Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
Perfusion ; 38(1 Supplement):96-97, 2023.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-20244671


Objectives: Data about COVID-19 patients treated with veno-arterial-ECMO (VA-ECMO) is limited. Reported survival rates range from 27.9% to 77.8%, depending on VA-ECMO indication. A subgroup of patients suffers from circulatory failure due to a COVID-19 associated hyperinflammatory state (CovHI). In these patients, differentiation between inflammation and sepsis is difficult but important. In this retrospective case series, differential diagnoses of COVID-19 associated refractory circulatory failure and survival rates in different indications for VA-ECMO are investigated. Method(s): Retrospective analysis of 28 consecutive COVID-19 patients requiring VA-ECMO at the University Hospital Regensburg between March 2020 and May 2022. Specific treatment for COVID-19 was in accordance with respective guidelines. Mycotic infections were either invasive or met current definitions of COVID19-associated-pulmonary aspergillosis. Result(s): At VA-ECMO initiation, median age was 57.3 years (IQR: 51.4 - 61.8), SOFA score 16 (IQR: 13 - 17) and norepinephrine dosing 0.53mug/kg/min (IQR: 0.32 - 0.78). Virus-variants were: 61% wild-type, 14% Alpha, 18% Delta and 7% Omicron. Survival to hospital discharge was 39%. 17 patients were primarily supported with VA-ECMO only (survival 42%), 3 patients were switched from VV to VA-ECMO (survival 0%), and 8 patients were converted from VA to VAV or VV-ECMO (survival 50%). Indications for VA-ECMO support were pulmonary embolism (PE) (n=5, survival 80%), right heart failure due to secondary pulmonary hypertension (n=5, survival 20%), cardiac arrest (n=4, survival 25%), acute left heart failure (ALHF) (n=11, survival 36%) and refractory vasoplegia (n=3, survival 0%). Inflammatory markers at VA-ECMO initiation were higher in patients with ALHF or vasoplegia;in these patients a higher rate of invasive fungal infections (10/14, 71% vs. 4/14, 29%;p=0.023) compared to the other patients was found. Conclusion(s): Survival on VA-ECMO in COVID-19 depends on VA-ECMO indication, which should be considered in further studies and clinical decisions making. Circulatory failure due to vasoplegia should be considered very carefully as indication for VA-ECMO. A high rate of mycotic infections mandates an intense microbiological workup of these patients and must be considered as an important differential diagnosis to CovHI.

Perfusion ; 38(1 Supplement):146, 2023.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-20244670


Objectives: Treatment of severe respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 by veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) had a mortality of up to 70% in Germany. Many patients with COVID-19 need VV-ECMO support longer than 28 days (long-term VV-ECMO). Evidence on mortality, complications during intensive care, functional status after discharge and mortality-predictors for patients supported with long-term VV-ECMO is lacking. Method(s): Retrospective study of 137 consecutive patients treated with VV-ECMO for ARDS due to COVID-19 at University Hospital Regensburg from March 2020 to March 2022. Result(s): 38% (n=52;87% male) of patients needed longterm VV-ECMO support. In these, SOFA score (median [IQR]) at ECMO initiation was 9 [8-11], age 58.2 [50.6- 62.5] years, PaO2/FiO2-ratio 67 [52-88] mmHg, pCO262 [52-74] mmHg, Murray-Score 3.3 [3.0-3.6] and PEEP 15 [13 - 16] cmH2O. Duration of long-term support was 45 [35-65] days. 26 (50%) patients were discharged from the ICU. Only one patient died after hospital discharge. At VVECMO initiation, baseline characteristics did not differ between deceased and survivors. Complications were frequent (acute kidney injury: 31/52, renal replacement therapy: 14/52, pulmonary embolism: 21/52, intracranial hemorrhage 8/52, major bleeding 34/52 and secondary sclerosing cholangitis: 5/52) and more frequent in the deceased. Karnofsky index (normal 100) after rehabilitation was 70 [57.5-82.5]. Twelve of the 18 patients discharged from rehabilitation had a satisfactory quality of life according to their own subjective assessment. Four patients required nursing support. Mortality-predictors within the first 30 days on VV-ECMO only observed in those who deceased later, were: Bilirubin >5mg/dl for > 7 days, pulmonary compliance <10ml/mbar for >14 days, and repeated serum concentrations of interleukin 8 >150ng/L. Conclusion(s): Long-term extracorporeal lung support in patients with COVID-19 resulted in 50 % survival and subsequently lead to a satisfactory quality of life and functionality in the majority of patients. It should preferably be performed in experienced centers because of a high incidence of complications. Several findings during the early course were associated with late mortality but need validation in large prospective studies.

