increased from 156 (6.6%) in 2017 to 299 (11.8%) in 2019. In this large cohort hemoadsorption with the CytoSorb adsorber was associated with higher mortality and increased treatment costs. Due to limited information in the dataset about the severity of disease comparison of outcomes of patients treated with and without CytoSorb has to be interpreted with caution. Further studies have to examine if this finding is due to a negative effect of hemoadsorption with the CytoSorb device or is rather to be attributed to disease severity.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome: a narrative review

A growing body of evidence supports the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) refractory to maximal medical therapy. ARDS may develop in a proportion of patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and ECMO may be used to manage patients refractory to maximal medical therapy to mitigate the risk of ventilator-induced lung injury and provide lung rest while awaiting recovery. The mortality of COVID-19-related ARDS was variously reassessed during the pandemic. Veno-venous (VV) ECMO was the default choice to manage refractory respiratory failure; however, with concomitant severe right ventricular dysfunction, venoarterial (VA) ECMO or mechanical right ventricular assist devices with extracorporeal gas exchange (Oxy-RVAD) were also considered. ECMO has also been used to manage special populations such as pregnant women, pediatric patients affected by severe forms of COVID-19, and, in cases with persistent and seemingly irreversible respiratory failure, as a bridge to successful lung transplantation. In this narrative review, we outline and summarize the most recent evidence that has emerged on ECMO use in different patient populations with COVID-19-related ARDS.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in traumatic brain injury - A retrospective, multicenter cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) regularly require intensive care with prolonged invasive ventilation. Consequently, these patients are at increased risk of pulmonary failure, potentially requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The aim of this work was to provide an overview of ECMO treatment in TBI patients based upon data captured into the TraumaRegister DGU® (TR-DGU).

METHODS

A retrospective multi-center cohort analysis of patients registered in the TR-DGU was conducted. Adult patients with relevant TBI (AIS_Head ≥3) who had been treated in German, Austrian, or Swiss level I or II trauma centers using ECMO therapy between 2015 and 2019 were included. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for the need for ECMO treatment.

RESULTS

12,247 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The overall rate of ECMO treatment was 1.1% (134 patients). Patients on ECMO had an overall hospital mortality rate of 38% (51/134 patients) while 13% (1523/12,113 patients) of TBI patients without ECMO therapy died. Male gender (p = 0.014), AIS_Chest 3+ (p<0.001), higher Injury Severity Score (p<0.001) and packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusion (p<0.001) were associated with ECMO treatment.

CONCLUSION

ECMO therapy is a potentially lifesaving modality for the treatment of moderate-to-severe TBI when combined with severe chest trauma and pulmonary failure. The in-hospital mortality is increased in this high-risk population, but the majority of patients is surviving.

Care of the Seriously Ill Patient with SARS-CoV-2

In late 2019, SARS-CoV-2 caused the greatest global health crisis in a century, impacting all aspects of society. As the COVID-19 pandemic evolved throughout 2020 and 2021, multiple variants emerged, contributing to multiple surges in cases of COVID-19 worldwide. In 2021, highly effective vaccines became available, although the pandemic continues into 2022. There has been tremendous expansion of basic, translational, and clinical knowledge about SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 since the pandemic's onset. Treatment options have been rapidly explored, attempting to repurpose preexisting medications in tandem with development and evaluation of novel agents. Care of the seriously ill patient is examined.

Use of CytoSorb© Hemoadsorption in Patients on Veno-Venous ECMO Support for Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Systematic Review

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Adjunct hemoadsorption is increasingly utilized to target underlying hyperinflammation derived from ARDS. This article aims to review available data on the use of CytoSorb© therapy in combination with V-V ECMO in severe ARDS, and to assess the effects on inflammatory, laboratory and clinical parameters, as well as on patient outcomes. A systematic literature review was conducted and reported in compliance with principles derived from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. When applicable, a before-and-after analysis for relevant biomarkers and clinical parameters was carried out. CytoSorb© use was associated with significant reductions in circulating levels of C-reactive protein and interleukin-6 (p = 0.039 and p = 0.049, respectively). Increases in PaO2/FiO2 reached significance as well (p = 0.028), while norepinephrine dosage reductions showed a non-significant trend (p = 0.067). Mortality rates in CytoSorb© patients tended to be lower than those of control groups of most included studies, which, however, were characterized by high heterogeneity and low power. In an exploratory analysis on 90-day mortality in COVID-19 patients supported with V-V ECMO, the therapy was associated with a significantly reduced risk of death. Based on the reviewed data, CytoSorb© therapy is able to reduce inflammation and potentially improves survival in ARDS patients treated with V-V ECMO. Early initiation of CytoSorb© in conjunction with ECMO might offer a new approach to enhance lung rest and promote recovery in patients with severe ARDS.

Outcomes of patients with acute respiratory failure on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation requiring additional circulatory support by veno-venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Objective

Veno-venous (V-V) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly used to support patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In case of additional cardio-circulatory failure, some experienced centers upgrade the V-V ECMO with an additional arterial return cannula (termed V-VA ECMO). Here we analyzed short- and long-term outcome together with potential predictors of mortality.

Design

Multicenter, retrospective analysis between January 2008 and September 2021.

Setting

Three tertiary care ECMO centers in Germany (Hannover, Bonn) and Switzerland (Zurich).

Patients

Seventy-three V-V ECMO patients with ARDS and additional acute cardio-circulatory deterioration required an upgrade to V-VA ECMO were included in this study.

Measurements and main results

Fifty-three patients required an upgrade from V-V to V-VA and 20 patients were directly triple cannulated. Median (Interquartile Range) age was 49 (28–57) years and SOFA score was 14 (12–17) at V-VA ECMO upgrade. Vasoactive-inotropic score decreased from 53 (12–123) at V-VA ECMO upgrade to 9 (3–37) after 24 h of V-VA ECMO support. Weaning from V-VA and V-V ECMO was successful in 47 (64%) and 40 (55%) patients, respectively. Duration of ECMO support was 12 (6–22) days and ICU length of stay was 32 (16–46) days. Overall ICU mortality was 48% and hospital mortality 51%. Two additional patients died after hospital discharge while the remaining patients survived up to two years (with six patients being lost to follow-up). The vast majority of patients was free from higher degree persistent organ dysfunction at follow-up. A SOFA score > 14 and higher lactate concentrations at the day of V-VA upgrade were independent predictors of mortality in the multivariate regression analysis.

Conclusion

In this analysis, the use of V-VA ECMO in patients with ARDS and concomitant cardiocirculatory failure was associated with a hospital survival of about 50%, and most of these patients survived up to 2 years. A SOFA score > 14 and elevated lactate levels at the day of V-VA upgrade predict unfavorable outcome.

Invasive mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome receiving extracorporeal support: a narrative review of strategies to mitigate lung injury

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is indicated in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and severely impaired gas exchange despite evidence-based lung protective ventilation, prone positioning and other parts of the standard algorithm for treating such patients. Extracorporeal support can facilitate ultra-lung-protective ventilation, meaning even lower volumes and pressures than standard lung-protective ventilation, by directly removing carbon dioxide in patients needing injurious ventilator settings to maintain sufficient gas exchange. Injurious ventilation results in ventilator-induced lung injury, which is one of the main determinants of mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Marked reductions in the intensity of ventilation to the lowest tolerable levels under extracorporeal support may be achieved and could thereby potentially mitigate ventilator-induced lung injury and theoretically patient self-inflicted lung injury in spontaneously breathing patients with high respiratory drive. However, the benefits of this strategy may be counterbalanced by the use of continuous deep sedation and even neuromuscular blocking drugs, which may impair physical rehabilitation and impact long-term outcomes. There are currently a lack of large-scale prospective data to inform optimal invasive ventilation practices and how to best apply a holistic approach to patients receiving veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, while minimising ventilator-induced and patient self-inflicted lung injury. We aimed to review the literature relating to invasive ventilation strategies in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome receiving extracorporeal support and discuss personalised ventilation approaches and the potential role of adjunctive therapies in facilitating lung protection.

Key characteristics impacting survival of COVID-19 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Background

Severe COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) often requires extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Recent German health insurance data revealed low ICU survival rates. Patient characteristics and experience of the ECMO center may determine intensive care unit (ICU) survival. The current study aimed to identify factors affecting ICU survival of COVID-19 ECMO patients.

Methods

673 COVID-19 ARDS ECMO patients treated in 26 centers between January 1st 2020 and March 22nd 2021 were included. Data on clinical characteristics, adjunct therapies, complications, and outcome were documented. Block wise logistic regression analysis was applied to identify variables associated with ICU-survival.

