Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 22
Filter
4.
Crit Care Med ; 2021 Sep 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440662

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The study investigated the impact of prone positioning during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory failure on the patient outcome. DESIGN: An observational study of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients. We used a multistate survival model to compare the outcomes of patients treated with or without prone positioning during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, which incorporates the dynamic nature of prone positioning and adjusts for potential confounders. SETTING: Seventy-two international institutions participating in the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Critical Care Consortium international registry. PATIENTS: Coronavirus disease 2019 patients who were supported by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during the study period. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were 232 coronavirus disease 2019 patients at 72 participating institutions who were supported with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during the study period from February 16, 2020, to October 31, 2020. Proning was used in 176 patients (76%) before initiation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and in 67 patients (29%) during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Survival to hospital discharge was 33% in the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation prone group versus 22% in the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation supine group. Prone positioning during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support was associated with reduced mortality (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.68). CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights that prone positioning during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for refractory coronavirus disease 2019-related acute respiratory distress syndrome is associated with reduced mortality. Given the observational nature of the study, a randomized controlled trial of prone positioning on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is needed to confirm these findings.

5.
Lancet ; 398(10307): 1230-1238, 2021 10 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1440421

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, the care of patients with COVID-19 has changed and the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has increased. We aimed to examine patient selection, treatments, outcomes, and ECMO centre characteristics over the course of the pandemic to date. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry and COVID-19 Addendum to compare three groups of ECMO-supported patients with COVID-19 (aged ≥16 years). At early-adopting centres-ie, those using ECMO support for COVID-19 throughout 2020-we compared patients who started ECMO on or before May 1, 2020 (group A1), and between May 2 and Dec 31, 2020 (group A2). Late-adopting centres were those that provided ECMO for COVID-19 only after May 1, 2020 (group B). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality in a time-to-event analysis assessed 90 days after ECMO initiation. A Cox proportional hazards model was fit to compare the patient and centre-level adjusted relative risk of mortality among the groups. FINDINGS: In 2020, 4812 patients with COVID-19 received ECMO across 349 centres within 41 countries. For early-adopting centres, the cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality 90 days after ECMO initiation was 36·9% (95% CI 34·1-39·7) in patients who started ECMO on or before May 1 (group A1) versus 51·9% (50·0-53·8) after May 1 (group A2); at late-adopting centres (group B), it was 58·9% (55·4-62·3). Relative to patients in group A2, group A1 patients had a lower adjusted relative risk of in-hospital mortality 90 days after ECMO (hazard ratio 0·82 [0·70-0·96]), whereas group B patients had a higher adjusted relative risk (1·42 [1·17-1·73]). INTERPRETATION: Mortality after ECMO for patients with COVID-19 worsened during 2020. These findings inform the role of ECMO in COVID-19 for patients, clinicians, and policy makers. FUNDING: None.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Hospital Mortality/trends , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Adult , COVID-19/mortality , Duration of Therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/trends , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Selection , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Registries , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 211, 2021 06 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1352668

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are several reports of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who develop severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to guide clinical decision-making and future research. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and Scopus databases from 1 December 2019 to 10 January 2021 for observational studies or randomised clinical trials examining ECMO in adults with COVID-19 ARDS. We performed random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression, assessed risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist and rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Survival outcomes were presented as pooled proportions while continuous outcomes were presented as pooled means, both with corresponding 95% confidence intervals [CIs]. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were duration of ECMO therapy and mechanical ventilation, weaning rate from ECMO and complications during ECMO. RESULTS: We included twenty-two observational studies with 1896 patients in the meta-analysis. Venovenous ECMO was the predominant mode used (98.6%). The pooled in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients (22 studies, 1896 patients) supported with ECMO was 37.1% (95% CI 32.3-42.0%, high certainty). Pooled mortality in the venovenous ECMO group was 35.7% (95% CI 30.7-40.7%, high certainty). Meta-regression found that age and ECMO duration were associated with increased mortality. Duration of ECMO support (18 studies, 1844 patients) was 15.1 days (95% CI 13.4-18.7). Weaning from ECMO (17 studies, 1412 patients) was accomplished in 67.6% (95% CI 50.5-82.7%) of patients. There were a total of 1583 ECMO complications reported (18 studies, 1721 patients) and renal complications were the most common. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients received venovenous ECMO support for COVID-19-related ARDS. In-hospital mortality in patients receiving ECMO support for COVID-19 was 37.1% during the first year of the pandemic, similar to those with non-COVID-19-related ARDS. Increasing age was a risk factor for death. Venovenous ECMO appears to be an effective intervention in selected patients with COVID-19-related ARDS. PROSPERO CRD42020192627.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Critical Illness/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Positive-Pressure Respiration/methods , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Risk Assessment
8.
ASAIO J ; 67(5): 485-495, 2021 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1203774

