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

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.

Peripartum veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with severe CoViD-19-related-ARDS

We describe a case series of five pregnant or postpartum women with severe CoViD-19-related ARDS requiring VV ECMO at our centre between Jan 1 and Sep 30, 2021. All patients were cannulated at the referring hospitals by our team before transferring to our centre. None of the women were vaccinated against CoViD-19. All had severe ARDS with Murray's Lung Injury Score of 3-4 and met the severity threshold for ECMO initiation that was used in the EOLIA study. All patients were discharged alive to home, acute rehabilitation, or lung transplant centre. One patient suffered intrauterine death before ECMO initiation and another while on ECMO. VV ECMO for refractory CoViD-19 related ARDS in the peripartum period is safe, and in this small series, it was associated with good maternal survival rates.

Relationship between the Pre-ECMO and ECMO Time and Survival of Severe COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the etiology of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is used to support gas exchange in patients who have failed conventional mechanical ventilation. However, there is no clear consensus on the timing of ECMO use in severe COVID-19 patients.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the differences in pre-ECMO time and ECMO duration between COVID-19 survivors and non-survivors and to explore the association between them.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and other sources were searched until 21 October 2022. Studies reporting the relationship between ECMO-related time and COVID-19 survival were included. All available data were pooled using random-effects methods. Linear regression analysis was used to determine the correlation between pre-ECMO time and ECMO duration. The meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42023403236.

RESULTS

Out of the initial 2473 citations, we analyzed 318 full-text articles, and 54 studies were included, involving 13,691 patients. There were significant differences between survivors and non-survivors in the time from COVID-19 diagnosis (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): [-0.53, -0.29], p < 0.00001), hospital (SMD = -0.53, 95% CI: [-0.97, -0.09], p = 0.02) and intensive care unit (ICU) admission (SMD = -0.28, 95% CI: [-0.49, -0.08], p = 0.007), intubation or mechanical ventilation to ECMO (SMD = -0.21, 95% CI: [-0.32, -0.09], p = 0.0003) and ECMO duration (SMD = -0.18, 95% CI: [-0.30, -0.06], p = 0.003). There was no statistical association between a longer time from symptom onset to ECMO (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.05, 95% CI: [0.99, 1.12], p = 0.11) or time from intubation or mechanical ventilation (MV) and the risk of mortality (highest vs. lowest time groups odds ratio (OR) = 1.18, 95% CI: [0.78, 1.78], p = 0.42; per one-day increase OR = 1.14, 95% CI: [0.86, 1.52], p = 0.36; HR = 0.99, 95% CI: [0.95, 1.02], p = 0.39). There was no linear relationship between pre-ECMO time and ECMO duration.

CONCLUSION

There are differences in pre-ECMO time between COVID-19 survivors and non-survivors, and there is insufficient evidence to conclude that longer pre-ECMO time is responsible for reduced survival in COVID-19 patients. ECMO duration differed between survivors and non-survivors, and the timing of pre-ECMO does not have an impact on ECMO duration. Further studies are needed to explore the association between pre-ECMO and ECMO time in the survival of COVID-19 patients.

Chest CT findings in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring V-V ECMO: J-CARVE registry

BACKGROUND

Chest computed tomography findings are helpful for understanding the pathophysiology of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, there is no large, multicenter, chest computed tomography registry for patients requiring veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO). The aim of this study was to describe chest computed tomography findings at V-V ECMO initiation and to evaluate the association between the findings and outcomes in severe ARDS.

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective cohort study enrolled patients with severe ARDS on V-V ECMO, who were admitted to the intensive care units of 24 hospitals in Japan between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2022.

RESULTS

The primary outcome was 90-day in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes were the successful liberation from V-V ECMO and the values of static lung compliance. Among the 697 registry patients, of the 582 patients who underwent chest computed tomography at V-V ECMO initiation, 394 survived and 188 died. Multivariate Cox regression showed that traction bronchiectasis and subcutaneous emphysema increased the risk of 90-day in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.77 [1.19-2.63], p = 0.005 and 1.97 [1.02-3.79], p = 0.044, respectively). The presence of traction bronchiectasis was also associated with decreased successful liberation from V-V ECMO (odds ratio: 0.27 [0.14-0.52], p < 0.001). Lower static lung compliance was associated with some chest computed tomography findings related to changes outside of pulmonary opacity, but not with the findings related to pulmonary opacity.

