Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
ASAIO J ; 68(6): 772-778, 2022 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1874039

ABSTRACT

Respiratory failure caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is associated with mortality. Patients unresponsive to conventional therapy may benefit from temporary venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). We investigated clinical and echocardiographic characteristics, particularly, right ventricular dysfunction, with survival in patients with respiratory failure caused by SARS-CoV-2. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients requiring VV-ECMO for respiratory failure from COVID-19 infection between January 2020 and December 2020. Demographics, comorbidities, laboratory parameters, and echocardiographic features of left and right ventricular (LV/RV) function were compared between patients who survived and those who could not be weaned from VV-ECMO. In addition, we evaluated outcomes in a separate population managed with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). In total, 10/17 patients failed to wean from VV-ECMO and died in the hospital on average 41.5 ± 10.9 days post admission. Seven were decannulated (41%) and survived to hospital discharge. There were no significant differences in demographics, comorbidities, and laboratory parameters between groups. Moderate to severe RV dysfunction was significantly more in those who died (8/10, 80%) compared to survivors (0/7, 0%) (p = 0.002). Patients supported with VA-ECMO had superior survival with 5/9 patients (56%) decannulated and discharged. Moderate to severe RV dysfunction is associated with increased mortality in patients with respiratory failure requiring VV-ECMO for COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Respiratory Insufficiency , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Death , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/adverse effects , Humans , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right/complications , Ventricular Dysfunction, Right/therapy
2.
Intensive Care Med ; 48(1): 1-15, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1800370

ABSTRACT

Rates of survival with functional recovery for both in-hospital and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest are notably low. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is emerging as a modality to improve prognosis by augmenting perfusion to vital end-organs by utilizing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) during conventional CPR and stabilizing the patient for interventions aimed at reversing the aetiology of the arrest. Implementing this emergent procedure requires a substantial investment in resources, and even the most successful ECPR programs may nonetheless burden healthcare systems, clinicians, patients, and their families with unsalvageable patients supported by extracorporeal devices. Non-randomized and observational studies have repeatedly shown an association between ECPR and improved survival, versus conventional CPR, for in-hospital cardiac arrest in select patient populations. Recently, randomized controlled trials suggest benefit for ECPR over standard resuscitation, as well as the feasibility of performing such trials, in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest within highly coordinated healthcare delivery systems. Application of these data to clinical practice should be done cautiously, with outcomes likely to vary by the setting and system within which ECPR is initiated. ECPR introduces important ethical challenges, including whether it should be considered an extension of CPR, at what point it becomes sustained organ replacement therapy, and how to approach patients unable to recover or be bridged to heart replacement therapy. The economic impact of ECPR varies by health system, and has the potential to outstrip resources if used indiscriminately. Ideally, studies should include economic evaluations to inform health care systems about the cost-benefits of this therapy.


Subject(s)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest , Adult , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Humans , Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest/therapy
3.
Case Rep Crit Care ; 2021: 8848013, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1052343

ABSTRACT

In the most severe cases, novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infection leads to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome which may be refractory to standard medical interventions including mechanical ventilation. There are growing reports of the use of venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in these cases. A subset of critically ill COVID-19 patients develops cardiomyopathy as well, manifested by cardiogenic shock with reduced ejection fraction, dysrhythmias, and subsequent increase in mortality. One strategy for managing ARDS with an element of cardiogenic shock is venoarteriovenous (VAV) ECMO. Less than 1% of the cases in the worldwide ELSO COVID-19 database employed any form of hybrid cannulation. To date, there has only been one reported case of patient salvage with arterial or partial arterial support. We present a case that demonstrates the potential role of VAV ECMO in the case of concomitant severe ARDS with cardiomyopathy in the setting of COVID-19 infection.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL