Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
2.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 190, 2022 06 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1910342

ABSTRACT

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 .


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Pandemics , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Survival Analysis
3.
Artif Organs ; 46(9): 1876-1885, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1807015

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Humans , Pandemics , Registries , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
4.
J Clin Med ; 10(19)2021 Sep 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1438646

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Delirium complicating the course of Intensive care unit (ICU) therapy is a known driver of morbidity and mortality. It has been speculated that infection with the neurotrophic SARS-CoV-2 might promote delirium. METHODS: Retrospective registry analysis including all patients treated at least 48 h on a medical intensive care unit. The primary endpoint was development of delirium as diagnosed by Nursing Delirium screening scale ≥2. Results were confirmed by propensity score matching. RESULTS: 542 patients were included. The primary endpoint was reached in 352/542 (64.9%) patients, without significant differences between COVID-19 patients and non-COVID-19 patients (51.4% and 65.9%, respectively, p = 0.07) and correlated with prolonged ICU stay in both groups. In a subgroup of patients with ICU stay >10 days delirium was significantly lower in COVID-19 patients (p ≤ 0.01). After adjustment for confounders, COVID-19 correlated independently with less ICU delirium (p ≤ 0.01). In the propensity score matched cohort, patients with COVID-19 had significantly lower delirium incidence compared to the matched control patients (p ≤ 0.01). CONCLUSION: Delirium is frequent in critically ill patients with and without COVID-19 treated at an intensive care unit. Data suggests that COVID-19 itself is not a driver of delirium per se.

5.
Artif Organs ; 45(9): 1050-1060, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1361914

ABSTRACT

Prognosis of patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is poor. This is especially true for immunosuppressed patients. It is controverisal whether these patients should receive veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) while evidence on this topic is sparse. We report retrospective data of a single-center registry of patients with severe ARDS requiring ECMO support between October 2010 and June 2019. Patients were analyzed by their status of immunosuppression. ECMO weaning success and hospital survival were analyzed before and after propensity score matching (PSM). Moreover, ventilator free days (VFD) were compared. A total of 288 patients were analyzed (age 55 years, 67% male), 88 (31%) presented with immunosuppression. Survival rates were lower in immunosuppressed patients (27% vs. 53%, P < .001 and 27% vs. 48% after PSM, P = .006). VFD (60 days) were lower for patients with immunosuppression (11.9 vs. 22.4, P < .001), and immunosuppression was an independent predictor for mortality in multivariate analysis. Hospital survival was 20%, 14%, 35%, and 46% for patients with oncological malignancies, solid organ transplantation, autoimmune diseases, and HIV, respectively. In this analysis immunosuppression was an independent predictor for mortality. However, there were major differences in the weaning and survival rates between the etiologies of immunosuppression which should be considered in decision making.


Subject(s)
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Immunosuppression Therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Adult , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Propensity Score , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate
6.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(7): 755-762, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1337041

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We sought to clarify the benefit of cytokine adsorption in patients with COVID-19 supported with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). METHODS: We did a single-centre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial to investigate cytokine adsorption in adult patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring ECMO. Patients with COVID-19 selected for ECMO at the Freiburg University Medical Center (Freiburg, Germany) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive cytokine adsorption using the CytoSorb device or not. Randomisation was computer-generated, allocation was concealed by opaque, sequentially numbered sealed envelopes. The CytoSorb device was incorporated into the ECMO circuit before connection to the patient circuit, replaced every 24 h, and removed after 72 h. The primary endpoint was serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) concentration 72 h after initiation of ECMO analysed by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints included 30-day survival. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04324528) and the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00021300) and is closed. FINDINGS: From March 29, 2020, to Dec 29, 2020, of 34 patients assessed for eligibility, 17 (50%) were treated with cytokine adsorption and 17 (50%) without. Median IL-6 decreased from 357·0 pg/mL to 98·6 pg/mL in patients randomly assigned to cytokine adsorption and from 289·0 pg/mL to 112·0 pg/mL in the control group after 72 h. One patient in each group died before 72 h. Adjusted mean log IL-6 concentrations after 72 h were 0·30 higher in the cytokine adsorption group (95% CI -0·70 to 1·30, p=0·54). Survival after 30 days was three (18%) of 17 with cytokine adsorption and 13 (76%) of 17 without cytokine adsorption (p=0·0016). INTERPRETATION: Early initiation of cytokine adsorption in patients with severe COVID-19 and venovenous ECMO did not reduce serum IL-6 and had a negative effect on survival. Cytokine adsorption should not be used during the first days of ECMO support in COVID-19. FUNDING: None.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Cytokines , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Adsorption , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
7.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 52(1): 76-84, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1310591