CONCLUSIONS

Traction bronchiectasis and subcutaneous emphysema increased the risk of 90-day in-hospital mortality in patients with severe ARDS who required V-V ECMO.

Profiling endogenous adrenal function during veno-venous ECMO support in COVID-19 ARDS: a descriptive analysis

Background

Prolonged critical illness is often accompanied by an impairment of adrenal function, which has been frequently related to conditions complicating patient management. The presumed connection between hypoxia and the pathogenesis of this critical- illness- related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI) might play an important role in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Since extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is frequently used in ARDS, but data on CIRCI during this condition are scarce, this study reports the behaviour of adrenal function parameters during oxygenation support with veno-venous (vv)ECMO in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) ARDS.

Methods

A total of 11 patients undergoing vvECMO due to COVID-19 ARDS at the Medical University of Vienna, who received no concurrent corticosteroid therapy, were retrospectively included in this study. We analysed the concentrations of cortisol, aldosterone, and angiotensin (Ang) metabolites (Ang I-IV, Ang 1-7, and Ang 1-5) in serum via liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry before, after 1 day, 1 week, and 2 weeks during vvECMO support and conducted correlation analyses between cortisol and parameters of disease severity.

Results

Cortisol concentrations appeared to be lowest after initiation of ECMO and progressively increased throughout the study period. Higher concentrations were related to disease severity and correlated markedly with interleukin-6, procalcitonin, pH, base excess, and albumin during the first day of ECMO. Fair correlations during the first day could be observed with calcium, duration of critical illness, and ECMO gas flow. Angiotensin metabolite concentrations were available in a subset of patients and indicated a more homogenous aldosterone response to plasma renin activity after 1 week of ECMO support.

Conclusion

Oxygenation support through vvECMO may lead to a partial recovery of adrenal function over time. In homogenous patient collectives, this novel approach might help to further determine the importance of adrenal stress response in ECMO and the influence of oxygenation support on CIRCI.

Potential for recovery after extremely prolonged VV-ECMO support in well-selected severe COVID-19 patients: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

VenoVenous ExtraCorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV-ECMO) has been widely used as supportive therapy for severe respiratory failure related to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). Only a few data describe the maximum time under VV-ECMO during which pulmonary recovery remains possible. The main objective of this study is to describe the outcomes of prolonged VV-ECMO in patients with COVID-19-related ARDS.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary ECMO center in Brussels, Belgium, between March 2020 and April 2022. All adult patients with ARDS due to COVID-19 who were managed with ECMO therapy for more than 50 days as a bridge to recovery were included.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean duration of VV-ECMO was 87 ± 29 days. Ten (71%) patients were discharged alive from the hospital. The 90-day survival was 86%, and the one-year survival was 71%. The evolution of the patients was characterized by very impaired pulmonary compliance that started to improve slowly and progressively on day 53 (± 25) after the start of ECMO. Of note, four patients improved substantially after a second course of steroids.

CONCLUSIONS

There is potential for recovery in patients with very severe ARDS due to COVID-19 supported by VV-ECMO for up to 151 days.

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 vvECMO implantation may be associated with lower mortality in ARDS

BACKGROUND

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vvECMO) is used to treat hypoxia in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Nevertheless, uncertainty exists regarding the optimal timing of initiation of vvECMO therapy. We aimed to investigate the association between number of days of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) prior to vvECMO implantation and mortality.

METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, we included patients treated at an academic intensive care unit with vvECMO for severe ARDS. The primary outcome was all-cause 28-day mortality. We conducted a multivariate logistic regression analysis to estimate the association between number of days of IMV prior to vvECMO implantation and mortality after adjustment for confounders.

RESULTS

Out of 274 patients who underwent ECMO for severe ARDS, 158 patients (median age: 58 years) with relevant data were included in the analysis. The mean duration of IMV prior to vvECMO was significantly shorter in survivors than in nonsurvivors [survivors median: 1; interquartile range: 1-3; non-survivors median 4; interquartile range: 1-5.75; p = 0.0001). Logistic regression showed an association between the duration of ventilation prior to vvECMO and patient mortality. The odds ratio for the all-cause 28-day mortality and in-hospital mortality was significantly reduced in patients who received vvECMO within the first 5 days of IMV.

