Using Artificial Intelligence to Predict Mechanical Ventilation Weaning Success in Patients with Respiratory Failure, Including Those with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

The management of mechanical ventilation (MV) remains a challenge in intensive care units (ICUs). The digitalization of healthcare and the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) has significantly influenced medical decision-making capabilities, potentially enhancing patient outcomes. Acute respiratory distress syndrome, an overwhelming inflammatory lung disease, is common in ICUs. Most patients require MV. Prolonged MV is associated with an increased length of stay, morbidity, and mortality. Shortening the MV duration has both clinical and economic benefits and emphasizes the need for better MV weaning management. AI and ML models can assist the physician in weaning patients from MV by providing predictive tools based on big data. Many ML models have been developed in recent years, dealing with this unmet need. Such models provide an important prediction regarding the success of the individual patient's MV weaning. Some AI models have shown a notable impact on clinical outcomes. However, there are challenges in integrating AI models into clinical practice due to the unfamiliar nature of AI for many physicians and the complexity of some AI models. Our review explores the evolution of weaning methods up to and including AI and ML as weaning aids.

Safety of tracheostomy during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support: A single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Some patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) require prolonged mechanical ventilation. An early tracheostomy strategy while on ECMO has appeared to be beneficial for these patients. This study aims to explore the safety of tracheostomy in ECMO patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational single-center study. RESULTS: Hundred and nine patients underwent tracheostomy (76 percutaneous and 33 surgical) during V-V ECMO support over an 8-year period. Patients with a percutaneous tracheostomy showed a significantly shorter ECMO duration [25.5 (17.3-40.1) vs 37.2 (26.5-53.2) days, p = 0.013] and a shorter ECMO-to-tracheostomy time [13.3 (8.5-19.7) vs 27.8 (16.3-36.9) days, p < 0.001] compared to those who underwent a surgical approach. There was no difference between the two strategies regarding both major and minor/no bleeding (p = 0.756). There was no difference in survival rate between patients who underwent percutaneous or surgical tracheostomy (p = 0.173). Patients who underwent an early tracheostomy (within 10 days from ECMO insertion) showed a significantly shorter hospital stay (p < 0.001) and a shorter duration of V-V ECMO support (p < 0.001). Our series includes 24 patients affected by COVID-19, who did not show significantly higher rates of major bleeding when compared to non-COVID-19 patients (p = 0.297). Within the COVID-19 subgroup, there was no difference in major bleeding rates between surgical and percutaneous approach (p = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous and surgical tracheostomy during ECMO have a similar safety profile in terms of bleeding risk and mortality. Percutaneous tracheostomy may favor a shorter duration of ECMO support and hospital stay and can be considered a safe alternative to surgical tracheostomy, even in COVID-19 patients, if relevant clinical expertise is available.

Thombosis, major bleeding, and survival in COVID-19 supported by veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the first vs second wave: a multicenter observational study in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Bleeding and thrombosis are major complications of veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). OBJECTIVES: To assess thrombosis, major bleeding (MB), and 180-day survival in patients supported by VV-ECMO between the first (March 1 to May 31, 2020) and second (June 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021) waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: An observational study of 309 consecutive patients (aged ≥18years) with severe COVID-19 supported by VV-ECMO was performed in 4 nationally commissioned ECMO centers in the United Kingdom. RESULTS: Median age was 48 (19-75) years, and 70.6% were male. Probabilities of survival, thrombosis, and MB at 180 days in the overall cohort were 62.5% (193/309), 39.8% (123/309), and 30% (93/309), respectively. In multivariate analysis, an age of >55 years (hazard ratio [HR], 2.29; 95% CI, 1.33-3.93; P = .003) and an elevated creatinine level (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.19-3.08; P = .008) were associated with increased mortality. Correction for duration of VV-ECMO support, arterial thrombosis alone (HR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.5-5.9; P = .002) or circuit thrombosis alone (HR, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.4-6.3; P < .001) but not venous thrombosis increased mortality. MB during ECMO had a 3-fold risk (95% CI, 2.6-5.8, P < .001) of mortality. The first wave cohort had more males (76.7% vs 64%; P = .014), higher 180-day survival (71.1% vs 53.3%; P = .003), more venous thrombosis alone (46.4% vs 29.2%; P = .02), and lower circuit thrombosis (9.2% vs 28.1%; P < .001). The second wave cohort received more steroids (121/150 [80.6%] vs 86/159 [54.1%]; P < .0001) and tocilizumab (20/150 [13.3%] vs 4/159 [2.5%]; P = .005). CONCLUSION: MB and thrombosis are frequent complications in patients on VV-ECMO and significantly increase mortality. Arterial thrombosis alone or circuit thrombosis alone increased mortality, while venous thrombosis alone had no effect. MB during ECMO support increased mortality by 3.9-fold.

A Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Managed With Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the First and Second Waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVES: Early studies of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in COVID-19 have revealed similar outcomes to historical cohorts. Changes in the disease and treatments have led to differences in the patients supported on venovenous ECMO in the first and second waves. We aimed to compare these two groups in both the acute and follow-up phase. DESIGN: Retrospective single-center cohort study comparing mortality at censoring date (November 30, 2021) and decannulation, patient characteristics, complications and lung function and quality of life (QOL-by European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 3 Level Version) at first follow-up in patients supported on venovenous ECMO between wave 1 and wave 2 of the COVID-19 pandemic. SETTING: Critical care department of a severe acute respiratory failure service. PATIENTS: Patients supported on ECMO for COVID-19 between wave 1 (March 17, 2020, to August 31, 2020) and wave 2 (January 9, 2020, to May 25, 2021). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three patients were included in our analysis. Survival at censoring date (χ 2 , 6.35; p = 0.012) and decannulation (90.4% vs 70.0%; p < 0.001) was significantly lower in the second wave, while duration of ECMO run was longer (12.0 d [18.0-30.0 d] vs 29.5 d [15.5-58.3 d]; p = 0.005). Wave 2 patients had longer application of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) prior to ECMO and a higher frequency of barotrauma. Patient age and NIV use were independently associated with increased mortality (odds ratio 1.07 [1.01-1.14]; p = 0.025 and 3.37 [1.12-12.60]; p = 0.043, respectively). QOL and lung function apart from transfer coefficient of carbon monoxide corrected for hemoglobin was similar at follow-up across the waves. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with COVID-19 supported on ECMO in both waves survived in the short and longer term. At follow-up patients had similar lung function and QOL across the two waves. This suggests that ECMO has an ongoing role in the management of a carefully selected group of patients with COVID-19.

Timing of Lung Transplant Referral in Patients with Severe COVID-19 Lung Injury Supported by ECMO.

Severe respiratory failure caused by COVID-19 often requires mechanical ventilation, including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). In rare cases, lung transplantation (LTx) may be considered as a last resort. However, uncertainties remain about patient selection and optimal timing for referral and listing. This retrospective study analyzed patients with severe COVID-19 who were supported by veno-venous ECMO and listed for LTx between July 2020 and June 2022. Out of the 20 patients in the study population, four who underwent LTx were excluded. The clinical characteristics of the remaining 16 patients were compared, including nine who recovered and seven who died while awaiting LTx. The median duration from hospitalization to listing was 85.5 days, and the median duration on the waitlist was 25.5 days. Younger age was significantly associated with a higher likelihood of recovery without LTx after a median of 59 days on ECMO, compared to those who died at a median of 99 days. In patients with severe COVID-19-induced lung damage supported by ECMO, referral to LTx should be delayed for 8-10 weeks after ECMO initiation, particularly for younger patients who have a higher probability of spontaneous recovery and may not require LTx.

Thoracic surgery in patients on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has generated a new type of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) arising as a complication of COVID-19 pneumonia. Extreme cases require the support of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Here we present the outcomes of patients that underwent surgical tracheostomy or thoracic surgery at a single tertiary centre whilst on ECMO support for COVID-19 related ARDS. METHODS: 18 patients requiring thoracic input whilst on ECMO support during the first wave of COVID-19 (March-June 2020) were included. Thoracic surgery was required both for performing surgical tracheostomies in the operating theatre and for treating emergencies arising under the ECMO treatment such as bleeding complications. RESULTS: Thirteen patients underwent a surgical tracheostomy, whilst five patients had an invasive thoracic procedure. Anticoagulation was withheld for at least 12 h in the perioperative setting regardless of the indication. One patient was re-operated for haemothorax immediately after the end of the primary operation. 94.5% of the patients were successfully decannulated from ECMO support. Overall 30-day mortality in the cohort was 5.5% (1/18). CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic surgeons can play a valuable role in supporting an ECMO unit during the COVID pandemic, by treating ECMO related complications and by safely performing surgical tracheostomies. Withholding anticoagulation in the perioperative window was not associated with increased thromboembolic events and is desirable when interventions or surgery is indicated in this patient cohort to avoid excessive bleeding.