ABSTRACT

Subpleural consolidations have been found in lung ultrasound in patients with COVID-19, possibly deriving from pulmonary embolism (PE). The diagnostic utility of impact of lung ultrasound in critical-ill patients with COVID-19 for PE diagnostics however is unclear. We retrospectively evaluated all SARS-CoV2-associated ARDS patients admitted to our ICU between March 8th and May 31th 2020. They were enrolled in this study, when a lung ultrasound and a computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) were documented. In addition, wells score was calculated to estimate the probability of PE. The CTPA was used as the gold standard for the detection of PE. Twenty out of 25 patients met the inclusion criteria. In 12/20 patients (60%) (sub-) segmental PE were detected by CT-angiography. Lung ultrasound found subpleural consolidations in 90% of patients. PE-typical large supleural consolidations with a size ≥ 1 cm were detectable in 65% of patients and were significant more frequent in patients with PE compared to those without (p = 0.035). Large consolidations predicted PE with a sensitivity of 77% and a specificity of 71%. The Wells score was significantly higher in patients with PE compared to those without (2.7 ± 0.8 and 1.7 ± 0.5, respectively, p = 0.042) and predicted PE with an AUC of 0.81. When combining the two modalities, comparing patients with considered/probable PE using LUS plus a Wells score ≥ 2 to patients with possible/unlikely PE in LUS plus a Wells score < 2, PE could be predicted with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 80%. Large consolidations detected in lung ultrasound were found frequently in COVID-19 ARDS patients with pulmonary embolism. In combination with a Wells score > 2, this might indicate a high-risk for PE in COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Clinical Decision Rules , Computed Tomography Angiography , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Pulmonary Artery/diagnostic imaging , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnostic imaging , Ultrasonography , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , Critical Illness , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multimodal Imaging , Predictive Value of Tests , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Registries , Reproducibility of Results , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors
8.
ERJ Open Res ; 7(2)2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1286808

ABSTRACT

This correspondence argues that data presented previously cannot justify a novel approach for treating hypoxic patients with severe #COVID19 https://bit.ly/3dLaPlk.

10.
Cureus ; 13(2): e13210, 2021 Feb 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1124804

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Germany reported sufficient intensive care unit (ICU) resources throughout the first wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The treatment of critically ill COVID-19 patients without rationing may improve the outcome. We therefore analyzed ICU resources allocated to COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure and their outcomes. METHODS: Retrospectively, we enrolled severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive patients with respiratory failure from 03/08/2020 to 04/08/2020 and followed until 05/28/2020 in the university hospital of Freiburg, Germany. RESULTS: In the defined interval, 34 COVID-19 patients were admitted to the ICU with median age of 67±13 (31-86) years. Six of 34 (17.6%) were female. All patients suffered from moderate or severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), 91.2% of the patients were intubated and 23.5% required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Proning was performed in 67.6%, renal replacement therapy (RRT) was required in 35.3%. Ninety-six percent required more than 20 nursing hours per day. Mean ICU stay was 21±19 (1-81) days. Sixty-day survival of critically ill COVID-19 patients was 50.0% (17/34). Causes of death were multi-organ failure (52.9%), refractory ARDS (17.6%) and intracerebral hemorrhage (17.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of critically ill COVID-19 patients is protracted and resource-intense. In a context without resources shortage, 50% of COVID-19 with respiratory failure survived up to 60 days.

11.
Neurocrit Care ; 34(3): 739-747, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1095736

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Hypercoagulability in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism necessitating systemic anticoagulation. Case reports of intracerebral hemorrhages in ventilated COVID-19 patients warrant precaution. It is unclear, however, if COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with or without veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy (VV-ECMO) have more intracerebral hemorrhages (ICH) compared to other ARDS patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational single-center study enrolling all patients with ARDS from 01/2018 to 05/2020. PCR-positive SARS-CoV-2 patients with ARDS were allocated to the COVID-19 group. Propensity score matching was performed for age, VV-ECMO, and bleeding risk. RESULTS: A total of 163 patients with moderate or severe ARDS were identified, 47 (28.8%) in the COVID-19 group, and 116 (71.2%) in the non-COVID-19 group. In 63/163 cases (38.7%), VV-ECMO therapy was required. The ICU survival was 52.8%. COVID-19 patients were older, more often male, and exhibited a lower SOFA score, but the groups showed similar rates of VV-ECMO therapy. Treatments with antiplatelet agents (p = 0.043) and therapeutic anticoagulation (p = 0.028) were significantly more frequent in the COVID-19 patients. ICH was detected in 22 patients (13.5%) with no statistical difference between the groups (11.2 vs. 19.1% without and with SARS-CoV-2, respectively, p = 0.21). Propensity score matching confirmed similar rates of ICH in both groups (12.8 vs. 19.1% without and with SARS-CoV-2, respectively, p = 0.57), thus leveling out possible confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Intracerebral hemorrhage was detected in every tenth patient with ARDS. Despite statistically higher rates of antiplatelet therapy and therapeutic anticoagulation in COVID-19 patients, we found a similar rate of ICH in patients with ARDS due to COVID-19 compared to other causes of ARDS.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Cerebral Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Cerebral Hemorrhage/virology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Cerebral Hemorrhage/therapy , Critical Care , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Female , Germany , Humans , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Propensity Score , Registries , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Survival Rate , Young Adult
12.
Artif Organs ; 45(5): 495-505, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1085292

