[Open questions with respect to extracorporeal circulatory support 2024]. / Offene Fragen zur extrakorporalen Kreislaufunterstützung 2024.

The use of extracorporeal circulatory support, both for cardiogenic shock and during resuscitation, still presents many unanswered questions. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for such a resource-intensive treatment must be clearly defined, considering that these criteria are directly associated with the type and location of treatment. For example, it is worth questioning the viability of an extracorporeal resuscitation program in areas where it is impossible to achieve low-flow times under 60 min due to local limitations. Additionally, the best approach for further treatment, including whether it is necessary to regularly relieve the left ventricle, must be explored. To find answers to some of these questions, large-scale, multicenter, randomized studies and registers must be performed. Until then this treatment must be carefully considered before use.

Expert consensus on training and accreditation for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation an international, multidisciplinary modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: A multidisciplinary group of stakeholders were used to identify: (1) the core competencies of a training program required to perform in-hospital ECPR initiation (2) additional competencies required to perform pre-hospital ECPR initiation and; (3) the optimal training method and maintenance protocol for delivering an ECPR program. METHODS: A modified Delphi process was undertaken utilising two web based survey rounds and one virtual meeting. Experts rated the importance of different aspects of ECPR training, competency and governance on a 9-point Likert scale. A diverse, representative group was targeted. Consensus was achieved when greater than 70% respondents rated a domain as critical (> or = 7 on the 9 point Likert scale). RESULTS: 35 international ECPR experts from 9 countries formed the expert panel, with a median number of 14 years of ECMO practice (interquartile range 11-38). Participant response rates were 97% (survey round one), 63% (virtual meeting) and 100% (survey round two). After the second round of the survey, 47 consensus statements were formed outlining a core set of competencies required for ECPR provision. We identified key elements required to safely train and perform ECPR including skill pre-requisites, surrogate skill identification, the importance of competency-based assessment over volume of practice and competency requirements for successful ECPR practice and skill maintenance. CONCLUSIONS: We present a series of core competencies, training requirements and ongoing governance protocols to guide safe ECPR implementation. These findings can be used to develop training syllabus and guide minimum standards for competency as the growth of ECPR practitioners continues.