In-hospital and 6-month outcomes in patients with COVID-19 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (EuroECMO-COVID): a multicentre, prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been widely used in patients with COVID-19, but uncertainty remains about the determinants of in-hospital mortality and data on post-discharge outcomes are scarce. The aims of this study were to investigate the variables associated with in-hospital outcomes in patients who received ECMO during the first wave of COVID-19 and to describe the status of patients 6 months after ECMO initiation. METHODS: EuroECMO-COVID is a prospective, multicentre, observational study developed by the European Extracorporeal Life Support Organization. This study was based on data from patients aged 16 years or older who received ECMO support for refractory COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic-from March 1 to Sept 13, 2020-at 133 centres in 21 countries. In-hospital mortality and mortality 6 months after ECMO initiation were the primary outcomes. Mixed-Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate associations between patient and management-related variables (eg, patient demographics, comorbidities, pre-ECMO status, and ECMO characteristics and complications) and in-hospital deaths. Survival status at 6 months was established through patient contact or institutional charts review. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04366921, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between March 1 and Sept 13, 2020, 1215 patients (942 [78%] men and 267 [22%] women; median age 53 years [IQR 46-60]) were included in the study. Median ECMO duration was 15 days (IQR 8-27). 602 (50%) of 1215 patients died in hospital, and 852 (74%) patients had at least one complication. Multiorgan failure was the leading cause of death (192 [36%] of 528 patients who died with available data). In mixed-Cox analyses, age of 60 years or older, use of inotropes and vasopressors before ECMO initiation, chronic renal failure, and time from intubation to ECMO initiation of 4 days or more were associated with higher in-hospital mortality. 613 patients did not die in hospital, and 547 (95%) of 577 patients for whom data were available were alive at 6 months. 102 (24%) of 431 patients had returned to full-time work at 6 months, and 57 (13%) of 428 patients had returned to part-time work. At 6 months, respiratory rehabilitation was required in 88 (17%) of 522 patients with available data, and the most common residual symptoms included dyspnoea (185 [35%] of 523 patients) and cardiac (52 [10%] of 514 patients) or neurocognitive (66 [13%] of 512 patients) symptoms. INTERPRETATION: Patient's age, timing of cannulation (<4 days vs ≥4 days from intubation), and use of inotropes and vasopressors are essential factors to consider when analysing the outcomes of patients receiving ECMO for COVID-19. Despite post-discharge survival being favourable, persisting long-term symptoms suggest that dedicated post-ECMO follow-up programmes are required. FUNDING: None.

Percutaneous oxygenated right ventricular assist device for pulmonary embolism: A case series.

Acute right ventricular (RV) failure following massive pulmonary embolism (PE) can have significant hemodynamic consequences and is the mode of death. Temporary mechanical circulatory support can provide tissue perfusion required while thrombectomy or lysis-aimed therapies act to relieve the thrombotic obstruction. Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) has conventionally been the first line MCS. A more selective approach to RV support has been advocated in the form of an extracorporeal right ventricular assist device (RVAD) as it mitigates some of the shortcomings of V-A ECMO. We present the first case series of four patients who received fully percutaneous RVAD, with an integrated oxygenator forming an Oxy-RVAD, for selective right heart support following massive PE, including the application of single-access dual-lumen right atrium to pulmonary artery cannula. All patients achieved RV recovery and were successfully weaned from oxy-RVAD support within 5-10 days demonstrating the feasibility of selective percutaneous right heart support in managing these challenging patients.

Single-center experience of temporary-permanent pacemaker use in COVID-19 patients supported with veno-venous ECMO: A case series.

INTRODUCTION: In the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, nine out of 129 patients (7%) developed life-threatening bradycardia episodes ultimately requiring a TPPM, whilst being supported with VV-ECMO for severe COVID-19 ARDS in our tertiary cardio-pulmonary failure center. ANALYSIS: All subjects had asystole due to sinus node dysfunction and experienced at least one episode involving cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Most bradycardic events were seen in the context of vagal hypersensitivity. Mean time from general ICU admission to TPPM insertion was 20.6 ± 8.9 days. One patient developed a large chest wall hematoma weeks after TPPM implantation, no other TPPM-related issues were observed. No patient required a long-term pacing system. Six-months survival rate was high (89%). CONCLUSION: These findings suggested that transient life-threatening sinus node disease is not uncommon in ECMO-dependent COVID-19 ARDS patients. TPPM with an active fixation lead is sometimes needed to facilitate ongoing ICU care, however, long-term permanent pacing was not required.

