Extracorporeal life support with left ventricular decompression-improved survival in severe cardiogenic shock: results from a retrospective study

Impella Versus VA-ECMO for Patients with Cardiogenic Shock: Comprehensive Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analyses

Impella and VA-ECMO are two possible therapeutic courses for the treatment of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). The study aims to perform a systematic literature review and meta-analyses of a comprehensive set of clinical and socio-economic outcomes observed when using Impella or VA-ECMO with patients under CS. A systematic literature review was performed in Medline, and Web of Science databases on 21 February 2022. Nonoverlapping studies with adult patients supported for CS with Impella or VA-ECMO were searched. Study designs including RCTs, observational studies, and economic evaluations were considered. Data on patient characteristics, type of support, and outcomes were extracted. Additionally, meta-analyses were performed on the most relevant and recurring outcomes, and results shown using forest plots. A total of 102 studies were included, 57% on Impella, 43% on VA-ECMO. The most common outcomes investigated were mortality/survival, duration of support, and bleeding. Ischemic stroke was lower in patients treated with Impella compared to the VA-ECMO population, with statistically significant difference. Socio-economic outcomes including quality of life or resource use were not reported in any study. The study highlighted areas where further data collection is needed to clarify the value of complex, new technologies in the treatment of CS that will enable comparative assessments focusing both on the health impact on patient outcomes and on the financial burden for government budgets. Future studies need to fill the gap to comply with recent regulatory updates at the European and national levels.

Central extracorporeal circulatory life support (cECLS) in selected patients with critical cardiogenic shock

Background

Percutaneous extracorporeal life support (pECLS) is increasingly applied in cardiogenic shock (CS) despite a lack of evidence from randomized trials. The in-hospital mortality rate of pECLS still reaches up to 60%, while vascular access site complications remain a shortcoming. Surgical approaches with central cannulation for ECLS (cELCS) have emerged as a bail-out option. To date, no systematic approach exists that allows a definition of inclusion or exclusion criteria for cECLS.

Methods and results

This single-center, retrospective, case-control study includes all patients fulfilling criteria for CS at the West German Heart and Vascular Center Essen/Germany between 2015 and 2020 who underwent cECLS (n = 58), excluding post-cardiotomy patients. Seventeen patients received cECLS (29.3%) as a first-line treatment strategy and 41 patients as a second-line strategy (70.7%). The main complications leading to the use of cECLS as a second-line strategy were limb ischemia (32.8%) and ongoing insufficient hemodynamic support (27.6%). The first-line cECLS cohort showed a 30-day mortality rate of 53.3% that was constant during follow-up. The 30-day mortality rate of secondary cECLS candidates was 69.8% and the rate at 3 and 6 months was 79.1%. Younger patients (<55 years) were more likely to exhibit survival benefit with cECLS (p = 0.043).

Conclusion

Surgical cECLS in CS is a feasible therapy for highly selected patients with hemodynamic instability, vascular complications, or peripheral access site limitations as complementary strategy in experienced centers.

Empfehlungen der S3-Leitlinie (AWMF) „Einsatz der extrakorporalen Zirkulation (ECLS/ECMO) bei Herz- und Kreislaufversagen“

In den vergangenen Jahren hat der Einsatz mechanischer Unterstützungssysteme für Patienten mit Herz- und Kreislaufversagen kontinuierlich zugenommen, sodass in Deutschland mittlerweile jährlich etwa 3000 ECLS-/ECMO-Systeme implantiert werden. Vor dem Hintergrund bislang fehlender umfassender Leitlinien bestand ein dringlicher Bedarf an der Formulierung evidenzbasierter Empfehlungen zu den zentralen Aspekten der ECLS-/ECMO-Therapie. Im Juli 2015 wurde daher die Erstellung einer S3-Leitlinie durch die Deutsche Gesellschaft für Thorax-, Herz- und Gefäßchirurgie (DGTHG) bei der zuständigen Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e. V. (AWMF) angemeldet. In einem strukturierten Konsensusprozess mit Einbindung von Experten aus Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz, delegiert aus 11 AWMF-Fachgesellschaften, 5 weiteren Fachgesellschaften sowie der Patientenvertretung, entstand unter Federführung der DGTHG die Leitlinie „Einsatz der extrakorporalen Zirkulation (ECLS/ECMO) bei Herz- und Kreislaufversagen“, die im Februar 2021 publiziert wurde. Die Leitlinie fokussiert auf klinische Aspekte der Initiierung, Fortführung, Entwöhnung und Nachsorge und adressiert hierbei auch strukturelle und ökonomische Fragestellungen. Dieser Artikel präsentiert eine Übersicht zu der Methodik und den konsentierten Empfehlungen.

