Neck Swelling in a Critically Ill Patient With COVID-19-Related Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome on Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Consider the Differential.

Neck swelling during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) usually heralds the development of potentially serious complications, including superior vena cava (SVC) syndrome, hematoma, and/or angioedema. In this case report, we describe a 43-year-old male patient who had received VV-ECMO support for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome. During his hospitalization, he developed acute onset of neck swelling after two weeks of VV-ECMO and two days after a tracheostomy. Clinical examination and investigations were performed to exclude ECMO-related SVC syndrome and tracheostomy-related complications. Consequently, it was discovered the patient had developed COVID-19-related subacute thyroiditis with enlargement of both thyroid glands. Conservative management, including the use of continued glucocorticoids, raising the head of the bed, and observing for complications of thyroiditis, was undertaken. Eventually, this patient's neck swelling resolved on its own, and he was eventually decannulated from ECMO several weeks later. Our case report highlights the differential diagnosis of neck swelling during VV-ECMO and considers the evaluation of different etiologies.

Percutaneous debulking of tricuspid valve endocarditis in severe COVID-19 pneumonia after prolonged venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with right-ventricular support: a case series.

Background: Over the past 2 years, the utilization of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has increased. While supporting respiratory function, VV-ECMO requires large-bore indwelling venous cannulas, which risk bleeding and infections, including endocarditis. Case summary: We describe two adults hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia who developed ARDS and right-ventricular failure, requiring VV-ECMO and ProtekDuo cannulation. After over 100 days with these devices, both patients developed tricuspid valve vegetations. Our first patient was decannulated from ECMO and discharged, but re-presented with a segmental pulmonary embolism and tricuspid mass. The Inari FlowTriver system was chosen to percutaneously remove both the tricuspid mass and pulmonary thromboembolism. Pathological examination of the mass demonstrated Candida albicans endocarditis in the setting of Candida fungemia. Our second patient developed a tricuspid valve vegetation which was also removed with the FlowTriever system. Pathological examination demonstrated endocarditis consistent with Pseudomonas aeruginosa in the setting of Pseudomonas bacteremia. Both patients experienced resolution of fungemia and bacteremia after percutaneous vegetation removal. After ECMO decannulation and percutaneous debulking, both patients experienced prolonged hospital stays for ventilator weaning and were eventually discharged with supplemental oxygen. Discussion: VV-ECMO and right-ventricular support devices are invasive and create various risks, including bloodstream infection and infective endocarditis. Percutaneous debulking of valvular vegetations associated with these right-sided indwelling devices may be an effective means of infection source control. It is unclear whether prolonged use of VV-ECMO provides a mortality benefit in COVID-19 ARDS.

Tracheal stenting on venovenous ECMO with a dual lumen right atrium-to-pulmonary artery cannula in a COVID-19 patient with an inferior vena cava filter.

A 47-year-old man, with no medical history, was diagnosed with severe COVID-19 ARDS and pulmonary embolism. Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) was required for impossibility to deliver protective ventilation. The patient was weaned from ECMO after clinical improvement. An inferior vena cava filter was then positioned to prevent embolization from a persistent left femoral deep venous thrombosis. Two days after the ECMO removal, a large lesion of the tracheal posterior wall was diagnosed. Tracheal stenting was deemed necessary. ECMO support was then re-established, to safely perform the bronchoscopic procedure. Due to the presence of the inferior vena cava filter, the patient was cannulated via the right internal jugular vein with a double lumen ProtekDuo cannula. The patient was then weaned from ECMO support and invasive ventilation. The tracheal stent was removed after 40 days, showing a full recovery of the tracheal lesion. The patient was discharged home in good condition.

One-Year Mental and Physical Health Assessment in Survivors After ECMO for COVID-19-related ARDS.

