ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Patients on veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) support are at a high risk of hemorrhagic complications, including upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence and impact of this complication in V-A ECMO patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective single-center study (2013-2017) was conducted on V-A ECMO patients, excluding those who died within 24 h. All patients with suspected UGIB underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and were analyzed and compared to the remainder of the cohort, from the initiation of ECMO until 5 days after explantation. RESULTS: A total of 150 V-A ECMO cases (65 after cardiac surgery and 85 due to medical etiology) were included. 90% of the patients received prophylactic proton pump inhibitor therapy and enteral nutrition. Thirty-one patients underwent EGD for suspected UGIB, with 16 confirmed cases of UGIB. The incidence was 10.7%, with a median occurrence at 10 [7-17] days. There were no significant differences in clinical or biological characteristics on the day of EGD. However, patients with UGIB had significant increases in packed red blood cells and fresh frozen plasma needs, mechanical ventilation duration and V-A ECMO duration, as well as in length of intensive care unit and hospital stays. There was no significant difference in mortality. The only independent risk factor of UGIB was a history of peptic ulcer (OR = 7.32; 95% CI [1.07-50.01], p = 0.042). CONCLUSION: UGIB occurred in at least 1 out of 10 cases of V-A ECMO patients, with significant consequences on healthcare resources. Enteral nutrition and proton pump inhibitor prophylaxis did not appear to protect V-A ECMO patients. Further studies should assess their real benefits in these patients with high risk of hemorrhage.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are frequent on veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO). Performing routine blood cultures (BCs) may identify early paucisymptomatic BSIs. We investigated the contribution of systematic daily BCs to detect BSIs on V-A ECMO. METHODS: This was a retrospective study including all adult patients requiring V-A ECMO and surviving more than 24 h. Our protocol included routine daily BCs, from V-A ECMO insertion up to 5 days after withdrawal; other BCs were performed on-demand. RESULTS: On the 150 V-A ECMO included, 2146 BCs were performed (1162 routine and 984 on-demand BCs); 190 (9%) were positive, including 68 contaminants. Fifty-one (4%) routine BCs revealed BSIs; meanwhile, 71 (7%) on-demand BCs revealed BSIs (p = 0.005). Performing routine BCs was negatively associated with BSIs diagnosis (OR 0.55, 95% CI [0.38; 0.81], p = 0.002). However, 16 (31%) BSIs diagnosed by routine BCs would have been missed by on-demand BCs. Independent variables for BSIs diagnosis after routine BCs were: V-A ECMO for cardiac graft failure (OR 2.43, 95% CI [1.20; 4.92], p = 0.013) and sampling with on-going antimicrobial therapy (OR 2.15, 95% CI [1.08; 4.27], p = 0.029) or renal replacement therapy (OR 2.05, 95% CI [1.10; 3.81], p = 0.008). Without these three conditions, only two BSIs diagnosed with routine BCs would have been missed by on-demand BCs sampling. CONCLUSIONS: Although routine daily BCs are less effective than on-demand BCs and expose to contamination and inappropriate antimicrobial therapy, a policy restricted to on-demand BCs would omit a significant proportion of BSIs. This argues for a tailored approach to routine daily BCs on V-A ECMO, based on risk factors for positivity.