ABSTRACT

Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is a means to support patients with acute respiratory failure. Initially, recommendations to treat severe cases of pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with ECLS have been restrained. In the meantime, ECLS has been shown to produce similar outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 compared to existing data on ARDS mortality. We performed an international email survey to assess how ECLS providers worldwide have previously used ECLS during the treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19. A questionnaire with 45 questions (covering, e.g., indication, technical aspects, benefit, and reasons for treatment discontinuation), mostly multiple choice, was distributed by email to ECLS centers. The survey was approved by the European branch of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO); 276 ECMO professionals from 98 centers in 30 different countries on four continents reported that they employed ECMO for very severe COVID-19 cases, mostly in veno-venous configuration (87%). The most common reason to establish ECLS was isolated hypoxemic respiratory failure (50%), followed by a combination of hypoxemia and hypercapnia (39%). Only a small fraction of patients required veno-arterial cannulation due to heart failure (3%). Time on ECLS varied between less than 2 and more than 4 weeks. The main reason to discontinue ECLS treatment prior to patient's recovery was lack of clinical improvement (53%), followed by major bleeding, mostly intracranially (13%). Only 4% of respondents reported that triage situations, lack of staff or lack of oxygenators, were responsible for discontinuation of ECLS support. Most ECLS physicians (51%, IQR 30%) agreed that patients with COVID-19-induced ARDS (CARDS) benefitted from ECLS. Overall mortality of COVID-19 patients on ECLS was estimated to be about 55%. ECLS has been utilized successfully during the COVID-19 pandemic to stabilize CARDS patients in hypoxemic or hypercapnic lung failure. Age and multimorbidity limited the use of ECLS. Triage situations were rarely a concern. ECLS providers stated that patients with severe COVID-19 benefitted from ECLS.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Critical Illness , Humans , Internationality , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology , Respiratory Insufficiency/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
14.
Artif Organs ; 45(6): 593-601, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-922468

ABSTRACT

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) is used to sustain blood oxygenation and decarboxylation in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). It is under debate if V-V ECMO is as appropriate for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) ARDS as it is for influenza. In this retrospective study, we analyzed all patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 or influenza A/B infection, ARDS and V-V ECMO, treated at our medical intensive care unit (ICU) between October 2010 and June 2020. Baseline and procedural characteristics as well as survival 30 days after ECMO cannulation were analyzed. A total of 62 V-V ECMO patients were included (15 with Covid-19 and 47 with influenza). Both groups had similar baseline characteristics at cannulation. Thirty days after ECMO cannulation, 13.3% of all patients with Covid-19 were discharged alive from our ICU compared to 44.7% with influenza (P = .03). Patients with Covid-19 had fewer ECMO-free days (0 (0-9.7) days vs. 13.2 (0-22.1) days; P = .05). Cumulative incidences of 30-day-survival showed no significant differences (48.6% in Covid-19 patients, 63.7% in influenza patients; P = .23). ICU treatment duration was significantly longer in ARDS patients with V-V ECMO for Covid-19 compared to influenza. Thirty-day mortality was higher in Covid-19, but not significant.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Influenza, Human/therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Influenza, Human/mortality , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Registries , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Survival Rate
15.
J Intensive Care Med ; 36(4): 477-483, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-788460