ABSTRACT

DISCLAIMER: This is an updated guideline from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) for the role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for patients with severe cardiopulmonary failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The great majority of COVID-19 patients (>90%) requiring ECMO have been supported using venovenous (V-V) ECMO for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). While COVID-19 ECMO run duration may be longer than in non-COVID-19 ECMO patients, published mortality appears to be similar between the two groups. However, data collection is ongoing, and there is a signal that overall mortality may be increasing. Conventional selection criteria for COVID-19-related ECMO should be used; however, when resources become more constrained during a pandemic, more stringent contraindications should be implemented. Formation of regional ECMO referral networks may facilitate communication, resource sharing, expedited patient referral, and mobile ECMO retrieval. There are no data to suggest deviation from conventional ECMO device or patient management when applying ECMO for COVID-19 patients. Rarely, children may require ECMO support for COVID-19-related ARDS, myocarditis, or multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C); conventional selection criteria and management practices should be the standard. We strongly encourage participation in data submission to investigate the optimal use of ECMO for COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/mortality , Humans , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy
12.
Pediatr Crit Care Med ; 22(1): 56-67, 2021 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1012891

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: In children, coronavirus disease 2019 is usually mild but can develop severe hypoxemic failure or a severe multisystem inflammatory syndrome, the latter considered to be a postinfectious syndrome, with cardiac involvement alone or together with a toxic shock like-presentation. Given the novelty of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the causative agent of the recent coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, little is known about the pathophysiology and phenotypic expressions of this new infectious disease nor the optimal treatment approach. STUDY SELECTION: From inception to July 10, 2020, repeated PubMed and open Web searches have been done by the scientific section collaborative group members of the European Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care. DATA EXTRACTION: There is little in the way of clinical research in children affected by coronavirus disease 2019, apart from descriptive data and epidemiology. DATA SYNTHESIS: Even though basic treatment and organ support considerations seem not to differ much from other critical illness, such as pediatric septic shock and multiple organ failure, seen in PICUs, some specific issues must be considered when caring for children with severe coronavirus disease 2019 disease. CONCLUSIONS: In this clinical guidance article, we review the current clinical knowledge of coronavirus disease 2019 disease in critically ill children and discuss some specific treatment concepts based mainly on expert opinion based on limited experience and the lack of any completed controlled trials in children at this time.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Critical Illness , Child , Critical Care , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Intensive Care, Neonatal , SARS-CoV-2 , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome
14.
ASAIO J ; 66(7): 707-721, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-981428

ABSTRACT

Disclaimer: The Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Guidelines have been developed to assist existing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) centers to prepare and plan provision of ECMO during the ongoing pandemic. The recommendations have been put together by a team of interdisciplinary ECMO providers from around the world. Recommendations are based on available evidence, existing best practice guidelines, ethical principles, and expert opinion. This is a living document and will be regularly updated when new information becomes available. ELSO is not liable for the accuracy or completeness of the information in this document. These guidelines are not meant to replace sound clinical judgment or specialist consultation but rather to strengthen provision and clinical management of ECMO specifically, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Consensus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic , COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann ; 29(3): 165-169, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-808571

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has been used for COVID-19 patients with refractory hypoxemia. METHODS: We share our institution's experience in organizing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation services in Singapore during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also share our first COVID-19 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation case report. RESULTS: We encountered initial difficulties in providing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation services in Singapore in view of the considerations of managing COVID-19 patients. By adopting rigorous planning, patient selection, staff training, adhering to infection control measures and preparing transport essentials, we were able to reorganize the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation services to serve the nation's needs. This culminated in our first successful COVID-19 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation retrieval case. CONCLUSIONS: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is an option for COVID-19 patients but preparation must be taken to prepare the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation teams to deal with this pandemic and future challenges.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
17.
Lancet ; 396(10257): 1071-1078, 2020 10 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-797735