Venting during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest contribute pre-dominantly to mortality in acute cardiovascular care. Here, veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) has emerged as an established therapeutic option for patients suffering from these life-threatening entities. VA-ECMO provides temporary circulatory support until causative treatments are effective and enables recovery or serves as a bridging strategy to surgical ventricular assist devices, heart transplantation or decision-making. However, in-hospital mortality rate in this treatment population is still around 60%. In the recently published ARREST trial, VA-ECMO treatment lowered mortality rate in patients with ongoing cardiac arrest due to therapy refractory ventricular fibrillation compared to standard advanced cardiac life support in selected patients. Whether VA-ECMO can reduce mortality compared to standard of care in cardiogenic shock has to be evaluated in the ongoing prospective randomized studies EURO-SHOCK (NCT03813134) and ECLS-SHOCK (NCT03637205). As an innate drawback of VA-ECMO treatment, the retrograde aortic flow could lead to an elevation of left ventricular (LV) afterload, increase in LV filling pressure, mitral regurgitation, and elevated left atrial pressure. This may compromise myocardial function and recovery, pulmonary hemodynamics—possibly with concomitant pulmonary congestion and even lung failure—and contribute to poor outcomes in a relevant proportion of treated patients. To overcome these detrimental effects, a multitude of venting strategies are currently engaged for both preventive and emergent unloading. This review aims to provide a comprehensive and structured synopsis of existing venting modalities and their specific hemodynamic characteristics. We discuss in detail the available data on outcome categories and complication rates related to the respective venting option.

Graphical abstract

Empfehlungen der S3-Leitlinie (AWMF) Einsatz der extrakorporalen Zirkulation (ECLS/ECMO) bei Herz- und Kreislaufversagen

In den vergangenen Jahren hat der Einsatz mechanischer Unterstützungssysteme für Patienten mit Herz- und Kreislaufversagen kontinuierlich zugenommen, sodass in Deutschland mittlerweile jährlich etwa 3000 ECLS/ECMO-Systeme implantiert werden. Vor dem Hintergrund bislang fehlender umfassender Leitlinien bestand ein dringlicher Bedarf an der Formulierung evidenzbasierter Empfehlungen zu den zentralen Aspekten der ECLS/ECMO-Therapie.

Im Juli 2015 wurde daher die Erstellung einer S3-Leitlinie durch die Deutsche Gesellschaft für Thorax-, Herz- und Gefäßchirurgie (DGTHG) bei der zuständigen Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e. V. (AWMF) angemeldet. In einem strukturierten Konsensusprozess mit Einbindung von Experten aus Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz, delegiert aus 11 AWMF-Fachgesellschaften, 5 weiteren Fachgesellschaften sowie der Patientenvertretung, entstand unter Federführung der DGTHG die Leitlinie „Einsatz der extrakorporalen Zirkulation (ECLS/ECMO) bei Herz- und Kreislaufversagen“, die im Februar 2021 publiziert wurde.

Die Leitlinie fokussiert auf klinische Aspekte der Initiierung, Fortführung, Entwöhnung und Nachsorge und adressiert hierbei auch strukturelle und ökonomische Fragestellungen. Dieser Artikel präsentiert eine Übersicht zu der Methodik und den konsentierten Empfehlungen.

Use of extracorporeal circulation (ECLS/ECMO) for cardiac and circulatory failure -A clinical practice Guideline Level 3

Aims Worldwide applications of extracorporeal circulation for mechanical support in cardiac and circulatory failure, which are referred to as extracorporeal life support (ECLS) or veno‐arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (va‐ECMO), have dramatically increased over the past decade. In spite of the expanding use and the immense medical as well as socio‐economic impact of this therapeutic approach, there has been a lack of interdisciplinary recommendations considering the best available evidence for ECLS treatment.

Methods and Results In a multiprofessional, interdisciplinary scientific effort of all scientific societies involved in the treatment of patients with acute cardiac and circulatory failure, the first evidence‐ and expert consensus‐based guideline (level S3) on ECLS/ECMO therapy was developed in a structured approach under regulations of the AWMF (Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany) and under use of GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria. This article presents all recommendations created by the expert panel, addressing a multitude of aspects for ECLS initiation, continuation, weaning and aftercare as well as structural and personnel requirements.

Conclusions This first evidence‐ and expert consensus‐based guideline (level S3) on ECLS/ECMO therapy should be used to apply the best available care nationwide. Beyond clinical practice advice, remaining important research aspects for future scientific efforts are formulated.

Rescue extracorporeal life support as a bridge to durable left ventricular assist device

BACKGROUND

The ideal timing of a durable assist device implantation in patients with end-stage heart failure presenting with INTERMACS profile I is still controversial. The data on extracorporeal life support (ECLS) bridge to durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in these patients is limited.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of 35 patients in acute cardiogenic shock (CS) who, between December 2013 and September 2020, were bridged with ECLS to durable LVAD. The mean age was 52.3 ± 12.0 years. The primary endpoints of this study were in-hospital, 30-day, 6-month, and 1-year mortality. The secondary endpoint was the development of any postoperative adverse events and other characteristics during the follow-up period. We also assessed the impact of the rescue ECLS on the recovery of the end-organ function.

RESULTS

In-hospital, 30-day, 6-month, and 1-year survival was 65.6%, 75.9%, 69.2%, and 62.7% respectively. The median time on ECLS was 7 days (IQR 5.0-13.0). We observed a high incidence of a severe right heart failure (22.9%), acute kidney injury on dialysis (68.6%), and respiratory failure (77.1%). Bridge with ECLS provided a significant recovery of liver and kidney function prior to durable LVAD implantation.

CONCLUSION

The concept of bridging patients presenting in end-stage heart failure and cardiogenic shock with ECLS prior to durable LVAD implantation is a feasible method to ensure acceptable survival rates and significant recovery of the end-organ function.

[Use of extracorporeal circulation (ECLS/ECMO) for cardiac and circulatory failure : Short version of the S3 guideline]

In Germany, a remarkable increase regarding the usage of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and extracorporeal life support (ECLS) systems has been observed in recent years with approximately 3000 ECLS/ECMO implantations annually since 2015. Despite the widespread use of ECLS/ECMO, evidence-based recommendations or guidelines are still lacking regarding indications, contraindications, limitations and management of ECMO/ECLS patients. Therefore in 2015, the German Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (GSTCVS) registered the multidisciplinary S3 guideline "Use of extracorporeal circulation (ECLS/ECMO) for cardiac and circulatory failure" to develop evidence-based recommendations for ECMO/ECLS systems according to the requirements of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF). Although the clinical application of ECMO/ECLS represents the main focus, the presented guideline also addresses structural and economic issues. Experts from 17 German, Austrian and Swiss scientific societies and a patients' organization, guided by the GSTCVS, completed the project in February 2021. In this report, we present a summary of the methodological concept and tables displaying the recommendations for each chapter of the guideline.

[Use of extracorporeal circulation (ECLS/ECMO) for cardiac and circulatory failure : Short version of the S3 guideline]

In Germany, a remarkable increase regarding the usage of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and extracorporeal life support (ECLS) systems has been observed in recent years with approximately 3000 ECLS/ECMO implantations annually since 2015. Despite the widespread use of ECLS/ECMO, evidence-based recommendations or guidelines are still lacking regarding indications, contraindications, limitations and management of ECMO/ECLS patients. Therefore in 2015, the German Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (GSTCVS) registered the multidisciplinary S3 guideline "Use of extracorporeal circulation (ECLS/ECMO) for cardiac and circulatory failure" to develop evidence-based recommendations for ECMO/ECLS systems according to the requirements of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF). Although the clinical application of ECMO/ECLS represents the main focus, the presented guideline also addresses structural and economic issues. Experts from 17 German, Austrian and Swiss scientific societies and a patients' organization, guided by the GSTCVS, completed the project in February 2021. In this report, we present a summary of the methodological concept and tables displaying the recommendations for each chapter of the guideline.