Results

Most patients were between 50 and 70 years of age. PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio prior to ECMO was 72 mmHg (IQR: 58–99). ICU survival was 31.4%. Survival was significantly lower during the 2nd wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A subgroup of 284 (42%) patients fulfilling modified EOLIA criteria had a higher survival (38%) (p = 0.0014, OR 0.64 (CI 0.41–0.99)). Survival differed between low, intermediate, and high-volume centers with 20%, 30%, and 38%, respectively (p = 0.0024). Treatment in high volume centers resulted in an odds ratio of 0.55 (CI 0.28–1.02) compared to low volume centers. Additional factors associated with survival were younger age, shorter time between intubation and ECMO initiation, BMI > 35 (compared to < 25), absence of renal replacement therapy or major bleeding/thromboembolic events.

Conclusions

Structural and patient-related factors, including age, comorbidities and ECMO case volume, determined the survival of COVID-19 ECMO. These factors combined with a more liberal ECMO indication during the 2nd wave may explain the reasonably overall low survival rate. Careful selection of patients and treatment in high volume ECMO centers was associated with higher odds of ICU survival.

Trial registration

Registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (study ID: DRKS00022964, retrospectively registered, September 7th 2020, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00022964.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-04053-6.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation during Respiratory Pandemics: Past, Present, and Future

The role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in the management of severe acute respiratory failure, including acute respiratory distress syndrome, has become better defined in recent years in light of emerging high-quality evidence and technological advances. Use of ECMO has consequently increased throughout many parts of the world. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, however, has highlighted deficiencies in organizational capacity, research capability, knowledge sharing, and resource use. Although governments, medical societies, hospital systems, and clinicians were collectively unprepared for the scope of this pandemic, the use of ECMO, a highly resource-intensive and specialized form of life support, presented specific logistical and ethical challenges. As the pandemic has evolved, there has been greater collaboration in the use of ECMO across centers and regions, together with more robust data reporting through international registries and observational studies. Nevertheless, centralization of ECMO capacity is lacking in many regions of the world, and equitable use of ECMO resources remains uneven. There are no widely available mechanisms to conduct large-scale, rigorous clinical trials in real time. In this critical care review, we outline lessons learned during COVID-19 and prior respiratory pandemics in which ECMO was used, and we describe how we might apply these lessons going forward, both during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and in the future.

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with acute covid-19 associated respiratory failure: comparative effectiveness study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effect of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) compared with conventional mechanical ventilation on outcomes of patients with covid-19 associated respiratory failure.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

30 countries across five continents, 3 January 2020 to 29 August 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

7345 adults admitted to the intensive care unit with clinically suspected or laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection.

INTERVENTIONS

ECMO in patients with a partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO₂/FiO₂) ratio <80 mm Hg compared with conventional mechanical ventilation without ECMO.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary outcome was hospital mortality within 60 days of admission to the intensive care unit. Adherence adjusted estimates were calculated using marginal structural models with inverse probability weighting, accounting for competing events and for baseline and time varying confounding.

RESULTS

844 of 7345 eligible patients (11.5%) received ECMO at any time point during follow-up. Adherence adjusted mortality was 26.0% (95% confidence interval 24.5% to 27.5%) for a treatment strategy that included ECMO if the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio decreased <80 mm Hg compared with 33.2% (31.8% to 34.6%) had patients received conventional treatment without ECMO (risk difference -7.1%, 95% confidence interval -8.2% to -6.1%; risk ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.75 to 0.82). In secondary analyses, ECMO was most effective in patients aged <65 years and with a PaO₂/FiO₂ <80 mm Hg or with driving pressures >15 cmH₂O during the first 10 days of mechanical ventilation.

CONCLUSIONS

ECMO was associated with a reduction in mortality in selected adults with covid-19 associated respiratory failure. Age, severity of hypoxaemia, and duration and intensity of mechanical ventilation were found to be modifiers of treatment effectiveness and should be considered when deciding to initiate ECMO in patients with covid-19.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during the first three waves of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A retrospective single-center registry study

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing knowledge about the optimal treatment for patients with severe COVID-19, data from different cohorts suggested that survival of patients treated with ECMO seemed to decline over the course of the pandemic.

METHODS

In this non-interventional retrospective single-center registry study we analyzed all consecutive patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection and supported with VV ECMO in our center during the first three waves of the pandemic. From March 2020 through June 2021, 59 patients have been included.

