In-hospital and 6-month outcomes in patients with COVID-19 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (EuroECMO-COVID): a multicentre, prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been widely used in patients with COVID-19, but uncertainty remains about the determinants of in-hospital mortality and data on post-discharge outcomes are scarce. The aims of this study were to investigate the variables associated with in-hospital outcomes in patients who received ECMO during the first wave of COVID-19 and to describe the status of patients 6 months after ECMO initiation. METHODS: EuroECMO-COVID is a prospective, multicentre, observational study developed by the European Extracorporeal Life Support Organization. This study was based on data from patients aged 16 years or older who received ECMO support for refractory COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic-from March 1 to Sept 13, 2020-at 133 centres in 21 countries. In-hospital mortality and mortality 6 months after ECMO initiation were the primary outcomes. Mixed-Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate associations between patient and management-related variables (eg, patient demographics, comorbidities, pre-ECMO status, and ECMO characteristics and complications) and in-hospital deaths. Survival status at 6 months was established through patient contact or institutional charts review. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04366921, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between March 1 and Sept 13, 2020, 1215 patients (942 [78%] men and 267 [22%] women; median age 53 years [IQR 46-60]) were included in the study. Median ECMO duration was 15 days (IQR 8-27). 602 (50%) of 1215 patients died in hospital, and 852 (74%) patients had at least one complication. Multiorgan failure was the leading cause of death (192 [36%] of 528 patients who died with available data). In mixed-Cox analyses, age of 60 years or older, use of inotropes and vasopressors before ECMO initiation, chronic renal failure, and time from intubation to ECMO initiation of 4 days or more were associated with higher in-hospital mortality. 613 patients did not die in hospital, and 547 (95%) of 577 patients for whom data were available were alive at 6 months. 102 (24%) of 431 patients had returned to full-time work at 6 months, and 57 (13%) of 428 patients had returned to part-time work. At 6 months, respiratory rehabilitation was required in 88 (17%) of 522 patients with available data, and the most common residual symptoms included dyspnoea (185 [35%] of 523 patients) and cardiac (52 [10%] of 514 patients) or neurocognitive (66 [13%] of 512 patients) symptoms. INTERPRETATION: Patient's age, timing of cannulation (<4 days vs ≥4 days from intubation), and use of inotropes and vasopressors are essential factors to consider when analysing the outcomes of patients receiving ECMO for COVID-19. Despite post-discharge survival being favourable, persisting long-term symptoms suggest that dedicated post-ECMO follow-up programmes are required. FUNDING: None.

Extracorporeal life support provision in COVID-19 patients - An international EuroELSO 2022 update survey.

INTRODUCTION: An analysis on the ECLS use for patients with respiratory or cardiac support in COVID-19 based on an international response to EuroELSO survey, aims to generate a more comprehensive understanding of ECLS role during the recent viral pandemic. METHODS: EuroELSO announced the survey at the 10th annual congress in London, May 2022. The survey covered 26 multiple-choice questions. RESULTS: The survey returned 69 questionnaires from 62 centers across 22 European countries and seven centers across five non-European countries. Most of the centers providing ECLS for COVID-19 patients had more than 30 runs for respiratory support since December 2019. In the same period, at least 31 runs in adult COVID-19 patients have been performed in 48 of 69 centers (69.6%). The reported pediatric data from 18 centers is limited to less than the patients per center. CONCLUSION: Majority of the COVID-19 patients received respiratory ECLS support and adult patients dominated. The indications and contraindications are broadly aligned with available guidelines. Most of the centers considered age >65 or biological age as a relative or absolute contraindication for ECLS in COVID-19. ECLS withdrawal criteria in COVID-19 are controversial because the long-term outcomes after ECLS in COVID-19 and the impact of critical illness and the impact of long-COVID are still not known.

COVID-19 and Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has recently and rapidly emerged and developed into a global pandemic. In SARS-CoV-2 patients with refractory respiratory failure, there may be a role for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) as a life-saving rescue intervention. METHODS: This review summarizes the evidence gathered until June 12, 2020; electronic databases were screened for pertinent reports on coronavirus and V-V ECMO. Search was conducted by two independent investigators; keywords used were SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, ECMO, and extracorporeal life support (ECLS). RESULTS: Many patients with COVID-19 experience moderate symptoms and a relatively quick recovery, but others must be admitted into the intensive care unit due to severe respiratory failure and often must be mechanically ventilated. Further deterioration may require institution of extracorporeal oxygenation. Infection mechanisms may trigger "cytokine storm," an inflammatory disorder notable for multi-organ system failure; together with other metabolic and hematological changes, these amplify the changes pertinent to ECMO therapy, often exaggerating blood coagulation disorders. Thirty-two studies were found describing experiences with ECMO in the treatment of COVID-19. Of 4,912 COVID-19 patients, 2,119 (43%) developed ARDS and 2,086 (42%) were transferred to the ICU; 1,015 patients (21%) were treated with ECMO. While in an overall cohort, observed mortality was 640 (13%), the mortality within ECMO subgroups reached up to 34.6% (range 0-100%). CONCLUSION: The efficacy of ECMO treatment for COVID-19 is largely dependent on the expertise of the center in ECLS due to the interplay between the changes in hematological and inflammatory modulators associated with both COVID-19 and ECMO. In order to support gas exchange during early infection with SARS-CoV-2, ECMO has a strong rationale for the treatment of the most critically ill patients. Due to the limited resources during a global pandemic, ECMO should be reserved for only the most severe cases of COVID-19.

The ProtekDuo in ECMO configuration for ARDS secondary to COVID-19: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Assessment of the results of the ProtekDuo cannula applied for dedicated right ventricular support with oxygenator in ARDS secondary to COVID-19. METHODS: Systematic literature search in NHS library, Medline (Pubmed) and EMBASE using appropriate keywords as well as PICOS and PRISMA approach. RESULTS: Out of 285 publications found, 5 publications met the search criteria and were included in this review. A total of 194 patients with ARDS secondary to COVID-19 underwent ProtekDuo placement to establish a combination of respiratory [veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO)] and right ventricular support. Patients treated using the ProtekDuo cannula had survival rates between 59% and 89% throughout the five studies, and a significant survival benefit when compared to an invasive ventilation group or compared to dual site V-V ECMO or other double lumen ECMO cannulas. One study focused on extubation and discontinuation of ventilator support, which could be achieved in 100% of ProtekDuo patients. An association for reduced incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) and use of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) could be shown when the ProtekDuo was used. CONCLUSION: Only limited literature is available for the ProtekDuo in V-P ECMO configuration in the setting of COVID-19 ARDS and should be interpreted with caution. Data on the ProtekDuo is suggestive for lower rates of mortality, AKI and CRRT as compared to other respiratory support modalities.

Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID-19 patients: A systematic review of literature.

OBJECTIVE: Myocardial damage occurs in up to 25% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. While veno-venous extracorporeal life support (V-V ECLS) is used as respiratory support, mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may be required for severe cardiac dysfunction. This systematic review summarizes the available literature regarding MCS use rates, disease drivers for MCS initiation, and MCS outcomes in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: PubMed/EMBASE were searched until October 14, 2021. Articles including adults receiving ECLS for COVID-19 were included. The primary outcome was the rate of MCS use. Secondary outcomes included mortality at follow-up, ECLS conversion rate, intubation-to-cannulation time, time on ECLS, cardiac diseases, use of inotropes, and vasopressors. RESULTS: Twenty-eight observational studies (comprising both ECLS-only populations and ECLS patients as part of larger populations) included 4218 COVID-19 patients (females: 28.8%; median age: 54.3 years, 95%CI: 50.7-57.8) of whom 2774 (65.8%) required ECLS with the majority (92.7%) on V-V ECLS, 4.7% on veno-arterial ECLS and/or Impella, and 2.6% on other ECLS. Acute heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and cardiac arrest were reported in 7.8%, 9.7%, and 6.6% of patients, respectively. Vasopressors were used in 37.2%. Overall, 3.1% of patients required an ECLS change from V-V ECLS to MCS for heart failure, myocarditis, or myocardial infarction. The median ECLS duration was 15.9 days (95%CI: 13.9-16.3), with an overall survival of 54.6% and 28.1% in V-V ECLS and MCS patients. One study reported 61.1% survival with oxy-right ventricular assist device. CONCLUSION: MCS use for cardiocirculatory compromise has been reported in 7.3% of COVID-19 patients requiring ECLS, which is a lower percentage compared to the incidence of any severe cardiocirculatory complication. Based on the poor survival rates, further investigations are warranted to establish the most appropriated indications and timing for MCS in COVID-19.