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Multiple major health organisations recommend the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support for COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure. However, initial reports of ECMO use in patients with COVID-19 described very high mortality and there have been no large, international cohort studies of ECMO for COVID-19 reported to date. METHODS: We used data from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) Registry to characterise the epidemiology, hospital course, and outcomes of patients aged 16 years or older with confirmed COVID-19 who had ECMO support initiated between Jan 16 and May 1, 2020, at 213 hospitals in 36 countries. The primary outcome was in-hospital death in a time-to-event analysis assessed at 90 days after ECMO initiation. We applied a multivariable Cox model to examine whether patient and hospital factors were associated with in-hospital mortality. FINDINGS: Data for 1035 patients with COVID-19 who received ECMO support were included in this study. Of these, 67 (6%) remained hospitalised, 311 (30%) were discharged home or to an acute rehabilitation centre, 101 (10%) were discharged to a long-term acute care centre or unspecified location, 176 (17%) were discharged to another hospital, and 380 (37%) died. The estimated cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality 90 days after the initiation of ECMO was 37·4% (95% CI 34·4-40·4). Mortality was 39% (380 of 968) in patients with a final disposition of death or hospital discharge. The use of ECMO for circulatory support was independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio 1·89, 95% CI 1·20-2·97). In the subset of patients with COVID-19 receiving respiratory (venovenous) ECMO and characterised as having acute respiratory distress syndrome, the estimated cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality 90 days after the initiation of ECMO was 38·0% (95% CI 34·6-41·5). INTERPRETATION: In patients with COVID-19 who received ECMO, both estimated mortality 90 days after ECMO and mortality in those with a final disposition of death or discharge were less than 40%. These data from 213 hospitals worldwide provide a generalisable estimate of ECMO mortality in the setting of COVID-19. FUNDING: None.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Adult , COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Critical Care , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Registries , Respiratory Insufficiency/mortality , Respiratory Insufficiency/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
18.
J Thromb Haemost ; 18(11): 3099-3105, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-733215

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Observational studies indicate that children hospitalized with COVID-19-related illness, like adults, are at increased risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). A multicenter phase 2 clinical trial of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in children hospitalized with COVID-19-related illness has recently been initiated in the United States. To date, there remains a paucity of high-quality evidence to inform clinical practice world-wide. Therefore, the objective of this scientific statement is to provide consensus-based recommendations on the use of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in children hospitalized for COVID-19-related illnesses, and to identify priorities for future research. METHODS: We surveyed 20 pediatric hematologists and pediatric critical care physicians from several continents who were identified by Pediatric/Neonatal Hemostasis and Thrombosis Subcommittee leadership as having experience and expertise in the use of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis and/or the management of COVID-19-related illness in children. A comprehensive review of the literature on COVID-19 in children was also performed. RESULTS: Response rate was 90%. Based on consensus of expert opinions, we suggest the administration of low-dose low molecular weight heparin subcutaneously twice-daily as anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis (in the absence of contraindications, and in combination with mechanical thromboprophylaxis with sequential compression devices, where feasible) in children hospitalized for COVID-19-related illness (including the multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children [MIS-C]) who have markedly elevated D-dimer levels or superimposed clinical risk factors for hospitalassociated VTE. For children who are clinically unstable or have severe renal impairment, we suggest the use of unfractionated heparin by continuous intravenous infusion as anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis. In addition, continued efforts to characterize VTE risk and risk factors in children with COVID-19, as well as to evaluate the safety and efficacy of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis strategies in children hospitalized with COVID-19-related illness (including MIS-C) via cooperative multicenter trials, were identified among several key priorities for future research. CONCLUSION: These consensus-based recommendations on the use of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in children hospitalized for COVID-19-related illnesses and priorities for future research will be updated as high-quality evidence emerges.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Evidence-Based Medicine/standards , Hospitalization , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Research/standards , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Adolescent , Age Factors , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , COVID-19 , Child , Child, Preschool , Clinical Decision-Making , Consensus , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome , Venous Thromboembolism/blood , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Young Adult
19.
Am J Kidney Dis ; 76(3): 392-400, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-526769

ABSTRACT

With the exponential surge in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) worldwide, the resources needed to provide continuous kidney replacement therapy (CKRT) for patients with acute kidney injury or kidney failure may be threatened. This article summarizes subsisting strategies that can be implemented immediately. Pre-emptive weekly multicenter projections of CKRT demand based on evolving COVID-19 epidemiology and routine workload should be made. Corresponding consumables should be quantified and acquired, with diversification of sources from multiple vendors. Supply procurement should be stepped up accordingly so that a several-week stock is amassed, with administrative oversight to prevent disproportionate hoarding by institutions. Consumption of CKRT resources can be made more efficient by optimizing circuit anticoagulation to preserve filters, extending use of each vascular access, lowering blood flows to reduce citrate consumption, moderating the CKRT intensity to conserve fluids, or running accelerated KRT at higher clearance to treat more patients per machine. If logistically feasible, earlier transition to intermittent hemodialysis with online-generated dialysate, or urgent peritoneal dialysis in selected patients, may help reduce CKRT dependency. These measures, coupled to multicenter collaboration and a corresponding increase in trained medical and nursing staffing levels, may avoid downstream rationing of care and save lives during the peak of the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy/trends , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Health Services Needs and Demand/trends , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Anticoagulants/supply & distribution , COVID-19 , Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy/instrumentation , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Dialysis Solutions/administration & dosage , Dialysis Solutions/supply & distribution , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Renal Insufficiency/epidemiology , Renal Insufficiency/therapy , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...