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV2 can cause pulmonary failure requiring prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation (MV). Lung protective ventilation strategies are recommended in order to minimize ventilator induced lung injury. Whether patients with COVID-19 have the same risk for complications including barotrauma is still unknown. Therefore, we investigated barotrauma in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring prolonged MV. METHODS: All patients meeting diagnosis criteria for ARDS according to the Berlin Definition, with PCR positive SARS-CoV2 infection and prolonged mechanical ventilation, defined as ≥2 days, treated at our ARDS referral center between March and April 2020 were included in a retrospective registry analysis. Complications were detected by manual review of all patient data including respiratory data, imaging studies, and patient files. RESULTS: A total of 20 patients with severe COVID-19 pulmonary failure (Overall characteristics: median age: 61 years, female gender 6, median duration of MV 22 days) were analyzed. Eight patients (40%) developed severe barotrauma during MV (after median 18 days, range: 1-32) including pneumothorax (5/20), pneumomediastinum (5/20), pneumopericard (1/20), and extended subcutaneous emphysema (5/20). Median respirator settings 24 hours before barotrauma were: Peak inspiratory pressure (Ppeak) 29 cm H2O (range: 27-35), positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) 14 cm H2O (range: 5-24), tidal volume (VT) 5.4ml/kg predicted body weight (range 0.4-8.6), plateau pressure (Pplateau) 27 cm H2O (range: 19-30). Mechanical ventilation was significantly more invasive on several occasions in patients without barotrauma. CONCLUSION: Barotrauma in COVID-19 induced respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation was found in 40% of patients included in this registry. Our data suggest that barotrauma in COVID-19 may occur even when following recommendations for lung protective MV.


Subject(s)
Barotrauma/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Ventilators, Mechanical/adverse effects , Adult , Aged , Barotrauma/etiology , Case-Control Studies , Critical Care Outcomes , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Registries , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Time Factors
16.
Respir Med ; 172: 106135, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-773282

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Patients hospitalized for infection with SARS-CoV-2 typically present with pneumonia. The respiratory failure is frequently complicated by pulmonary embolism in segmental pulmonary arteries. The distribution of pulmonary embolism in regard to lung parenchymal opacifications has not been investigated yet. METHODS: All patients with COVID-19 treated at a medical intensive care unit between March 8th and April 15th, 2020 undergoing computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) were included. All CTPA were assessed by two radiologists independently in respect to parenchymal changes and pulmonary embolism on a lung segment basis. RESULTS: Out of 22 patients with severe COVID-19 treated within the observed time period, 16 (age 60.4 ± 10.2 years, 6 female SAPS2 score 49.2 ± 13.9) underwent CT. A total of 288 lung segment were analyzed. Thrombi were detectable in 9/16 (56.3%) patients, with 4.4 ± 2.9 segments occluded per patient and 40/288 (13.9%) segments affected in the whole cohort. Patients with thrombi had significantly worse segmental opacifications in CT (p < 0.05) and all thrombi were located in opacitated segments. There was no correlation between d-dimer level and number of occluded segmental arteries. CONCLUSIONS: Thrombi in segmental pulmonary arteries are common in COVID-19 and are located in opacitated lung segments. This might suggest local clot formation.


Subject(s)
Computed Tomography Angiography , Coronavirus Infections , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Pulmonary Artery/diagnostic imaging , Pulmonary Embolism , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Thrombosis , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Blood Coagulation , COVID-19 , Computed Tomography Angiography/methods , Computed Tomography Angiography/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Correlation of Data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/etiology , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnosis , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Radiography, Thoracic/methods , Radiography, Thoracic/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombosis/diagnostic imaging , Thrombosis/etiology
17.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 51(2): 301-307, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-640446

ABSTRACT

The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and the resulting disease COVID-19 causes pulmonary failure including severe courses requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO). Coagulopathy is a known complication of COVID-19 leading to thrombotic events including pulmonary embolism. It is unclear if the coagulopathy also increases thrombotic circuit complications of the ECMO. Aim of the present study therefor was to investigate the rate of V-V ECMO complications in COVID-19. We conducted a retrospective registry study including all patients on V-V ECMO treated at our centre between 01/2018 and 04/2020. COVID-19 cases were compared non- COVID-19 cases. All circuit related complications resulting in partial or complete exchange of the extracorporeal system were registered. In total, 66 patients were analysed of which 11 (16.7%) were SARS-CoV-2 positive. The two groups did not differ in clinical parameters including age (COVID-19 59.4 vs. non-COVID-19 58.1 years), gender (36.4% vs. 40%), BMI (27.8 vs. 24.2) and severity of illness as quantified by the RESP Score (1pt. vs 1pt.). 28 days survival was similar in both groups (72.7% vs. 58.2%). While anticoagulation was similar in both groups (p = 0.09), centrifugal pump head thrombosis was more frequent in COVID-19 (9/11 versus 16/55 p < 0.01). Neither the time to first exchange (p = 0.61) nor blood flow at exchange (p = 0.68) did differ in both groups. D-dimer levels prior to the thrombotic events were significantly higher in COVID-19 (mean 15.48 vs 26.59, p = 0.01). The SARS-CoV-2 induced infection is associated with higher rates of thrombotic events of the extracorporeal system during V-V ECMO therapy.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/adverse effects , Registries , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombosis , Aged , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Thrombosis/blood , Thrombosis/drug therapy , Thrombosis/etiology , Thrombosis/mortality
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL