Outcomes of 576 patients with extracorporeal life support for the treatment of perioperative cardiogenic shock.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to analyse the short- and long-term outcomes in patients who received extracorporeal life support for the treatment of perioperative low-output syndrome and identify risk factors for mortality. METHODS: All consecutive patients who received extracorporeal life-support system during or after cardiac surgery at a high-volume German cardiac centre between 2008 and 2017 were identified retrospectively and followed up to December 2023. This cohort was characterized, and long-term survival (>10 years) was analysed. Univariate and multivariable regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors for mortality. RESULTS: Five-hundred and seventy-six patients were included; 21.7% underwent isolated coronary bypass, 16.5% single valve surgery, 34.3% combined cardiac surgery and 13.2% heart transplantation. The system was implanted peripherally in 60.8% of patients. In-hospital and 1-year mortality for all patients was 66.0% and 77.7%, respectively. In the multivariable Cox adjustment, severe aortic valve stenosis, previous cardiac surgery and intra-aortic balloon pump were independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality (P < 0.05). Older age, severe mitral regurgitation and patients on insulin were predictors for long-term mortality (P < 0.05). However, peripheral cannulation significantly reduced mortality. There was no time-dependent interaction of perioperative stroke with mortality. For patients who were discharged alive, the estimated 10-year survival was 32.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of perioperative low-output syndrome with extracorporeal life-support systems is associated with poor outcome and only 34% of patients could be discharged successfully. Peripheral cannulation is prognostically favourable. Special attention should be paid to these patients because age, insulin therapy and severe mitral regurgitation are strong predictors for mortality after 10 years.

Functional Status and Quality of Life 6 Months After Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Therapy for COVID-19-Related Pulmonary Failure.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly used in COVID-19-related pulmonary failure and the number of patients recovering from COVID-19 is growing. Here, we assess survival and recovery 6 months after ECMO for COVID-19. From April 2020 to September 2021, n = 60 (60.5 [51.0-65.0] years, 23.3% female) were treated with venovenous/venoarterial ECMO for COVID-19. 41.7% were weaned off ECMO, survival-to-discharge was 40.0% (n = 24). Age (63.0 [60.0-66.8] vs. 55.0 [43.8-60.0] years, p < 0.001), vasoactive support (97.2% vs . 75.0%, p = 0.013), and pre-ECMO SOFA scores (13.0 [12.0-14.8] vs. 12.0 [10.0-13.8] p = 0.036) correlated with nonsurvival. All patients aged >65 years, with histories of neoplasia, immunocompromise, chronic renal failure, or frailty died. After 6 months, 20 were alive (6-month survival 33.3%, survival conditioned on survival-to-discharge 83.3%), with follow-up in 19. 57.9% showed no relevant, 26.3% moderate, 15.8% severe deficits. Cardiopulmonary status was satisfactory (mMRC level: 84.2% ≤2). 73.7% were independent in daily life. Cognitive impairments were frequent (52.6%). 26.3% showed moderate depression, 15.8% posttraumatic stress disorder. Social and work life were considerably affected. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation thus can serve as salvage therapy in COVID-19, but advanced age, immunocompromise, histories of neoplasia, and frailty must be considered as relative contraindications. Age, vasoactive support, and SOFA scores assist discriminating in daily practice. Deficits after 6 months are substantial, and efforts need to focus on long-term recovery.

Inter-hospital transfer of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-assisted patients: the hub and spoke network.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of cardiogenic shock (CS) in peripheral hospitals may be challenging when acute mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is not available. Tertiary care centers may provide mobile extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) teams to support the treatment of CS-patients externally. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed our single-center experience with a mobile ECMO team focussing on decision-making and survival data of CS-patients retrieved by ECMO support from peripheral hospitals to our tertiary care center between January 2012 and October 2018. RESULTS: A total number of 134 CS-patients have been retrieved by ECMO support to our center within the observation period. Forty-three (32%) died on the acute MCS device, while 59 (44%) patients could be weaned from the acute MCS. Twenty-nine (22%) were bridged to implantation of a durable MCS system and 6 were finally transplanted. The overall 1-year survival was 33%. Interestingly, advanced patient age did not significantly affect survival. CONCLUSIONS: Acute MCS for CS may be provided by experienced mobile teams allowing for retrieval of patients from peripheral hospitals to tertiary care centers. Relatively low survival rates oppose intensive material and human resources. It is therefore mandatory to constantly refine logistics and selection criteria.