CONCLUSIONS

Early vvECMO implantation may be associated with lower mortality in ARDS.

Retrospective analysis of factors associated with outcome in veno-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation

BACKGROUND

The outcome of Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV-ECMO) in acute respiratory failure may be influenced by patient-related factors, center expertise and modalities of mechanical ventilation (MV) during ECMO. We determined, in a medium-size ECMO center in Switzerland, possible factors associated with mortality during VV-ECMO for acute respiratory failure of various etiologies.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients treated with VV-ECMO in our University Hospital from 2012 to 2019 (pre-COVID era). Demographic variables, severity scores, MV duration before ECMO, pre and on-ECMO arterial blood gases and respiratory variables were collected. The primary outcome was ICU mortality. Data were compared between survivors and non-survivors, and factors associated with mortality were assessed in univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients (33 ARDS, 18 non-ARDS) were included. ICU survival was 49% (ARDS, 39%; non-ARDS 67%). In univariate analyses, a higher driving pressure (DP) at 24h and 48h on ECMO (whole population), longer MV duration before ECMO and higher DP at 24h on ECMO (ARDS patients), were associated with mortality. In multivariate analyses, ECMO indication, higher DP at 24h on ECMO and, in ARDS, longer MV duration before ECMO, were independently associated with mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

DP on ECMO and longer MV duration before ECMO (in ARDS) are major, and potentially modifiable, factors influencing outcome during VV-ECMO.

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.

Expert consensus statement on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation ECMO for COVID-19 severe ARDS: an international Delphi study

BACKGROUND

The high-quality evidence on managing COVID-19 patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support is insufficient. Furthermore, there is little consensus on allocating ECMO resources when scarce. The paucity of evidence and the need for guidance on controversial topics required an international expert consensus statement to understand the role of ECMO in COVID-19 better. Twenty-two international ECMO experts worldwide work together to interpret the most recent findings of the evolving published research, statement formulation, and voting to achieve consensus.

OBJECTIVES

To guide the next generation of ECMO practitioners during future pandemics on tackling controversial topics pertaining to using ECMO for patients with COVID-19-related severe ARDS.

METHODS

The scientific committee was assembled of five chairpersons with more than 5 years of ECMO experience and a critical care background. Their roles were modifying and restructuring the panel's questions and, assisting with statement formulation in addition to expert composition and literature review. Experts are identified based on their clinical experience with ECMO (minimum of 5 years) and previous academic activity on a global scale, with a focus on diversity in gender, geography, area of expertise, and level of seniority. We used the modified Delphi technique rounds and the nominal group technique (NGT) through three face-to-face meetings and the voting on the statement was conducted anonymously. The entire process was planned to be carried out in five phases: identifying the gap of knowledge, validation, statement formulation, voting, and drafting, respectively.

RESULTS

In phase I, the scientific committee obtained 52 questions on controversial topics in ECMO for COVID-19, further reviewed for duplication and redundancy in phase II, resulting in nine domains with 32 questions with a validation rate exceeding 75% (Fig. 1). In phase III, 25 questions were used to formulate 14 statements, and six questions achieved no consensus on the statements. In phase IV, two voting rounds resulted in 14 statements that reached a consensus are included in four domains which are: patient selection, ECMO clinical management, operational and logistics management, and ethics.

CONCLUSION

Three years after the onset of COVID-19, our understanding of the role of ECMO has evolved. However, it is incomplete. Tota14 statements achieved consensus; included in four domains discussing patient selection, clinical ECMO management, operational and logistic ECMO management and ethics to guide next-generation ECMO providers during future pandemic situations.

Bleeding and Thrombotic Complications in COVID-19-Associated ARDS Requiring ECMO

BACKGROUND

We analyzed bleeding and thrombotic complications in COVID-19-associated ARDS requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

METHODS

This was a single-center observational study of adult subjects undergoing ECMO for COVID-19 (n = 67) or all other cause of ARDS (n = 60), excluding trauma patients.