Survival benefit of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in severe COVID-19: a multi-centre-matched cohort study.

PURPOSE: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has become an established therapy for severe respiratory failure in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The added benefit of receiving ECMO in COVID-19 remains uncertain. The aim of this study is to analyse the impact of receiving ECMO at specialist centres on hospital mortality. METHODS: A multi-centre retrospective study was conducted in COVID-19 patients from 111 hospitals, referred to two specialist ECMO centres in the United Kingdom (UK) (March 2020 to February 2021). Detailed covariate data were contemporaneously curated from electronic referral systems. We analysed added benefit of ECMO treatment in specialist centres using propensity score matching techniques. RESULTS: 1363 patients, 243 receiving ECMO, were analysed. The best matching technique generated 209 matches, with a marginal odds ratio (OR) for mortality of 0.44 (95% CI 0.29-0.68, p < 0.001) and absolute mortality reduction of 18.2% (44% vs 25.8%, p < 0.001) for treatment with ECMO in a specialist centre. CONCLUSION: We found ECMO provided at specialist centres conferred significant survival benefit. Where resources and specialism allow, ECMO should be widely offered.

Cardiohelp System use in school age children and adolescents at a center with interfacility mobile extracorporeal membrane oxygenation capability.

Cardiohelp System use for pediatric extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) beyond the transport setting is sparsely described in literature. We report the use of Getinge's Cardiohelp System in children and integrated utilization of Mobile ECMO Retrieval Team (MERT) at an all-age specialized cardiorespiratory center. Electronic database of all patients under 16 years of age who received ECMO with use of the Cardiohelp System between January 2018 and March 2020 was retrospectively reviewed and analyzed for demographics, set-up, complications, and outcomes. Out of 41 patients, seven patients (four in middle childhood, three in early teenage) with median age of 10 years (range 8.8-15.6) were supported with use of Cardiohelp System. Median weight and height were 34 kg (range 28-53) and 145 cm (range 134-166) respectively. Initial ECMO deployment was veno-arterial (V-A) in five patients and veno-venous (V-V) in two. There were three interhospital transfers by our MERT, and 12 intrahospital transfers for interventions or imaging. The median ECMO therapy was 7 days (range 4-25), with standard 3/8-inch tubing and ECMO flow rate range at 56-100 mL/kg/min (1.89-5.0 LPM). There were two circuit changes and three reconfigurations of support. Two patients received continuous veno-venous hemofiltration via ECMO circuit. The 90-day and 180-day survival rates were 100% (including two heart transplants at day 7 and day 8). There were no transport-related or circuit-related complications during the 1750 h of Cardiohelp use. Cardiohelp System use is safe in pediatric patients for diverse application of ECMO support including inter- and intrahospital transfers.

Impact of major bleeding and thrombosis on 180-day survival in patients with severe COVID-19 supported with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the United Kingdom: a multicentre observational study.

Bleeding and thrombosis are major complications in patients supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). In this multicentre observational study of 152 consecutive patients (≥18 years) with severe COVID-19 supported by veno-venous (VV) ECMO in four UK commissioned centres during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (1 March to 31 May 2020), we assessed the incidence of major bleeding and thrombosis and their association with 180-day mortality. Median age (range) was 47 years (23-65) and 75% were male. Overall, the 180-day survival was 70·4% (107/152). The rate of major bleeding was 30·9% (47/152), of which intracranial bleeding (ICH) was 34% (16/47). There were 96 thrombotic events (63·1%) consisting of venous 44·7% [68/152 of which 66·2% were pulmonary embolism (PE)], arterial 18·6% (13/152) and ECMO circuit thrombosis 9·9% (15/152). In multivariate analysis, only raised lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) at the initiation of VV ECMO was associated with an increased risk of thrombosis [hazard ratio (HR) 1·92, 95% CI 1·21-3·03]. Major bleeding and ICH were associated with 3·87-fold (95% CI 2·10-7·23) and 5·97-fold [95% confidence interval (CI) 2·36-15·04] increased risk of mortality and PE with a 2·00-fold (95% CI1·09-3·56) risk of mortality. This highlights the difficult balancing act often encountered when managing coagulopathy in COVID-19 patients supported with ECMO.

Utility of echocardiographic right ventricular subcostal strain in critical care.

