The Role of Palliative Care Consultation in Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Treatment among ICU Patients Receiving Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV-ECMO): A Retrospective Case-Control Study.

Background: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has extended the survivability of critically ill patients beyond their unsupported prognosis and has widened the timeframe for making an informed decision about the goal of care. However, an extended time window for survival does not necessarily translate into a better outcome and the sustaining treatment is ultimately withdrawn in many patients. Emerging evidence has implicated the determining role of palliative care consult (PCC) in direction of the care that critically ill patients receive. Objective: To evaluate the impact of PCC in withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment (WOLST) among critically ill patients, who were placed on venovenous ECMO (VV-ECMO) at the intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary care hospital. Methods: In a retrospective observational study, electronic medical records of 750 patients admitted to the ICU of our hospital between January 1, 2015, and October 31, 2021, were reviewed. Data was collected for patients on VV-ECMO, for whom WOLST was withdrawn during the ICU stay. Clinical characteristics and the underlying reasons for WOLST were compared between those who received PCC (PCC group) and those who did not (non-PCC group). Results: A total of 95 patients were included in our analysis, 63 in the PCC group and 32 in the non-PCC group. The average age of the study population was 48.8 ± 12.6 years, and 64.2% were male. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of demographics or clinical characteristics at the time of ICU admission. The average duration of ICU stay and VV-ECMO were 14.1 ± 19.9 days and 9.4 ± 16.6 days, respectively. The number of PCC visits was correlated with the length of ICU stay. The average duration of ICU stay (40.3 ± 33.2 days vs 27.8 ± 19.3 days, P = .05) and ECMO treatment (31.9 ± 27 days vs 18.6 ± 16.1 days, P = .01) were significantly longer in patients receiving PCC than those not receiving PCC. However, the frequency of life sustaining measures or the underlying reasons for WOLST did not significantly differ between the two groups (P > .05). Conclusion: Among ICU patients requiring ECMO support, longer duration of ICU stay and treatment with a higher number of life-sustaining measures seemed to be correlated with the number of PCC visits. The underlying reasons for WOLST seem not to be affected by PCC.

Discussing goals of care for a delirious advanced cancer patient in the hospice setting.

In the United States, patient autonomy is generally considered the most important ethical principle; however, patients sometimes make decisions that are medically futile or in conflict with the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. Difficult issues are often compounded if the patient loses capacity and a surrogate must provide substituted judgments. Allowing autonomy free reign can sometimes be detrimental to patient care and contribute to family distress. Here, we describe the case of a terminally ill patient whose conflicting desires were to have "everything" done--including cardiopulmonary resuscitation--and to simultaneously avoid hospitalization and die peacefully at home.

Clinical characteristics of cancer patients referred early to supportive and palliative care.

BACKGROUND: Palliative care is evolving from end-of-life care to care provided earlier in the disease trajectory. We compared clinical characteristics between patients referred late in the course of their disease (late referrals, LRs) with patients referred earlier (early referrals, ERs). METHOD: Six hundred and ninety-five patients referred to the Supportive Care Center (SCC) with follow-up within 30 days were enrolled. One hundred ERs (expected survival ≥ 2 years or receiving treatment for curative intent, 14.4%) were compared with a random sample of 100/595 consecutive LRs (all others). RESULTS: ERs were younger (54.4 versus 59.5, p=0.009), more likely to have head and neck cancer (67% versus 6%, p<0.0001), alcoholism (15% versus 4%, p=0.014), and shorter disease duration until first palliative care consultation (3.8 months versus 16.2 months, p<0.0001). They were also more likely to be referred by radiation oncologists (49% versus 3%, p<0.0001), be referred for treatment-related side effects (70% versus 9%, p<0.0001), and receive more anticancer treatment (74% versus 48%, p=0.0002). Head and neck cancer and reason for referral were independent predictors for ERs (p<0.0001) in multivariate analysis. Baseline Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) symptoms were similar between ERs and LRs. Both groups exhibited improved ESAS scores at follow-up; LRs experienced greater improvement in the symptom distress score (-5.5 versus -3, p=0.007). The median total number of medical visits was higher in ERs (p<0.001); however, the median number of visits per month was higher in LRs (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ERs had different patient characteristics than LRs, and although ERs experience distress similar to that of LRs, their needs and outcomes differ.