ABSTRACT
Background: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Workforce on Critical Care and the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization sought to identify how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed the practice of venoarterial (VA) and venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) programs across North America. Methods: A 26-question survey covering 6 categories (ECMO initiation, cannulation, management, anticoagulation, triage/protocols, and credentialing) was emailed to 276 North American Extracorporeal Life Support Organization centers. ECMO practices before and during the COVID-19 pandemic were compared. Results: Responses were received from 93 (34%) programs. The percentage of high-volume (>20 cases per year) VV ECMO programs increased during the pandemic from 29% to 41% (P < .001), as did institutions requiring multiple clinicians for determining initiation of ECMO (VV ECMO, 25% to 43% [P = .001]; VA ECMO, 20% to 32% [P = .012]). During the pandemic, more institutions developed their own protocols for resource allocation (23% before to 51%; P < .001), and more programs created sharing arrangements to triage patients and equipment with other centers (31% to 57%; P < .001). Direct thrombin inhibitor use increased for both VA ECMO (13% to 18%; P = .025) and VV ECMO (12% to 24%; P = .005). Although cardiothoracic surgeons remained the primary cannulating proceduralists, VV ECMO cannulations performed by pulmonary and critical care physicians increased (13% to 17%; P = .046). Conclusions: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/Extracorporeal Life Support Organization collaborative survey indicated that the pandemic has affected ECMO practice. Further research on these ECMO strategies and lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic may be useful in future global situations.
ABSTRACT
For yet another year, our lives have been dominated by a pandemic. This year in review, we feature an expert panel opinion regarding extracorporeal support in the context of COVID-19, challenging previously held standards. We also feature survey results assessing the impact of the pandemic on cardiac surgical volume. Furthermore, we focus on a single center experience that evaluated the use of pulmonary artery catheters and the comparison of transfusion strategies in the Restrictive and Liberal Transfusion Strategies in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction (REALITY) trial. Additionally, we address the impact of acute kidney injury on cardiac surgery and highlight the controversy regarding the choice of fluid resuscitation. We close with an evaluation of dysphagia in cardiac surgery and the impact of prehabilitation to optimize surgical outcomes.