Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Comparing ecmo characteristics and outcomes among COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients at a tertiary academic medical center
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine ; 203(9), 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1277303
ABSTRACT
Rationale Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause severe respiratory failure that worsens despite maximal medical management. When to initiate extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and how to manage these patients on ECMO is not clear. Here, we present our experience with venovenous ECMO to support patients with COVID-19 and compare it to historic patients supported with VV-ECMO for other causes of respiratory failure.

Methods:

Patients admitted to our tertiary academic medical center in 2019 and 2020 who received VV ECMO support were included in this retrospective chart review. We examined patients with and without COVID-19 infection. We placed COVID-19 patients on ECMO who failed supportive care with mechanical ventilation using a high PEEP low tidal volume strategy, prone positioning, and neuromuscular blockade. Data analysis were done in Excel and Prism. Non-parametric data were compared with unpaired, two-tailed Mann-Whitney tests.

Results:

ECMO was provided to 26 COVID-19 patients and 38 patients without COVID-19. Median (interquartile range) age of COVID-19 patients was 49.5 (40.5-56.25), compared with non-COVID-19 patients 53.5 (30.5-60.25), p=0.28. COVID-19 patients had a significantly higher BMI 32 (30.1-35.9) vs. 26.4 (23.6-29.4), p<0.001. There were 27% female COVID-19 patients compared with 37% female non-COVID patients (p=0.43). COVID-19 patients had similar PaO2FiO2 ratios as non-COVID patients on day of cannulation 74 (69-112) vs 78 (60-205), p=0.65. COVID-19 patients had longer ventilator duration pre-cannulation (not including time spent intubated at outside hospitals prior to transfer to our center)-1.9 (1.4-7.0) days vs 0.7 (-.2-1.0) days, p<0.001. COVID patients spent more days on ECMO compared with non-COVID patients 20.7 (7.3-36.5) vs. 11.5 (3.8-26.8), p=0.14. Twelve (46%) of the COVID-19 ECMO patients died, compared with 9 (25%) of the non-COVID ECMO patients, p=0.10.

Conclusions:

In patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia induced ARDS who fail maximal supportive therapy with mechanical ventilation, outcomes are similar or worse than patients historically receiving VV ECMO support for respiratory failure. These findings highlight the need to determine the optimal timing of ECMO initiation and management in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.

Full text: Available Collection: Databases of international organizations Database: EMBASE Type of study: Observational study Language: English Journal: American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine Year: 2021 Document Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: Databases of international organizations Database: EMBASE Type of study: Observational study Language: English Journal: American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine Year: 2021 Document Type: Article