ABSTRACT
Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) provides temporary mechanical circulatory support and simultaneous extracorporeal gas exchange for acute cardiorespiratory failure. By providing circulatory support, VA-ECMO gives treatments time to reach optimal efficacy or may be used as a bridge to a more durable mechanical solution for patients with acute cardiopulmonary failure. It is commonly used when a readily reversible etiology of decompensation is identified with very strict inclusion criteria for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation use. We present a unique case in which VA-ECMO/extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation was used after cardiac arrest with pulseless electrical activity in a patient with recurrent lymphoma of the left thigh with recent autologous stem cell transplant.
ABSTRACT
Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) provides temporary mechanical circulatory support and simultaneous extracorporeal gas exchange for acute cardiorespiratory failure. By providing circulatory support, VA-ECMO gives treatments time to reach optimal efficacy or may be used as a bridge to a more durable mechanical solution for patients with acute cardiopulmonary failure. It is commonly used when a readily reversible etiology of decompensation is identified with very strict inclusion criteria for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation use. We present a unique case in which VA-ECMO/extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation was used after cardiac arrest with pulseless electrical activity in a patient with recurrent lymphoma of the left thigh with recent autologous stem cell transplant.
Subject(s)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Heart Arrest , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Pancytopenia , Humans , Critical Pathways , Transplantation, Autologous , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Heart Arrest/etiology , Heart Arrest/therapy , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Survivors of coronary artery disease (CAD) events are at risk for repeat events. Although evidence supports cardiac rehabilitation (CR) after an initial CAD event, it is unclear whether a repeat course of CR (CR × 2) is beneficial after a recurrent CAD event. The purpose of this study was to determine the association of CR × 2 with clinical outcomes in persons undergoing repeat percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: We assessed the prevalence of CR × 2 and its impact on cardiovascular outcomes in individuals who experienced a repeat PCI at the Mayo Clinic hospitals between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2013. Landmark analyses were used to calculate unadjusted and propensity score adjusted mortality rates and cardiovascular (CV) events rates for patients who underwent CR × 2 compared with those who did not. RESULTS: Among 240 individuals who had a repeat PCI and who had participated in CR after their first PCI, 97 (40%) participated in CR × 2. Outcomes were assessed for a mean follow-up time of 7.8 yr (IQR 7.1-9.0 yr). Propensity score-based inverse probability weighting analysis revealed that CR × 2 was associated with significantly lower target lesion revascularization (HR = 0.47: 95% CI, 0.26-0.86; P = .014), lower combined end point of CV death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization (HR = 0.57: 95% CI, 0.36-0.89; P = .014), and lower CV hospitalization (HR = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.84; P = .003). CONCLUSION: A second course of CR following repeat PCI is associated with a lower risk of adverse clinical outcomes. These findings support current policies that allow for repeat courses of CR following recurrent CV events.