RATIONAL: Long-term outcomes of patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are unknown. METHODS: Multicenter, prospective study in patients who received ECMO for COVID-19 ARDS from March to June 2020 and survived hospital discharge. Physical examination, pulmonary function tests, anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorders (PTSD), and quality of life (QoL) were assessed at 6 and 12 months after ECMO onset. RESULTS: Of 80 eligible patients, 62 were enrolled in 7 French Intensive Care Units (ICU). ECMO and invasive mechanical ventilation duration were 18 (11-25) and 36 (27-62) days, respectively. All were alive but only 19/50 (38%) returned to work and 13/42 (31%) had recovered a normal sex drive at one year. Pulmonary function tests were almost normal at 6 months except for diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide which was still impaired at 12 months. Mental health, role-emotional, and role-physical were the most impaired domain compared to non-COVID ECMO patients. One year after ICU admission, 19/43 (44%) patients had significant anxiety, 18/43 (42%) had depression symptoms and 21/50 (42%) were at risk for PTSD. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the partial recovery of the lung function tests at one year, the physical and psychological function of this population remains impaired. Based on the comparison with long-term follow-up of non-COVID ECMO patients, poor mental and physical health may be more related to COVID-19 than to ECMO in itself, although this needs confirmation This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Video-assisted thoracic surgery in critically ill COVID-19 patients on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) leads to thoracic complications requiring surgery. This is challenging, particularly in patients supported with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) due to the need for continuous therapeutic anticoagulation. We aim to share our experience regarding the safety and perioperative management of video-assisted thoracic surgery for this specific population. METHODS: Retrospective, single-center study between November 2020 and January 2022 at the ICU department of a 1.061-bed tertiary care and VV-ECMO referral center during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: 48 COVID-19 patients were supported with VV-ECMO. A total of 14 video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) procedures were performed in seven patients. Indications were mostly hemothorax (85.7%). In eight procedures heparin was stopped at least 1 h before incision. A total of 10 circuit changes due to clot formation or oxygen transfer failure were required in six patients (85.7%). One circuit replacement seemed related to the preceding VATS procedure, although polytransfusion might be a contributing factor. None of the mechanical complications was fatal. Four VATS-patients (57.1%) died, of which two (50%) immediately perioperatively due to uncontrollable bleeding. All three survivors were treated with additional transarterial embolization. CONCLUSION: (1) Thoracic complications in COVID-19 patients on VV-ECMO are common. (2) Indication for VATS is mostly hemothorax (3) Perioperative mortality is high, mostly due to uncontrollable bleeding. (4) Preoperative withdrawal of anticoagulation is not directly related to a higher rate of ECMO circuit-related complications, but a prolonged duration of VV-ECMO support and polytransfusion might be. (5) Additional transarterial embolization to control postoperative bleeding may further improve outcomes.

Effect of prone position in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome supported by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The application of prone position (PP) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) supported by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) is controversial. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of application of PP during VV-ECMO in patients with ARDS. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective study of patients who met the Berlin definition of ARDS, and were supported with VV-ECMO. We divided the patients into two groups. The prone group included patients who were supported by VV-ECMO, and experienced at least one period of PP, while those without PP during VV-ECMO were defined as the supine group. Propensity score matching (PSM) at a ratio of 1:1 was introduced to minimize potential confounders. The primary outcomes were the complications of PP and the change of arterial oxygen pressure/fraction of the inspiration (PaO2/FiO2) ratio after PP. The secondary outcomes were hospital survival, ICU survival, and ECMO weaning rate. RESULTS: From April 2013 to October 2020, a total of 91 patients met the diagnostic criteria of ARDS who were supported with ECMO. 38 patients (41.8%) received at least one period of PP during ECMO, while 53 patients (58.2%) were maintained in supine position during ECMO. 22 minor complications were reported in the prone group and major complications were not found. The other ECMO-related complications were similar between two groups. The PaO2/FiO2 ratio significantly improved after PP compared with before (174.50 (132.40-228.25) mmHg vs. 158.00 (122.93-210.33) mmHg, p < 0.001). PSM selected 25 pairs of patients with similar characteristics. Hospital survival or ICU survival did not differ between the two groups (40% vs. 28%, p = 0.370; 40% vs. 32%, p = 0.556). Significant difference of ECMO weaning rate between two groups was not found (56% vs. 32%, p = 0.087). CONCLUSIONS: PP during VV-ECMO was safe and could improve oxygenation. A large-scale and well-designed RCT is needed in the future.