HEROES V-V-HEmorRhagic cOmplications in Veno-Venous Extracorporeal life Support-Development and internal validation of multivariable prediction model in adult patients.

BACKGROUND: During extracorporeal life support (ECLS), bleeding is one of the most frequent complications, associated with high morbidity and increased mortality, despite continuous improvements in devices and patient care. Risk factors for bleeding complications in veno-venous (V-V) ECLS applied for respiratory support have been poorly investigated. We aim to develop and internally validate a prediction model to calculate the risk for bleeding complications in adult patients receiving V-V ECLS support. METHODS: Data from adult patients reported to the extracorporeal life support organization (ELSO) registry between the years 2010 and 2020 were analyzed. The primary outcome was bleeding complications recorded during V-V ECLS. Multivariable logistic regression with backward stepwise elimination was used to develop the predictive model. The performance of the model was tested by discriminative ability and calibration with receiver operating characteristic curves and visual inspection of the calibration plot. RESULTS: In total, 18 658 adult patients were included, of which 3 933 (21.1%) developed bleeding complications. The prediction model showed a prediction of bleeding complications with an AUC of 0.63. Pre-ECLS arrest, surgical cannulation, lactate, pO2 , HCO3 , ventilation rate, mean airway pressure, pre-ECLS cardiopulmonary bypass or renal replacement therapy, pre-ECLS surgical interventions, and different types of diagnosis were included in the prediction model. CONCLUSIONS: The model is based on the largest cohort of V-V ECLS patients and reveals the most favorable predictive value addressing bleeding events given the predictors that are feasible and when compared to the current literature. This model will help identify patients at risk of bleeding complications, and decision making in terms of anticoagulation and hemostatic management.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and rehabilitation in patients with COVID-19: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic posed severe difficulties in managing critically ill patients in hospital care settings. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support has been proven to be lifesaving support during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. The purpose of this review was to describe the rehabilitative treatments provided to patients undergoing ECMO support during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Scopus for English-language studies published from the databases' inception until June 30, 2021. We excluded editorials, letters to the editor, and studies that did not describe rehabilitative procedures during ECMO support. We also excluded those articles not written in English. RESULTS: A total of 50 articles were identified. We ultimately included nine studies, seven of which were case reports. Only two studies had more than one patient; an observational design analyzing the clinical course of 19 patients and a case series of three patients. Extracorporeal support duration varied from 9 to 49 days, and the primary indication was acute respiratory distress syndrome COVID-19-related. Rehabilitative treatment mainly consisted of in-bed mobilization, postural transfers (including sitting), and respiratory exercises. After hospital discharge, patients were referred to rehabilitation facilities. Physiotherapeutic interventions provided during ECMO support and after its discontinuation were feasible and safe. CONCLUSION: The physiotherapeutic treatment of patients undergoing ECMO support includes several components and must be provided in a multidisciplinary context. The optimal approach depends on the patient's status, including sedation, level of consciousness, ECMO configuration, types of cannulas, and cannulation site.