RESULTS

Overall 90-day survival was 32%. Besides changes in drug treatment for COVID-19 and a lower PaO₂ /FiO₂ ratio before ECMO initiation during the third wave, all other patient baseline characteristics were similar during the three waves. Survival rate was highest during the first wave and lowest during the third wave, yet this difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

VV ECMO has shown to be a feasible and safe support option for patients with severe respiratory failure due to COVID-19. The results from this single-center study confirm findings from other cohorts showing declining survival rates of patients treated with VV ECMO during the COVID-19 pandemic, however, the specific reasons for this finding remain unclear.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during the first three waves of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic - a retrospective single-center registry study

Background

Despite increasing knowledge about the optimal treatment for patients with severe COVID‐19, data from different cohorts suggested that survival of patients treated with ECMO seemed to decline over the course of the pandemic.

Methods

In this non‐interventional retrospective single‐center registry study we analyzed all consecutive patients tested positive for SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and supported with VV ECMO in our center during the first three waves of the pandemic. From March 2020 through June 2021, 59 patients have been included.

Results

Overall 90‐day survival was 32%. Besides changes in drug treatment for COVID‐19 and a lower PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio before ECMO initiation during the third wave, all other patient baseline characteristics were similar during the three waves. Survival rate was highest during the first wave and lowest during the third wave, yet this difference was not statistically significant.

Conclusions

VV ECMO has shown to be a feasible and safe support option for patients with severe respiratory failure due to COVID‐19. The results from this single‐center study confirm findings from other cohorts showing declining survival rates of patients treated with VV ECMO during the COVID‐19 pandemic, however, the specific reasons for this finding remain unclear.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome in Poland: a multicenter cohort study

Background

In Poland, the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) remain unknown. This study aimed to answer these unknowns by analyzing data collected from high-volume ECMO centers willing to participate in this project.

Methods

This retrospective, multicenter cohort study was completed between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021 (15 months). Data from all patients treated with ECMO for COVID-19 were analyzed. Pre-ECMO laboratory and treatment data were compared between non-survivors and survivors. Independent predictors for death in the intensive care unit (ICU) were identified.

Results

There were 171 patients admitted to participating centers requiring ECMO for refractory hypoxemia due to COVID-19 during the defined time period. A total of 158 patients (mean age: 46.3 ± 9.8 years) were analyzed, and 13 patients were still requiring ECMO at the end of the observation period. Most patients (88%) were treated after October 1, 2020, 77.8% were transferred to ECMO centers from another facility, and 31% were transferred on extracorporeal life support. The mean duration of ECMO therapy was 18.0 ± 13.5 days. The crude ICU mortality rate was 74.1%. In the group of 41 survivors, 37 patients were successfully weaned from ECMO support and four patients underwent a successful lung transplant. In-hospital death was independently associated with pre-ECMO lactate level (OR 2.10 per 1 mmol/L, p = 0.017) and BMI (OR 1.47 per 5 kg/m², p = 0.050).

Conclusions

The ICU mortality rate among patients requiring ECMO for COVID-19 in Poland was high. In-hospital death was independently associated with increased pre-ECMO lactate levels and BMI.

ECMO during the COVID19 pandemic: moving from rescue therapy to more reasonable indications

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) led to an unprecedented number of patients on mechanical ventilation, many of them presenting with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) [1–4]. Depending on the resources of national healthcare systems, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) was frequently applied during the pandemic [3, 5–7]. While intensive care unit experience improved with this new disease, various forms of drug therapies were introduced in living guidelines, resulting in a dynamic development in outcome of COVID-19 [8, 9]. Particularly noteworthy was the introduction of dexamethasone in the summer of 2020, and in 2021 the additional administration of tocilizumab in the early severe phase of the disease [10]. A third important factor that had a significant impact on the outcome of severe respiratory failure was the start of vaccination programmes, primarily for risk groups, depending on national strategies, followed by the general public.

Shedding new light on ECMO treatment in ARDS: moving from rescue therapy to a standardised treatment option with defined indicationshttps://bit.ly/3zXAhyF

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for coronavirus disease 2019-related acute respiratory distress syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To understand the potential role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), highlighting evolving practices and outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

The role for ECMO in COVID-19-related ARDS has evolved throughout the pandemic. Early reports of high mortality led to some to advocate for withholding ECMO in this setting. Subsequent data suggested mortality rates were on par with those from studies conducted prior to the pandemic. However, outcomes are evolving and mortality in these patients may be worsening with time.

SUMMARY

ECMO has an established role in the treatment of severe forms of ARDS. Current data suggest adherence to the currently accepted algorithm for management of ARDS, including the use of ECMO. However, planning related to resource utilization and strain on healthcare systems are necessary to determine the feasibility of ECMO in specific regions at any given time. Utilization of national and local networks, pooling of resources and ECMO mobilization units are important to optimize access to ECMO as appropriate. Reported complications of ECMO in the setting of COVID-19-related ARDS have been predominantly similar to those reported in studies of non-COVID-19-related ARDS. Further high-quality research is needed.