Effects of Prone Positioning on Respiratory Mechanics and Oxygenation in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19 Requiring Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

BACKGROUND: The effect of prone positioning (PP) on respiratory mechanics remains uncertain in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). METHODS: We prospectively analyzed the effects of PP on respiratory mechanics from continuous data with over a thousand time points during 16-h PP sessions in patients with COVID-19 and ARDS under VV-ECMO conditions. The evolution of respiratory mechanical and oxygenation parameters during the PP sessions was evaluated by dividing each PP session into four time quartiles: first quartile: 0-4 h, second quartile: 4-8 h, third quartile: 8-12 h, and fourth quartile: 12-16 h. RESULTS: Overall, 38 PP sessions were performed in 10 patients, with 3 [2-5] PP sessions per patient. Seven (70%) patients were responders to at least one PP session. PP significantly increased the PaO2/FiO2 ratio by 14 ± 21% and compliance by 8 ± 15%, and significantly decreased the oxygenation index by 13 ± 18% and driving pressure by 8 ± 12%. The effects of PP on respiratory mechanics but not on oxygenation persisted after supine repositioning. PP-induced changes in different respiratory mechanical parameters and oxygenation started as early as the first-time quartile, without any difference in PP-induced changes among the different time quartiles. PP-induced changes in driving pressure (-14 ± 14 vs. -6 ± 10%, p = 0.04) and mechanical power (-11 ± 13 vs. -0.1 ± 12%, p = 0.02) were significantly higher in responders (increase in PaO2/FiO2 ratio > 20%) than in non-responder patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19 and severe ARDS, PP under VV-ECMO conditions improved the respiratory mechanical and oxygenation parameters, and the effects of PP on respiratory mechanics persisted after supine repositioning.

COVID-19 Patients Require Prolonged Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support for Survival Compared With Non-COVID-19 Patients.

To investigate the ICU survival of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) patients suffering from COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) versus ECMO patients without COVID-19 (non-COVID-19)-related ARDS. DESIGN: Preliminary analysis of data from two prospective ECMO trials and retrospective analysis of a cohort of ARDS ECMO patients. SETTING: Single-center ICU. PATIENTS: Adult ARDS ECMO patients, 16 COVID-19 versus 23 non-COVID-19 patients. Analysis of retrospective data from 346 adult ARDS ECMO patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS patients did not differ with respect to preexisting disease or body mass index. ICU survival rate was 62% for COVID-19 ECMO patients and 70% for non-COVID-19 ECMO patients. COVID-19 ECMO survivors were supported with ECMO for a median of 43 days (interquartile range [IQR], 18-58 d) versus 16 days (IQR, 19-39 d; p = 0.03) for non-COVID-19 patients. The median duration of ECMO therapy for all ARDS patients between 2007 and 2018 was 15 days (IQR, 6-28 d). The subgroup of patients suffering from any viral pneumonia received ECMO support for a median of 16 days (IQR, 9-27 d), survivors of influenza pneumonia received ECMO support for 13 days (IQR, 7-25 d). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients required significant longer ECMO support compared with patients without COVID-19 to achieve successful ECMO weaning and ICU survival.

Increasing Mortality in Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for COVID-19-Associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Determine the factors associated with mortality in venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) patients with COVID-19 infection and provide an updated report of clinical outcomes for patients treated with V-V ECMO for COVID-19 in Minnesota. DESIGN: Multicenter prospective observational study. SETTING: The four adult Extracorporeal Life Support Organization-certified Centers of Excellence in Minnesota. PATIENTS: A total of 100 patients treated with V-V ECMO for COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) from March 2020 to May 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was 60-day survival for patients treated with V-V ECMO for COVID-19. Outcomes of patients treated from November 2020 to May 2021(cohort 2) were compared with data from a previous cohort of patients, collected from March 2020 to October 2020 (cohort 1). The data from both cohorts were merged into a single dataset (Combined Cohort). Survival on V-V ECMO due to COVID-19-associated ARDS significantly decreased after October 2020 (63% vs 41%; p = 0.026). The median interval from hospital admission to V-V ECMO cannulation was significantly associated with 60-day mortality (10 d [6-14 d] in nonsurvivors vs 7 d [4-9 d] in survivors; p = 0.001) in the Combined Cohort and was also significantly longer in cohort 2 than cohort 1 (10 d [7-14 d] vs 6 d [4-10 d]; p < 0.001). In the Combined Cohort, the 60-day survival for patients who did not receive steroids was 86% (n = 12) versus 45% (n = 39) for patients who received at least one dose of steroids (p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant increase in mortality for patients treated with V-V ECMO for COVID-19-associated ARDS in cohort 2 compared with cohort 1. Further research is required to determine the cause of the worsening trend in mortality.