Managing patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support during the COVID-19 pandemic - a proposal for a nursing standard operating procedure.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is effective in a selected critically ill patient population with promising results in refractory hypoxemia related to the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). However, it requires specialized clinicians and resources in advanced technology. Moreover, the COVID-19 remains an ongoing global emergency, and there is no evidence-based practice in preparedness. This article proposes an innovative and optimized nursing care protocol, the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), that regulates safety and efficiency in using personal protective equipment (PPE) during ECMO-relevant procedures while providing ECMO therapy for patients with COVID-19. METHODS: After performing a narrative literature search, we developed a high-fidelity translational simulation scenario. It included practicing appropriate donning and doffing PPE during work organization, ECMO-related procedures, and routine daily nursing care and management of ECMO over nine hours. In addition, we held supplementary constructive debrief meetings to consult international expert in the field. RESULTS: A proposal for nursing standardized operating procedures was created, divided into categories. They included work organization, workload references, competences, infrastructural conditions, cannulation equipment, daily routine nursing care, and procedures during ECMO. CONCLUSIONS: High-fidelity medical simulation can play an important role in staff training, improvement in previously gained proficiency, and development of optimal SOP for nursing care and management during ECMO in patients with COVID-19. Optimal SOPs may further guide multidisciplinary teams, including intensive care units and interventional departments.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19: evolving outcomes from the international Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry.

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.

Extracorporeal life support in COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome: A EuroELSO international survey.

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.

Artificial lungs--Where are we going with the lung replacement therapy?

Lung transplantation may be a final destination therapy in lung failure, but limited donor organ availability creates a need for alternative management, including artificial lung technology. This invited review discusses ongoing developments and future research pathways for respiratory assist devices and tissue engineering to treat advanced and refractory lung disease. An overview is also given on the aftermath of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and lessons learned as the world comes out of this situation. The first order of business in the future of lung support is solving the problems with existing mechanical devices. Interestingly, challenges identified during the early days of development persist today. These challenges include device-related infection, bleeding, thrombosis, cost, and patient quality of life. The main approaches of the future directions are to repair, restore, replace, or regenerate the lungs. Engineering improvements to hollow fiber membrane gas exchangers are enabling longer term wearable systems and can be used to bridge lung failure patients to transplantation. Progress in the development of microchannel-based devices has provided the concept of biomimetic devices that may even enable intracorporeal implantation. Tissue engineering and cell-based technologies have provided the concept of bioartificial lungs with properties similar to the native organ. Recent progress in artificial lung technologies includes continued advances in both engineering and biology. The final goal is to achieve a truly implantable and durable artificial lung that is applicable to destination therapy.

Additive treatment considerations in COVID-19-The clinician's perspective on extracorporeal adjunctive purification techniques.

The aim of this document was to inform the scientific community of sparse preliminary results regarding advanced supportive therapies and technology-driven systems in addition to highlighting the benefits and possibilities of performing concise research during challenging times. Advanced organ support for lung and heart offers the possibility to buy the time needed for recovery. However, remaining a bridging strategy, extracorporeal life support cannot act as the ultimate treatment for the underlying COVID-19 disease. Appropriate patient selection criteria addressed by experts and scientific organizations, such as Extracorporeal Life Support Organization and World Health Organization, may provide significant help in the difficult decision-making and to reduce mortality in patients with profound respiratory and/or cardiac failure due to COVID-19. Severe, systemic cytokine-mediated inflammation associated with the SARS-CoV-2 has also been described. Effects of crosstalk between coagulation and inflammatory pathways appear to significantly affect disease progression and lead to poor outcomes. Multiple therapeutic strategies, including antibody therapies (such as Tocilizumab, Sarilumab, Siltuximab), therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE), and blood purification techniques for direct removal of cytokines, including filtration, dialysis (diffusion), and adsorption are available. Further, we believe, that research should be facilitated and promoted, particularly under the guidance of recognized scientific societies or expert-based multicenter investigation, with rapid communication of critical and relevant information to enhance better appraisal of patient profiles, complications, and treatment modalities.