Left ventricular unloading with transaortic Impella 2.5 implantation in a pediatric patient supported by extracorporeal life support

We report the case of a 12-year old female patient with Friedreich's ataxia and diabetes mellitus. Due to a progressive multiorgan failure, a veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was implanted through the axillary vessels. However, due to a lack of ejection and severe dilatation of the left ventricle, an Impella 2.5 was implanted. Due to the small diameter of the femoral arteries, we performed a trans-aortic implantation through a median sternotomy via a Dacron tube graft. We report on the procedure and perioperative outcome.

Left ventricle unloading strategies in ECMO: A single-center experience

INTRODUCTION

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a life-saving technology capable of restoring perfusion but is not without significant complications that limit its realizable therapeutic benefit. ECMO-induced hemodynamics increase cardiac afterload risking left ventricular distention and impaired cardiac recovery. To mitigate potentially harmful effects, multiple strategies to unload the left ventricle (LV) are used in clinical practice but data supporting the optimal approach is presently lacking.

MATERIALS & METHODS

We reviewed outcomes of our ECMO population from September 2015 through January 2019 to determine if our LV unloading strategies were associated with patient outcomes. We compared reactive (Group 1, n = 30) versus immediate (Group 2, n = 33) LV unloading and then compared patients unloaded with an Impella CP (n = 19) versus an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP, n = 16), analyzing survival and ECMO-related complications.

RESULTS

Survival was similar between Groups 1 and 2 (33 vs 42%, P = .426) with Group 2 experiencing more clinically-significant hemorrhage (40 vs. 67%, P = .034). Survival and ECMO-related complications were similar between patients unloaded with an Impella versus an IABP. However, the Impella group exhibited a higher rate of survival (37%) than predicted by their median SAVE score (18%).

DISCUSSION

Based on this analysis, reactive unloading appears to be a viable strategy while venting with the Impella CP provides better than anticipated survival. Our findings correlate with recent large cohort studies and motivate further work to design clinical guidelines and future trial design.

Left Ventricle Unloading with Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Cardiogenic Shock. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

During veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO), the increase of left ventricular (LV) afterload can potentially increase the LV stress, exacerbate myocardial ischemia and delay recovery from cardiogenic shock (CS). Several strategies of LV unloading have been proposed. Systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement included adult patients from studies published between January 2000 and March 2019. The search was conducted through numerous databases. Overall, from 62 papers, 7581 patients were included, among whom 3337 (44.0%) received LV unloading concomitant to VA-ECMO. Overall, in-hospital mortality was 58.9% (4466/7581). A concomitant strategy of LV unloading as compared to ECMO alone was associated with 12% lower mortality risk (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82–0.93; p < 0.0001; I² = 40%) and 35% higher probability of weaning from ECMO (RR 1.35; 95% CI 1.21–1.51; p < 0.00001; I² = 38%). In an analysis stratified by setting, the highest mortality risk benefit was observed in case of acute myocardial infarction: RR 0.75; 95%CI 0.68–0.83; p < 0.0001; I² = 0%. There were no apparent differences between two techniques in terms of complications. In heterogeneous populations of critically ill adults in CS and supported with VA-ECMO, the adjunct of LV unloading is associated with lower early mortality and higher rate of weaning.

Left ventricular unloading during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation – Impella versus atrial septal defect: A simulation study

Background:

Atrial septal defect and Impella have been proposed for left ventricular unloading in venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients. This work aims at evaluating the haemodynamic changes in venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients after Impella implantation or atrial septal defect realization by a simulation study.

Methods:

A lumped parameter model of the cardiovascular system was adapted to this study. Atrial septal defect was modelled as a resistance between the two atria. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and Impella were modelled starting from their pressure-flow characteristics. The baseline condition of a patient undergoing venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was reproduced starting from haemodynamic and echocardiographic data. The effects of different atrial septal defect size, Impella and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support were simulated.

Results:

Impella caused an increment of mean arterial pressure up to 67%, a decrement in mean pulmonary arterial pressure up to 8%, a decrement in left ventricular end systolic volume up to 11% with a reduction up to 97% of left ventricular cardiac output. Atrial septal defect reduces left atrial pressure (19%), increases right atrial pressure (22%), increases mean arterial pressure (18%), decreases left ventricular end systolic volume (11%), increases right ventricular volume (33%) and decreases left ventricular cardiac output (55%).

Conclusion:

Impella has a higher capability in left ventricular unloading during venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in comparison to atrial septal defect with a lower right ventricular overload.

Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Cardiogenic Shock: Lifeline of Modern Day CICU

Cardiogenic shock (CS) portends an extremely high mortality of nearly 50% during index hospitalization. Prompt diagnoses of CS, its underlying etiology, and efficient implementation of treatment modalities, including mechanical circulatory support (MCS), are critical especially in light of such high predicted mortality. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) provides the most comprehensive cardiopulmonary support in critically ill patients and hence has seen a steady increase in its utilization over the past decade. Hence, a good understanding of VA-ECMO, its role in treatment of CS, especially when compared with other temporary MCS devices, and its complications are vital for any critical care cardiologist. Our review of VA-ECMO aims to provide the same.

Optimal Strategy and Timing of Left Ventricular Venting During Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Life Support for Adults in Cardiogenic Shock

Background:

Veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (VA-ECLS) is widely used to treat refractory cardiogenic shock. However, increased left ventricular (LV) afterload in VA-ECLS can worsen pulmonary congestion and compromise myocardial recovery. Our objectives were to explore the efficacy, safety, and optimal timing of adjunctive LV venting strategies.

Methods:

A systematic search was performed on Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, CDSR, CCRCT, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.Gov, and WHO ICTRP from inception until January 2019 for all relevant studies, including LV venting. Data were analyzed for mortality and weaning from VA-ECLS on the basis of timing of LV venting, along with adverse complications.

Results:

A total of 7995 patients were included from 62 observational studies, wherein 3458 patients had LV venting during VA-ECLS. LV venting significantly improved weaning from VA-ECLS (odds ratio, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.47–0.83]; P =0.001) and reduced short-term (30 day; risk ratio [RR], 0.86 [95% CI, 0.77–0.96]; P =0.008) but not in-hospital (RR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.83–1.01] P =0.09) or long-term (6 months; RR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.90–1.03]; P =0.27) mortality. Early (<12 hours; RR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.75–0.99]; P =0.03) but not late (≥12 hours; RR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.71–1.38]; P =0.93) LV venting significantly reduced short-term mortality. Patients with LV venting spent more time on VA-ECLS (3.6 versus 2.8 days, P <0.001), and mechanical ventilation (7.1 versus 4.6 days, P =0.013). With the exception of hemolysis (RR, 2.18 [95% CI, 1.58–3.01]; P <0.00001), overall adverse events did not differ.

Conclusions:

LV venting, especially if done early (<12 hours), appears to be associated with an increased success of weaning and reduced short-term mortality. Future studies are required to delineate the importance of any or early LV venting adjuncts on mortality and morbidity outcomes.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Transport Part 1: Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Configurations and Physiology

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), a term used to describe oxygenation that occurs outside of the body, is an increasingly common means of supporting the most critically ill patients. Because of the invasiveness and high probability of serious complications during ECMO, ECMO is typically indicated only when there is a high likelihood of death with conventional treatment. With continued improvements in technology and increasing clinical experience, transport clinicians are increasingly likely to be called on to transport patients on ECMO. ECMO can be initiated in 2 distinct forms, venovenous or venoarterial, and can primarily support the respiratory system or the cardiac and respiratory systems concurrently. This review will cover the basic physiology and components of ECMO as well as the preparation for ECMO transport for adults.

ECPELLA 2.0-Minimally invasive biventricular groin-free full mechanical circulatory support with Impella 5.0/5.5 pump and ProtekDuo cannula as a bridge-to-bridge concept: A first-in-man method description

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock (CS) from biventricular heart failure that requires acute mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is associated with high mortality. Different MCS methods and techniques have emerged as a standard of care in CS. Nevertheless, the routine MCS approach carries multiple limitations such as limb ischemia, missing of left ventricular unloading and immobilization. We describe a method to establish a groin-free full support MCS in patients with CS without the need for thoracotomy. This is the first report of the ECPELLA 2.0 concept, a peripheral groin-free biventricular MCS in patients with acute CS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We discuss two patients in acute CS (INTERMACS I) treated with two peripheral MCS devices (Impella 5.0 or 5.5 surgically via an axillary artery and ProtekDuo cannula percutaneously via a right internal jugular vein) as a bridge before the implantation of a durable left ventricular assist device (LVAD). Biventricular assist device (BIVAD)-support duration was 9 and 15 days and both of the patients were successfully bridged to a durable LVAD. As our BIVAD-concept is groin-free, the patients started full mobilization as early as they were weaned from the respirator 2 days after the BIVAD-implantation. ECPELLA 2.0 provides a high cardiac output, right and left ventricular unloading with end-organ recovery and a possibility of administration of a membrane oxygenator. There were no device-related complications.

CONCLUSION

The ECPELLA 2.0 biventricular support concept for patients suffering from an acute CS. Allows for rapid extubation, mobilization, and physical exercise while on full support. Additional application of a membrane oxygenator is easily feasible if required.

Left ventricular decompression in veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Background

Despite the survival benefit of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for treatment of refractory cardiogenic shock, it can also have potentially deleterious effects of left ventricular overload and pulmonary edema. The objective of this review was to investigate the current evidence on the incidence, diagnosis, risk factors, prevention, and interventions for left ventricular overload in adult and pediatric VA-ECMO patients.

Methods

Five electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, were searched for original published studies from their dates of inception to January 2018. All types of adult and pediatric studies that investigated LV overload in VA-ECMO and were published in the English language were reviewed. Exclusion criteria included abstracts and conference presentations.

Results

The reported incidence and sequelae of LV overload in VA-ECMO are highly variable, with presentations ranging from pulmonary arterial diastolic pressures of greater than 25 mmHg and LV distention on echocardiography, to severe pulmonary edema, LV thrombosis, and refractory ventricular arrhythmias. Currently, there are no standardized diagnostic criteria or guidelines for the type and timing of intervention for LV overload. Techniques for LV decompression have included direct surgical LV venting with catheter insertion via sternotomy or a minimally invasive incision; percutaneous catheterization via a transaortic, transseptal, or transpulmonary approach; ventricular assist devices; and intra-aortic balloon pumps.

Conclusions

Left ventricular volume distention is a significant problem in VA-ECMO patients, with sequelae including myocardial ischemia, severe pulmonary edema, and intracardiac thrombosis. Further research is required on its incidence, diagnostic criteria, and risk factors, as well as the optimal timing and method for LV decompression, given the diversity of surgical and percutaneous techniques that are available.

Clinical Pearls of Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Cardiogenic Shock

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a technique that uses a pump to drain blood from a body, circulate blood through a membrane lung, and return the oxygenated blood back into the body. Venoarterial (VA) ECMO is a simplified version of the heart-lung machine that assists native pulmonary and/or cardiac function. VA ECMO is composed of a drainage cannula in the venous system and a return cannula in the arterial system. Because VA ECMO can increase tissue perfusion by increasing the arterial blood flow, it is used to treat medically refractory cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest. VA ECMO has a distinct physiology that is referred to as differential flows. It can cause several complications such as left ventricular distension with pulmonary edema, distal limb ischemia, bleeding, and thromboembolism. Physicians who are using this technology should be knowledgeable on the prevention and management of these complications. We review the basic physiology of VA ECMO, the mechanism of complications, and the simple management of VA ECMO.