Eleven Years of Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: From H1N1 to SARS-CoV-2. Experience and Perspectives of a National Referral Center.

OBJECTIVE: Despite growing expertise and wide application of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) treatment for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) of different origin and during pandemics (H1N1 Influenza A virus and SARS-CoV-2), large reports are few and pertain mostly to multicenter registries, and randomized trials are difficult to perform. The aim of this study was to report outcomes, trends, and innovations of VV ECMO treatment over the last 11 years. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational study on 142 patients treated at the IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital in Milan from June 2009 (year of the H1N1 pandemic) to May 2020 (SARS-CoV-2 pandemic). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The main causes of ARDS were H1N1 pneumonia in 36% of patients, bacterial pneumonia in 17%, and SARS-CoV-2 in 9%. Seventy-two percent of patients were centralized from remote hospitals, of whom 33% had implanted VV ECMO before transport. The most common cannulation strategy was the dual-lumen catheter cannulation system (55%), and anticoagulation was performed with bivalirudin in most patients (79%). Refractory hypoxia was treated with intravenous beta-blockers (64%), nitric oxide (20%), and pronation (8%). Almost one-third of patients (32%) were extubated while on ECMO. Forty-nine percent of patients were discharged from the intensive care unit, and hospital discharge was 46%; survival was lower in patients requiring VV ECMO for more than three weeks compared with shorter support duration (23% v 56%, p = 0.007). Anticoagulation with bivalirudin was associated with higher survival, compared with heparin (55% v 31%, p = 0.03), and lower thrombocytopenia incidence (69% v 35%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: VV ECMO is the pivotal rescue treatment for refractory ARDS-timely treatment and optimal care are needed to optimize therapy, as duration of support is associated with outcome. Anticoagulation with bivalirudin may improve outcome.

Awake Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Acute Respiratory Failure.

Implantation of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as an alternative to invasive mechanical ventilation, an "awake approach," may facilitate a lung- and diaphragm-protective ventilatory strategies without the associated harms of endotracheal intubation, positive pressure ventilation, and continuous sedation. This report presents the characteristics and outcomes of the patients treated with the awake venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation approach. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Monocenter study. PATIENTS: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 patients with acute respiratory failure treated with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation instead of invasive mechanical ventilation from March 2020 to March 2021. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Physiologic and laboratory data were collected at admission to the ICU, prior to and after venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation implantation, and at decannulation. Seven patients were treated with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation instead of invasive mechanical ventilation due to hypoxemia with a median Pao2/Fio2 ratio at implantation of 76 (interquartile range, 59-92). Four patients in the awake group subsequently required invasive mechanical ventilation, and only one patient (14.3%) died. There were no significant complications attributed venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. CONCLUSIONS: This report demonstrates that in a selected group of patients, an "awake" venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation approach is feasible and may result in favorable outcomes.

Individualized Multimodal Physiologic Approach to Mechanical Ventilation in Patients With Obesity and Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Reduced Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Utilization.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether individualized optimization of mechanical ventilation through the implementation of a lung rescue team could reduce the need for venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with obesity and acute respiratory distress syndrome and decrease ICU and hospital length of stay and mortality. DESIGN: Single-center, retrospective study at the Massachusetts General Hospital from June 2015 to June 2019. PATIENTS: All patients with obesity and acute respiratory distress syndrome who were referred for venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation evaluation due to hypoxemic respiratory failure. INTERVENTION: Evaluation and individualized optimization of mechanical ventilation by the lung rescue team before the decision to proceed with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The control group was those patients managed according to hospital standard of care without lung rescue team evaluation. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: All 20 patients (100%) allocated in the control group received venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, whereas 10 of 13 patients (77%) evaluated by the lung rescue team did not receive venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Patients who underwent lung rescue team evaluation had a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (p = 0.03) and shorter ICU length of stay (p = 0.03). There were no differences between groups in in-hospital, 30-day, or 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In this hypothesis-generating study, individualized optimization of mechanical ventilation of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and obesity by a lung rescue team was associated with a decrease in the utilization of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU length of stay. Mortality was not modified by the lung rescue team intervention.