Perfusion ; 38(1 Supplement):145-146, 2023.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-20244669


Objectives: In COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring VV-ECMO, ventilator-associated-pneumonia (VAP), pulmonary aspergillosis and viral reactivations are observed frequently, but there is only little knowledge on incidence, onset and causative pathogens. This study analyzes frequency of VAP, pulmonary aspergillus infections, and viral reactivations in a large cohort of patients with ARDS treated with VV-ECMO due to either COVID-19 or Influenza. Method(s): Retrospective analysis of all consecutively patients at the University Hospital Regensburg requiring VVECMO due to COVID-19 (March 2020 and May 2022) or Influenza (May 2012 and December 2022). VAP was diagnosed according to current guidelines. Pulmonary Aspergillosis met criteria of probable COVID-associated Aspergillosis according to current guidelines. Result(s): 147 patients (age (median [IQR]) 55.3 [48.7 - 61.7], SOFA at VV-ECMO initiation 9 [8 - 12], 23 [14 - 38] days on VV-ECMO) suffering from COVID-19 and 72 influenza patients (age 55.3 [46 - 61.3], SOFA at VV-ECMO initiation 13 [10 - 15], 16 [10 - 23] days on VV-ECMO) were included in the analysis. Pulmonary superinfections were more frequent in COVID-19 than in influenza (VAP: 61% vs. 39%, pulmonary Aspergillosis: 33% vs. 22%, CMV reactivation: 19% vs. 4%, HSV reactivation: 49% vs. 26%.) The first episode of VAP in COVID-19 and Influenza was detected 2 days [1 - 15] after and 1 day (-3 - 22) before ECMO initiation, respectively. First VAP-episode in COVID-19 were mainly caused by Klebsiella spp. (29%,), Staphylococcus aureus (27%) and E. coli (11%). Further VAP-episodes (30% in COVID-19) and relapses of VAP were mainly caused by Klebsiella spp. (53%, 64%, respectively). In Influenza, VAP was mainly caused by Staphylococcus aureus (28%) and Streptococcus pneumoniae(28%), further VAP episodes were not observed. Conclusion(s): Superinfections were common in patients treated with VV-ECMO and occur more frequently in COVID-19 ARDS compared to Influenza. VAP occurs early and may significantly contribute to the need of VV-ECMO. Therefore, a meticulous routine microbiologic workup is advisable. The observed differences in the spectrum of secondary infectious agents in COVID19 compared to Influenza are not understood yet.

European Heart Journal ; 42(SUPPL 1):762, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1554588


Background: Arrhythmias may often be a result of heart failure, but they can also cause left-ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD), thereby presenting as arrhythmia-induced cardiomyopathy (AIC). AIC-diagnosis is established retrospectively when LVSD normalizes or improves significantly over time following rhythm restoration. However, the prevalence and most importantly the time course of this relevant disease remain unclear and hence merit investigation to enable the correct diagnosis. Purpose: Therefore, our aim was to evaluate a) the occurrence of AIC in this clinical relevant cohort of patients with newly diagnosed and otherwise unexplainable LVSD and concomitant tachycardia and b) the time needed to fulfill the diagnostic criteria of AIC in order to facilitate a diagnostic algorithm. Method: We prospectively screened patients hospitalized for newly diagnosed and otherwise unexplainable LVSD (i.e. left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50%) and coexisting tachyarrhythmia (atrial fibrillation/flutter + heart rate (HR) >100/min) in 3 cardiological centers. Coronary angiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging were performed to exclude other causes for LVSD. Patients underwent a rhythm control strategy in accordance to the local clinical pathways. LVEF was assessed by echocardiography at presentation and at follow-up (FU) visits after 2, 4, and 6 months. Patients who lost sinus rhythm (SR) during FU were excluded. Patients with any increase of ≥15% in absolute EF or an EF ≥50% with an improvement of ≥10% after 6 months of FU were assigned to the AICgroup, which is a common definition of AIC. All others were assigned to an idiopathic DCM-group as final comparator. Results: 68 patients were eligible, 18 of them were excluded: 1 lost to follow-up, 1 PCI, 2 COVID-19, 1 diagnosed cancer, 1 withdraw consent and 12 lost SR. Thus, our sample consists of a total of 50 patients. At presentation, mean±SD HR was 121±17/min. After rhythm therapy, HR normalized (67±10/min) and LVEF increased in both groups, see fig. 1. Surprisingly, only 9 patients did not fulfill the AIC-criteria in this specific collective resulting in a prevalence of 82% (95%-CI: 68% - 92%). This high prevalence of AIC underlines the importance of the disease. 2 and 4 months after rhythm intervention, 58% and 73% of patients fulfilled AIC-criteria (fig. 2). The sensitivity for detection of AIC by echocardiographic LVEF-measurement at months 2 and 4 of FU was 65% and 86% with a specificity of 100%, emphasizing that a FU of 6 months is necessary to certainly distinguish between AIC and idiopathic DCM. Conclusion: The prevalence of AIC in patients with newly diagnosed and otherwise unexplainable LVSD with concomitant tachycardia is 82%. Analysis of the time course of AIC clearly suggests that the final diagnosis cannot be established before 6 months after successful rhythm restoration. These results may help to improve diagnosis of AIC in daily clinical practice.