Lactate Dehydrogenase and Hemorrhagic Stroke During Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Hemorrhagic stroke (HS) is a devastating complication during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) but markers of risk stratification during COVID-19 are unknown. Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) is a readily available biomarker of cell injury and permeability. We sought to determine whether an elevated LDH before ECMO placement is related to the occurrence of HS during ECMO for COVID-19. METHODS: Adult patients with COVID-19 requiring ECMO between March 2020 and February 2022 were included. LDH values prior to ECMO placement were captured. Patients were categorized into high (> 750 U/L) or low (≤ 750 U/L) LDH groups. Multivariable regression modeling was used to determine the association between LDH and HS during ECMO. RESULTS: There were 520 patients that underwent ECMO placement in 17 centers and 384 had an available LDH. Of whom, 122 (32%) had a high LDH. The overall incidence of HS was 10.9%, and patients with high LDH had a higher incidence of HS than those with low LDH level (17% vs 8%, p = 0.007). At 100 days, the probability of a HS was 40% in the high LDH group and 23% in those with a low LDH, p = 0.002. After adjustment for clinical covariates, high LDH remained associated with subsequent HS (aHR: 2.64, 95% CI 1.39-4.92). Findings were similar when restricting to patients supported by venovenous ECMO only. CONCLUSION: Elevated LDH prior to ECMO cannulation is associated with a higher incidence of HS during device support. LDH can risk stratify cases for impending cerebral bleeding during ECMO.

Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Survival Improves With Multidisciplinary Approach.

BACKGROUND: Continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices have revolutionized the management of advanced heart failure. Device complications continue to limit survival, but enhanced management strategies have shown promise. This study compared outcomes for HeartMate II recipients before and after implementation of a multidisciplinary continuous support heart team (HTMCS) strategy. METHODS: Between January 2012 and December 2016, 124 consecutive patients underwent primary HeartMate II implantation at our institution. In January 2015, we instituted a HTMCS approach consisting of (1) daily simultaneous cardiology/cardiac surgery/critical care/pharmacy/coordinator rounds, (2) pharmacist-directed anticoagulation, (3) speed optimization echocardiogram before discharge, (4) comprehensive device thrombosis screening and early intervention, (5) blood pressure clinic with pulsatility-adjusted goals, (6) early follow-up after discharge and individual long-term coordinator/cardiologist assignment, and (7) systematic basic/advanced/expert training and credentialing of ancillary in-hospital providers. All patients completed 1-year of follow-up. RESULTS: Demographic characteristics for pre-HTMCS (n = 71) and HTMCS (n = 53) groups, including age (55.8 ± 12.1 versus 52.5 ± 14.1 years, p = not significant), percentage of men (77.5% versus 71.7%, p = not significant), and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support class 3 (84.5% versus 83.0%, p = not significant), were comparable. One-year survival was 74.6% versus 100% for the pre-HTMCS and HTMCS groups, respectively (p = 0.0002). One-year survival free of serious adverse events (reoperation to replace device or disabling stroke) was 70.4% versus 84.9% for the pre-HTMCS and HTMCS groups, respectively (p = 0.059). Event per patient-year rates for disabling stroke (0.15 versus 0, p = 0.019), gastrointestinal bleeding (0.87 versus 0.51, p = 0.11), and driveline infection (0.24 versus 0.10, p = 0.18) were lower for the HTMCS group, whereas pump thrombosis requiring device exchange was higher (0.09 versus 0.18, p = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a comprehensive multidisciplinary approach substantially improved outcomes for recipients of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices.

Severe Burnout Is Common Among Critical Care Physician Assistants.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of and risk factors for burnout among critical care medicine physician assistants. DESIGN: Online survey. SETTINGS: U.S. ICUs. SUBJECTS: Critical care medicine physician assistant members of the Society of Critical Care Medicine coupled with personal contacts. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We used SurveyMonkey to query critical care medicine physician assistants on demographics and the full 22-question Maslach Burnout Inventory, a validated tool comprised of three subscales-emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and achievement. Multivariate regression was performed to identify factors independently associated with severe burnout on at least one subscale and higher burnout scores on each subscale and the total inventory. From 431 critical care medicine physician assistants invited, 135 (31.3%) responded to the survey. Severe burnout was seen on at least one subscale in 55.6%-10% showed evidence of severe burnout on the "exhaustion" subscale, 44% on the "depersonalization" subscale, and 26% on the "achievement" subscale. After multivariable adjustment, caring for fewer patients per shift (odds ratio [95% CI]: 0.17 [0.05-0.57] for 1-5 vs 6-10 patients; p = 0.004) and rarely providing futile care (0.26 [0.07-0.95] vs providing futile care often; p = 0.041) were independently associated with having less severe burnout on at least one subscale. Those caring for 1-5 patients per shift and those providing futile care rarely also had a lower depersonalization scores; job satisfaction was independently associated with having less exhaustion, less depersonalization, a greater sense of personal achievement, and a lower overall burnout score. CONCLUSIONS: Severe burnout is common in critical care medicine physician assistants. Higher patient-to-critical care medicine physician assistant ratios and provision of futile care are risk factors for severe burnout.

Pulseless Oximetry: A Preliminary Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Pulse oximetry fails when pulsations are weak or absent, common in patients with continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). We developed a method to measure arterial oxygenation (Sao2) noninvasively in pulseless patients with LVADs. METHODS: The technique involves 5- to 10-s occlusions of radial and ulnar arteries on one hand. A fingertip is transilluminated alternately with light-emitting diodes emitting 660 nm (red) and 905 nm (infrared). During the approximately 1 s after release of occlusion, changing attenuance of each wavelength is measured and their red/infrared arterial blood attenuance ratio (R/IR) calculated. We studied five normal subjects breathing hyperoxic, normoxic, or hypoxic gas mixtures to establish a calibration curve, using standard pulse oximetry as the gold standard. We also studied seven pulseless patients with LVADs (two studied twice) at clinically determined oxygenation. RESULTS: Normal subject data showed close correlation of oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry (Spo2) with R/IR, (Spo2 = 111 - [26.7 × R/IR]; R2 = 0.975). For patients with LVADs, predicted Sao2 (from the calibration curve) tended to underestimate measured Sao2 (from arterial blood) by a clinically insignificant 1.1 ± 1.6 percentage points (mean ± SD), maximum 3.4 percentage points. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary results in a small number of patients demonstrate that pulseless oximetry can be used to estimate arterial saturation with acceptable accuracy. A noninvasive oximeter that does not rely on pulsatile flow would be a valuable advance in assessing oxygenation in patients with LVADs, for whom the only current option is arterial puncture, which is painful, risks arterial injury, and only provides a snapshot evaluation of oxygenation.

Monitoring of the adult patient on venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) provides mechanical support to the patient with cardiac or cardiopulmonary failure. This paper reviews the physiology of VA ECMO including the determinants of ECMO flow and gas exchange. The efficacy of this therapy may be determined by assessing patient hemodynamics and device flow, overall gas exchange support, markers of adequate oxygen delivery, and pulsatility of the arterial blood pressure waveform.