Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Life Support in Heart Transplant and Ventricle Assist Device Centres. Meta-analysis.

AIMS: Because reported mortality on veno-arterial (V-A) extracorporeal life support (ECLS) substantially varies between centres, the aim of the current analysis was to assess the outcomes between units performing heart transplantation and/or implanting ventricular assist device (HTx/VAD) vs. non-HTx/VAD units in patients undergoing V-A ECLS for cardiogenic shock. METHODS AND RESULTS: Systematic search according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was performed using PubMed/MEDLINE databases until 30 November 2019. Articles reporting in-hospital/30-day mortality and centre's HTx/VAD status were included. In-hospital outcomes and long-term survival were analysed in subgroup meta-analysis. A total of 174 studies enrolling n = 13 308 patients were included with 20 series performed in non-HTx/VAD centres (1016 patients, 7.8%). Majority of patients underwent V-A ECLS for post-cardiotomy shock (44.2%) and acute myocardial infarction (20.7%). Estimated overall in-hospital mortality was 57.2% (54.9-59.4%). Mortality rates were higher in non-HTx/VAD [65.5% (59.8-70.8%)] as compared with HTx/VAD centres [55.8% (53.3-58.2%)], P < 0.001. Estimated late survival was 61.8% (55.7-67.9%) without differences between non-HTx/VAD and HTx/VAD centres: 66.5% (30.3-1.02%) vs. 61.7% (55.5-67.8%), respectively (P = 0.797). No differences were seen with respect to ECLS duration, limb complications, and reoperations for bleeding, kidney injury, and sepsis. Yet, weaning rates were higher in HTx/VAD vs. non-HTx/VAD centres: 58.7% (56.2-61.1%) vs. 48.9% (42.0-55.9%), P = 0.010. Estimated rate of bridge to heart transplant was 6.6% (5.2-8.3%) with numerical, yet not statistically significant, difference between non-HTx/VAD [2.7% (0.8-8.3%)] as compared with HTx/VAD [6.7% (5.3-8.6%)] (P = 0.131). CONCLUSIONS: Survival after V-A ECLS differed according to centre's HTx/VAD status. Potentially different risk profiles of patients must be taken account for before definite conclusions are drawn.

The impact of Centre's heart transplant status and volume on in-hospital outcomes following extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory post-cardiotomy cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock (PCS) that is refractory to inotropic support remains a major concern in cardiac surgery and is almost universally fatal unless treated with mechanical support. While reported mortality rates on ECMO vary from center to center, aim of the current report is assess if the outcomes differ between centres according to volume and heart transplantation status. METHODS: A systematic search was performed according to PRISMA statement using PubMed/Medline databases between 2010 and 2018. Relevant articles were scrutinized and included in the meta-analysis only if reporting in-hospital/30-day mortality and heart transplantation status of the centre. Paediatric and congenital heart surgery-related studies along with those conducted in the setting of veno-venous ECMO for respiratory distress syndrome were excluded. Differences were assessed by means of subgroup meta-analysis and meta-regression. RESULTS: Fifty-four studies enrolling N = 4421 ECMO patients were included. Of those, 6 series were performed in non-HTx centres (204 pts.;4.6%). Overall 30-day survival (95% Confidence Intervals) was 35.3% (32.5-38.2%) and did not statistically differ between non-HTx: 33.3% (26.8-40.4%) and HTx centres: 35.7% (32.7-38.8%); Pinteraction = 0.531. There was no impact of centre volume on survival as well: ßcoef = 0.0006; P = 0.833. No statistical differences were seen between HTx and non-HTx with respect to ECMO duration, limb complications, reoperations for bleeding, kidney injury and sepsis. There were however significantly less neurological complications in the HTx as compared to non-HTx centres: 11.9% vs 19.5% respectively; P = 0.009; an inverse relationship was seen for neurologic complications in centres performing more ECMOs annually ßcoef = - 0.0066; P = 0.031. Weaning rates and bridging to HTx and/or VADs were higher in HTx facilities. CONCLUSIONS: There was no apparent difference in survival after ECMO implantation for refractory PCS according to centre's ECMO volume and transplantation status. Potentially different risk profiles of patients in these centres must be taken account for before definite conclusions are drawn.

Long-term survival and major outcomes in post-cardiotomy extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for adult patients in cardiogenic shock.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in the veno-arterial (VA) configuration is an established method for the treatment of refractory cardiogenic shock. Such a condition characterizes the postoperative course of approximatively 1% of cardiac surgery patients. Although some studies have reported ECMO-related short-term results, little is known about the long-term outcomes of VA-ECMO therapy in the post-cardiotomy setting. Therefore, an extensive literature search was conducted regarding articles published after 1990 reporting postoperative ECMO use. PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched for sources. In-hospital mortality was high in post-cardiotomy VA-ECMO patients, ranging from 24.8% to 52%. Long-term results were poorly reported. However, based on the limited information available, hospital survivors showed a favorable outcome, with improvement in overall clinical condition, quality of life and limited hospital readmission for cardiac-related events. To conclude, in-hospital outcome in post-cardiotomy ECMO is often unfavorable, post-discharge results show satisfactory condition, with stable improvement of overall patient clinical status and low rate of hospital readmission and cardiac-related adverse events. Data reporting is, however, scarce and hence new and detailed studies are still warranted to investigate such aspects.

Protracted aortic valve closure during peripheral veno-arterial extracorporeal life support: is intra-aortic balloon pump an effective solution?

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) afterload increase with protracted aortic valve (AV) closure may represent a complication of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO). The aim of the present study was to assess the effects of an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) to overcome such a hemodynamic shortcoming in patients submitted to peripheral V-A ECMO. METHODS: Among 184 adult patients who were treated with peripheral V-A ECMO support at Medical University Center Maastricht Hospital between 2007 and 2018, patients submitted to IABP implant for protracted AV closure after V-A ECMO implant were retrospectively identified. All clinical and hemodynamic data, including echocardiographic monitoring, were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: During the study period, 10 subjects (mean age 60 years old, 80% males) underwent IABP implant after peripheral V-A ECMO positioning due to the diagnosis of protracted AV closure and inefficient LV unloading as assessed by echocardiography and an absence of pulsation in the arterial pressure wave. Recovery of blood pressure pulsatility and enhanced LV unloading were observed in 8 patients after IABP placement, with no significant differences in the main hemodynamic parameters, inotropic therapy or in the ECMO flow (p=0.48). The weaning rate in this patient subgroup (mean ECMO duration 8 days), however, was only 10%, with another patient finally transplanted, leading to a 20% survival-to-hospital discharge. CONCLUSION: IABP placement was an effective solution in order to reverse the protracted AV closure and impaired LV unloading observed during peripheral V-A ECMO support. However, the impact on the weaning rate and survival needs further investigations.