Observational study of changes in utilization and outcomes in mechanical ventilation in COVID-19

Background

The role of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in severe COVID-19 remains a matter of debate. Therefore, the utilization and outcome of NIV in COVID-19 in an unbiased cohort was determined.

Aim

The aim was to provide a detailed account of hospitalized COVID-19 patients requiring non-invasive ventilation during their hospital stay. Furthermore, differences of patients treated with NIV between the first and second wave are explored.

Methods

Confirmed COVID-19 cases of claims data of the Local Health Care Funds with non-invasive and/or invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) in the spring and autumn pandemic period in 2020 were comparable analysed.

Results

Nationwide cohort of 17.023 cases (median/IQR age 71/61–80 years, 64% male) 7235 (42.5%) patients primarily received IMV without NIV, 4469 (26.3%) patients received NIV without subsequent intubation, and 3472 (20.4%) patients had NIV failure (NIV-F), defined by subsequent endotracheal intubation. The proportion of patients who received invasive MV decreased from 75% to 37% during the second period. Accordingly, the proportion of patients with NIV exclusively increased from 9% to 30%, and those failing NIV increased from 9% to 23%. Median length of hospital stay decreased from 26 to 21 days, and duration of MV decreased from 11.9 to 7.3 days. The NIV failure rate decreased from 49% to 43%. Overall mortality increased from 51% versus 54%. Mortality was 44% with NIV-only, 54% with IMV and 66% with NIV-F with mortality rates steadily increasing from 62% in early NIV-F (day 1) to 72% in late NIV-F (>4 days).

Conclusions

Utilization of NIV rapidly increased during the autumn period, which was associated with a reduced duration of MV, but not with overall mortality. High NIV-F rates are associated with increased mortality, particularly in late NIV-F.

Duration of invasive mechanical ventilation prior to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is not associated with survival in acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by coronavirus disease 2019

Background

Duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) prior to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) affects outcome in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related ARDS, the role of pre-ECMO IMV duration is unclear. This single-centre, retrospective study included critically ill adults treated with ECMO due to severe COVID-19-related ARDS between 01/2020 and 05/2021. The primary objective was to determine whether duration of IMV prior to ECMO cannulation influenced ICU mortality.

Results

During the study period, 101 patients (mean age 56 [SD ± 10] years; 70 [69%] men; median RESP score 2 [IQR 1–4]) were treated with ECMO for COVID-19. Sixty patients (59%) survived to ICU discharge. Median ICU length of stay was 31 [IQR 20.7–51] days, median ECMO duration was 16.4 [IQR 8.7–27.7] days, and median time from intubation to ECMO start was 7.7 [IQR 3.6–12.5] days. Fifty-three (52%) patients had a pre-ECMO IMV duration of > 7 days. Pre-ECMO IMV duration had no effect on survival (p = 0.95). No significant difference in survival was found when patients with a pre-ECMO IMV duration of < 7 days (< 10 days) were compared to ≥ 7 days (≥ 10 days) (p = 0.59 and p = 1.0).

Conclusions

The role of prolonged pre-ECMO IMV duration as a contraindication for ECMO in patients with COVID-19-related ARDS should be scrutinised. Evaluation for ECMO should be assessed on an individual and patient-centred basis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13613-022-00980-3.

Respiratory indications for ECMO: focus on COVID-19

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly being used for patients with severe respiratory failure and has received particular attention during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Evidence from two key randomized controlled trials, a subsequent post hoc Bayesian analysis, and meta-analyses support the interpretation of a benefit of ECMO in combination with ultra-lung-protective ventilation for select patients with very severe forms of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). During the pandemic, new evidence has emerged helping to better define the role of ECMO for patients with COVID-19. Results from large cohorts suggest outcomes during the first wave of the pandemic were similar to those in non-COVID-19 cohorts. As the pandemic continued, mortality of patients supported with ECMO has increased. However, the precise reasons for this observation are unclear. Known risk factors for mortality in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients are higher patient age, concomitant extra-pulmonary organ failures or malignancies, prolonged mechanical ventilation before ECMO, less experienced treatment teams and lower ECMO caseloads in the treating center. ECMO is a high resource-dependent support option; therefore, it should be used judiciously, and its availability may need to be constrained when resources are scarce. More evidence from high-quality research is required to better define the role and limitations of ECMO in patients with severe COVID-19.