RESULTS

In the COVID-19 group, duration of invasive mechanical ventilation prior to ECMO was lower (2 [0-4] d vs 3 [1-6] d) and ECMO retrieval less frequent (71% vs 87%). No significant differences were found in Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II), or in the in-hospital survival predicted by the Respiratory ECMO Survival Prediction score. During the first 7 d of ECMO support, the COVID-19 group presented higher platelets and fibrinogen, lower activated partial thromboplastin time, but no differences in D-dimer. Thrombotic complications were similar between groups. Higher rates of severe bleeding, namely airway bleeding (37.3% vs 15.0%) and hemothorax (13.4% vs 3.3%), were found in COVID-19, with lower hemoglobin and higher red blood cell transfusions. COVID-19 ARDS was associated with longer ECMO duration (47 [17-80] d vs 19 [12-30] d) and absence of a statistically significant difference concerning in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19-associated ARDS requiring ECMO presented high rates of severe bleeding complications and a protracted course. Further studies are needed to clarify the risks and benefits of ECMO in severe COVID-19-associated ARDS.

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.

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.

Airway Pressure Release Ventilation for Acute Respiratory Failure Due to Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: To explore the evidence surrounding the use of Airway Pressure Release Ventilation (APRV) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: A Systematic electronic search of PUBMED, EMBASE, and the WHO COVID-19 database. We also searched the grey literature via Google and preprint servers (medRxive and research square). Eligible studies included randomised controlled trials and observational studies comparing APRV to conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) in adults with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and reporting at least one of the following outcomes; in-hospital mortality, ventilator free days (VFDs), ICU length of stay (LOS), changes in gas exchange parameters, and barotrauma. Two authors independently screened and selected articles for inclusion and extracted data in a pre-specified form. Results: Of 181 articles screened, seven studies (one randomised controlled trial, two cohort studies, and four before-after studies) were included comprising 354 patients. APRV was initiated at a mean of 1.2-13 days after intubation. APRV wasn't associated with improved mortality compared to CMV (relative risk [RR], 1.20; 95% CI 0.70-2.05; I², 61%) neither better VFDs (ratio of means [RoM], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.52-1.24; I², 0%) nor ICU LOS (RoM, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.79-1.51; I², 57%). Compared to CMV, APRV was associated with a 33% increase in PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio (RoM, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.21-1.48; I², 29%) and a 9% decrease in PaCO₂ (RoM, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.15; I², 0%). There was no significant increased risk of barotrauma compared to CMV (RR, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.60-4.00; I², 0%). Conclusions: In adult patients with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation, APRV is associated with improved gas exchange but not mortality nor VFDs when compared with CMV. The results were limited by high uncertainty given the low quality of the available studies and limited number of patients. Adequately powered and well-designed clinical trials to define the role of APRV in COVID-19 patients are still needed. Registration: PROSPERO; CRD42021291234.

In-hospital and 6-month outcomes in patients with COVID-19 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (EuroECMO-COVID): a multicentre, prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been widely used in patients with COVID-19, but uncertainty remains about the determinants of in-hospital mortality and data on post-discharge outcomes are scarce. The aims of this study were to investigate the variables associated with in-hospital outcomes in patients who received ECMO during the first wave of COVID-19 and to describe the status of patients 6 months after ECMO initiation.

METHODS

EuroECMO-COVID is a prospective, multicentre, observational study developed by the European Extracorporeal Life Support Organization. This study was based on data from patients aged 16 years or older who received ECMO support for refractory COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic-from March 1 to Sept 13, 2020-at 133 centres in 21 countries. In-hospital mortality and mortality 6 months after ECMO initiation were the primary outcomes. Mixed-Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate associations between patient and management-related variables (eg, patient demographics, comorbidities, pre-ECMO status, and ECMO characteristics and complications) and in-hospital deaths. Survival status at 6 months was established through patient contact or institutional charts review. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04366921, and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between March 1 and Sept 13, 2020, 1215 patients (942 [78%] men and 267 [22%] women; median age 53 years [IQR 46-60]) were included in the study. Median ECMO duration was 15 days (IQR 8-27). 602 (50%) of 1215 patients died in hospital, and 852 (74%) patients had at least one complication. Multiorgan failure was the leading cause of death (192 [36%] of 528 patients who died with available data). In mixed-Cox analyses, age of 60 years or older, use of inotropes and vasopressors before ECMO initiation, chronic renal failure, and time from intubation to ECMO initiation of 4 days or more were associated with higher in-hospital mortality. 613 patients did not die in hospital, and 547 (95%) of 577 patients for whom data were available were alive at 6 months. 102 (24%) of 431 patients had returned to full-time work at 6 months, and 57 (13%) of 428 patients had returned to part-time work. At 6 months, respiratory rehabilitation was required in 88 (17%) of 522 patients with available data, and the most common residual symptoms included dyspnoea (185 [35%] of 523 patients) and cardiac (52 [10%] of 514 patients) or neurocognitive (66 [13%] of 512 patients) symptoms.