AIMS: Right ventricular (RV) strain is a known predictor of outcomes in various heart and lung pathologies but has been considered too technically challenging for routine use in critical care. We examined whether RV strain acquired from the subcostal view, frequently more accessible in the critically ill, is an alternative to conventionally derived RV strain in intensive care. METHODS AND RESULTS: RV strain data were acquired from apical and subcostal views on transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in 94 patients (35% female), mean age 50.5 ± 15.2 years, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VVECMO) (44%). RV strain values from the apical (mean ± standard deviation; -20.4 ± 6.7) and subcostal views (-21.1 ± 7) were highly correlated (Pearson's r -0.89, P < 0.001). RV subcostal strain correlated moderately well with other echocardiography parameters including tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (r -0.44, P < 0.001), RV systolic velocity (rho = -0.51, P < 0.001), fractional area change (r -0.66, P < 0.01), and RV outflow tract velocity time integral (r -0.49, P < 0.001). VVECMO was associated with higher RV subcostal strain (non-VVECMO -19.6 ± 6.7 vs. VVECMO -23.2 ± 7, P = 0.01) but not apical RV strain. On univariate analysis, RV subcostal strain was weakly associated with survival at 30 days (R2 = 0.04, P = 0.05, odds ratio =1.08) while apical RV was not (P = 0.16). CONCLUSION: RV subcostal deformation imaging is a reliable surrogate for conventionally derived strain in critical care and may in time prove to be a useful diagnostic marker in this cohort.

Managing Harlequin Syndrome in VA-ECMO - do not forget the right ventricle.

Harlequin Syndrome (also known as North-South Syndrome) is a complication of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) that can occur when left ventricular function starts to recover. While most commonly due to continued impaired gas exchange in the lungs, we present a case caused by right ventricular dysfunction, successfully managed by conversion of the ECMO circuit to a veno-veno-arterial (VV-A) configuration.

Near-fatal Panton-Valentine leukocidin-positive Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia, shock and complicated extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cannulation: A case report.

BACKGROUND: Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL) is an exotoxin secreted by Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus), responsible for skin and soft tissue infections. As a cause of severe necrotising pneumonia, it is associated with a high mortality rate. A rare entity, the epidemiology of PVL S. aureus (PVL-SA) pneumonia as a complication of influenza coinfection, particularly in young adults, is incompletely understood. CASE SUMMARY: An adolescent girl presented with haemoptysis and respiratory distress, deteriorated rapidly, with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and profound shock requiring extensive, prolonged resuscitation, emergency critical care and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Cardiac arrest and a rare complication of ECMO cannulation necessitated intra-procedure extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, i.e., venoarterial ECMO. Coordinated infectious disease, microbiology and Public Health England engagement identified causative agents as PVL-SA and influenza A/H3N2 from bronchial aspirates within hours. Despite further complications of critical illness, the patient made an excellent recovery with normal cognitive function. The coordinated approach of numerous multidisciplinary specialists, nursing staff, infection control, specialist cardiorespiratory support, hospital services, both adult and paediatric and Public Health are testimony to what can be achieved to save life against expectation, against the odds. The case serves as a reminder of the deadly nature of PVL-SA when associated with influenza and describes a rare complication of ECMO cannulation. CONCLUSION: PVL-SA can cause severe ARDS and profound shock, with influenza infection. A timely coordinated multispecialty approach can be lifesaving.

Six Month Mortality in Patients with COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Viral Pneumonitis Managed with Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

A significant proportion of patients with COVID-19 develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with high risk of death. The efficacy of veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) for COVID-19 on longer-term outcomes, unlike in other viral pneumonias, is unknown. In this study, we aimed to compare the 6 month mortality of patients receiving VV-ECMO support for COVID-19 with a historical viral ARDS cohort. Fifty-three consecutive patients with COVID-19 ARDS admitted for VV-ECMO to the Royal Brompton Hospital between March 17, 2020 and May 30, 2020 were identified. Mortality, patient characteristics, complications, and ECMO parameters were then compared to a historical cohort of patients with non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia. At 6 months survival was significantly higher in the COVID-19 than in the non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia cohort (84.9% vs. 66.0%, p = 0.040). Patients with COVID-19 had an increased Murray score (3.50 vs. 3.25, p = 0.005), a decreased burden of organ dysfunction (sequential organ failure score score [8.76 vs. 10.42, p = 0.004]), an increased incidence of pulmonary embolism (69.8% vs. 24.5%, p < 0.001) and in those who survived to decannulation longer ECMO runs (19 vs. 11 days, p = 0.001). Our results suggest that survival in patients supported with EMCO for COVID-19 are at least as good as those treated for non-COVID-19 viral ARDS.