Trend and Pattern of 100 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Patients Referred for Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Treatment in a National Referral Center in North Italy During the Last Decade.

OBJECTIVE: Current evidence supports centralization of patients with refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) to institutions with a high level of expertise and with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) capabilities. The aim of this study was to analyze and report the data of transferred refractory ARDS patients managed with venovenous (VV) ECMO at a national referral center over the last 11 years. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Referral center in Italy. PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised 100 patients treated from May 2009-November 2020. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The mean age was 54 ± 14 years, and 65% of patients were male. Patients were treated throughout the year, with seasonal peaks in the winter months. The majority of patients were referred from hospitals within the Lombardia region (81%), mainly from the city of Milan and surrounding area (36% of the total). The most common etiology of refractory ARDS was H1N1 influenza A (42 patients [42%]), followed by bacterial pneumonia (35 patients [35%]), and severe acute respiratory syndrome due to Sars-CoV-2 infection (five patients [5%]). All patients were severely hypoxic at the time of VV ECMO treatment. No transport-related complication was recorded. The most common configuration used in the authors' clinical practice was a bicaval dual-lumen configuration (61 patients [61%]), followed by a femoro-jugular configuration (38 patients [38%]). The intensive care unit survival rate was 55%. CONCLUSIONS: Referral to a specialized center for VV ECMO treatment should be considered expeditiously in case of refractory ARDS, which often is lethal. Transport of patients with an unstable condition, although challenging, is feasible, and centralization of patient care is associated with good outcomes.

Venovenous ECMO treatment, outcomes, and complications in adults according to large case series: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has gained popularity for the treatment of refractory respiratory failure during and after the 2009 influenza pandemic, and still represents a precious therapeutic resource for severe novel coronavirus 2019 infection. However, most of the published studies are small case series, and only two randomized trials exist in literature. AIM: Aim of this systematic review is to describe trends in VV ECMO treatment outcomes according to large studies only. METHODS: We searched and included studies with more than 100 VV ECMO cases dated up to August 1st, 2019. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies published in the period 2011-2019 met inclusion criteria, for a total of 12,860 patients (age 46.3 ± 17.4 years). ARDS was mainly by pneumonia, in 3126 (37%) cases; further 401(7%) patients had H1N1 Influenza A infection. Cannulation-related complications occurred in 502 (7%) cases. Weighted mean (95% confidence interval) of VV ECMO duration was 8.9 (8.7-9.1) days, and ICU stay was 23.6 (22.4-24.8) days. Mortality at the longest follow up available was 40%. Data collection in 70% of the studies had a duration of >5 years. CONCLUSION: This study reveals the characteristics of large case VV ECMO studies.

Case Report of Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Caused by COVID-19: Successfully Treated by Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and an Ultra-Protective Ventilation.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) started in Wuhan (China) at the end of 2019, and then increased rapidly. In patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) caused by COVID-19, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) is considered a rescue therapy that provides adequate gas exchange. The way in which mechanical ventilation is applied during VV-ECMO is not clear, however it is associated with prognosis. Currently, the mortality rate of COVID-19 patients that receive VV-ECMO stands at approximately 50%. Here, we report three patients that successfully recovered from COVID-19-induced ARDS after VV-ECMO and implementation of an ultra-protective ventilation. This ventilation strategy involved maintaining a peak inspiratory pressure of ≤20 cmH2O and a positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) of ≤ 10 cmH2O, which are lower values than have been previously reported. Thus, we suggest that this ultra-protective ventilation be considered during VV-ECMO as it minimizes the ventilator-induced lung injury.