INTERPRETATION

Patient's age, timing of cannulation (<4 days vs ≥4 days from intubation), and use of inotropes and vasopressors are essential factors to consider when analysing the outcomes of patients receiving ECMO for COVID-19. Despite post-discharge survival being favourable, persisting long-term symptoms suggest that dedicated post-ECMO follow-up programmes are required.

FUNDING

None.

Complications Associated With Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation-What Can Go Wrong?

OBJECTIVES

Despite increasing use and promising outcomes, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) introduces the risk of a number of complications across the spectrum of ECMO care. This narrative review describes the variety of short- and long-term complications that can occur during treatment with ECMO and how patient selection and management decisions may influence the risk of these complications.

DATA SOURCES

English language articles were identified in PubMed using phrases related to V-V ECMO, acute respiratory distress syndrome, severe respiratory failure, and complications.

STUDY SELECTION

Original research, review articles, commentaries, and published guidelines from the Extracorporeal Life support Organization were considered.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data from relevant literature were identified, reviewed, and integrated into a concise narrative review.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Selecting patients for V-V ECMO exposes the patient to a number of complications. Adequate knowledge of these risks is needed to weigh them against the anticipated benefit of treatment. Timing of ECMO initiation and transfer to centers capable of providing ECMO affect patient outcomes. Choosing a configuration that insufficiently addresses the patient's physiologic deficit leads to consequences of inadequate physiologic support. Suboptimal mechanical ventilator management during ECMO may lead to worsening lung injury, delayed lung recovery, or ventilator-associated pneumonia. Premature decannulation from ECMO as lungs recover can lead to clinical worsening, and delayed decannulation can prolong exposure to complications unnecessarily. Short-term complications include bleeding, thrombosis, and hemolysis, renal and neurologic injury, concomitant infections, and technical and mechanical problems. Long-term complications reflect the physical, functional, and neurologic sequelae of critical illness. ECMO can introduce ethical and emotional challenges, particularly when bridging strategies fail.

CONCLUSIONS

V-V ECMO is associated with a number of complications. ECMO selection, timing of initiation, and management decisions impact the presence and severity of these potential harms.

Outcomes of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in COVID-19-Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: An Inverse Probability Weighted Analysis

Although venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has been used in case of COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), outcomes and criteria for its application should be evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To describe patient characteristics and outcomes in patients receiving VV ECMO due to COVID-19-induced ARDS and to assess the possible impact of COVID-19 on mortality.

DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Multicenter retrospective study in 15 ICUs worldwide. All adult patients (> 18 yr) were included if they received VV ECMO with ARDS as main indication. Two groups were created: a COVID-19 cohort from March 2020 to December 2020 and a "control" non-COVID ARDS cohort from January 2018 to July 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Collected data consisted of patient demographics, baseline variables, ECMO characteristics, and patient outcomes. The primary outcome was 60-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included patient characteristics, COVID-19-related therapies before and during ECMO and complication rate. To assess the influence of COVID-19 on mortality, inverse probability weighted (IPW) analyses were used to correct for predefined confounding variables.

RESULTS

A total of 193 patients with COVID-19 received VV ECMO. The main indication for VV ECMO consisted of refractory hypoxemia, either isolated or combined with refractory hypercapnia. Complications with the highest occurrence rate included hemorrhage, an additional infectious event or acute kidney injury. Mortality was 35% and 45% at 28 and 60 days, respectively. Those mortality rates did not differ between the first and second waves of COVID-19 in 2020. Furthermore, 60-day mortality was equal between patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19-associated ARDS receiving VV ECMO (hazard ratio 60-d mortality, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.82-1.98; p = 0.30).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Mortality for patients with COVID-19 who received VV ECMO was similar to that reported in other COVID-19 cohorts, although no differences were found between the first and second waves regarding mortality. In addition, after IPW, mortality was independent of the etiology of ARDS.

Subcutaneous Enoxaparin for Systemic Anticoagulation of COVID-19 Patients During Extracorporeal Life Support

Background

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, with an inherent requirement for anticoagulation to avoid circuit thrombosis, is a key element in the treatment of respiratory failure associated with COVID-19. Anticoagulation remains challenging, the standard of care being intravenous continuous administration of unfractionated heparin. Yet regimens vary. Some intensive care units in our center have successfully used enoxaparin subcutaneously in recent years and throughout the pandemic.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed adult COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure who had been systemically anticoagulated using either enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin. The choice of anticoagulant therapy was based on the standard of the intensive care unit. Defined thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events were analyzed as study endpoints.

Results

Of 98 patients, 62 had received enoxaparin and 36 unfractionated heparin. All hazard ratios for the thromboembolic (3.43; 95% CI: 1.08–10.87; p = 0.04), hemorrhagic (2.58; 95% CI: 1.03–6.48; p = 0.04), and composite (2.86; 95% CI: 1.41–5.92; p = 0.007) endpoints favored enoxaparin, whose efficient administration was verified by peak levels of anti-factor Xa (median: 0.45 IU ml⁻¹; IQR: 0.38; 0.56). Activated partial thromboplastin time as well as thrombin time differed significantly (both p<0.001) between groups mirroring the effect of unfractionated heparin.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates the successful use of subcutaneous enoxaparin for systemic anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19 during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Our findings are to be confirmed by future prospective, randomized, controlled trials.

Evolving outcomes of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been used extensively for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Reports early in the pandemic suggested that mortality in patients with COVID-19 receiving ECMO was comparable to non-COVID-19-related ARDS. However, subsequent reports suggested that mortality appeared to be increasing over time. Therefore, we conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis, to characterise changes in mortality over time and elucidate risk factors for poor outcomes.

Methods

We conducted a meta-analysis (CRD42021271202), searching MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases, from 1 December 2019 to 26 January 2022, for studies reporting on mortality among adults with COVID-19 receiving ECMO. We also captured hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation and ECMO, as well as complications of ECMO. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses, assessed risk of bias of included studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist and evaluated certainty of pooled estimates using GRADE methodology.

Results

Of 4522 citations, we included 52 studies comprising 18,211 patients in the meta-analysis. The pooled mortality rate among patients with COVID-19 requiring ECMO was 48.8% (95% confidence interval 44.8–52.9%, high certainty). Mortality was higher among studies which enrolled patients later in the pandemic as opposed to earlier (1st half 2020: 41.2%, 2nd half 2020: 46.4%, 1st half 2021: 62.0%, 2nd half 2021: 46.5%, interaction p value = 0.0014). Predictors of increased mortality included age, the time of final patient enrolment from 1 January 2020, and the proportion of patients receiving corticosteroids, and reduced duration of ECMO run.

Conclusions

The mortality rate for patients receiving ECMO for COVID-19-related ARDS has increased as the pandemic has progressed. The reasons for this are likely multifactorial; however, as outcomes for these patients evolve, the decision to initiate ECMO should include the best contextual estimate of mortality at the time of ECMO initiation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-04011-2.

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.

Different Methods to Improve the Monitoring of Noninvasive Respiratory Support of Patients with Severe Pneumonia/ARDS Due to COVID-19: An Update

The latest guidelines for the hospital care of patients affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory failure have moved towards the widely accepted use of noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) as opposed to early intubation at the pandemic onset. The establishment of severe COVID-19 pneumonia goes through different pathophysiological phases that partially resemble typical acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and have been categorized into different clinical–radiological phenotypes. These can variably benefit on the application of external positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) during noninvasive mechanical ventilation, mainly due to variable levels of lung recruitment ability and lung compliance during different phases of the disease. A growing body of evidence suggests that intense respiratory effort producing excessive negative pleural pressure swings (P_pl) plays a critical role in the onset and progression of lung and diaphragm damage in patients treated with noninvasive respiratory support. Routine respiratory monitoring is mandatory to avoid the nasty continuation of NIRS in patients who are at higher risk for respiratory deterioration and could benefit from early initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation instead. Here we propose different monitoring methods both in the clinical and experimental settings adapted for this purpose, although further research is required to allow their extensive application in clinical practice. We reviewed the needs and available tools for clinical–physiological monitoring that aims at optimizing the ventilatory management of patients affected by acute respiratory distress syndrome due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.