Early hyperoxia and 28-day mortality in patients on venoarterial ECMO support for refractory cardiogenic shock: a bicenter retrospective propensity score-weighted analysis.

BACKGROUND: The mortality rate for a patient with a refractory cardiogenic shock on venoarterial (VA) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) remains high, and hyperoxia might worsen this prognosis. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the association between hyperoxia and 28-day mortality in this setting. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective bicenter study in two French academic centers. The study population comprised adult patients admitted for refractory cardiogenic shock. The following arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) variables were recorded for 48 h following admission: the absolute peak PaO2 (the single highest value measured during the 48 h), the mean daily peak PaO2 (the mean of each day's peak values), the overall mean PaO2 (the mean of all values over 48 h), and the severity of hyperoxia (mild: PaO2 < 200 mmHg, moderate: PaO2 = 200-299 mmHg, severe: PaO2 ≥ 300 mmHg). The main outcome was the 28-day all-cause mortality. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) derived from propensity scores was used to reduce imbalances in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: From January 2013 to January 2020, 430 patients were included and assessed. The 28-day mortality rate was 43%. The mean daily peak, absolute peak, and overall mean PaO2 values were significantly higher in non-survivors than in survivors. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, the mean daily peak PaO2, absolute peak PaO2, and overall mean PaO2 were independent predictors of 28-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval per 10 mmHg increment: 2.65 [1.79-6.07], 2.36 [1.67-4.82], and 2.85 [1.12-7.37], respectively). After IPW, high level of oxygen remained significantly associated with 28-day mortality (OR = 1.41 [1.01-2.08]; P = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: High oxygen levels were associated with 28-day mortality in patients on VA-ECMO support for refractory cardiogenic shock. Our results confirm the need for large randomized controlled trials on this topic.

Subclavian versus femoral arterial cannulations during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A propensity-matched comparison.

BACKGROUND: During peripheral extracorporeal veno-arterial membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) support, subclavian arterial cannulation provides, in comparison to femoral arterial cannulation, an anterograde flow which may prevent from left ventricular (LV) distention and improve outcomes. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of subclavian cannulation to femoral cannulation in reducing LV overdistension consequences, hemostatic complications and mortality. METHODS: This retrospective study conducted in two intensive care units of the Lille academic hospitals from January 2013 to December 2019 included 372 non-moribund adult patients supported by VA-ECMO. The primary endpoint was a new onset of pulmonary edema (PO) or LV unloading. Secondary endpoints were myocardial recovery, serious bleeding (according to Extracorporeal Life Support Organization definition), thrombotic complications (a composite of stroke, cannulated limb or mesenteric ischemia, intracardiac or aortic-root thrombosis) and 28 day mortality. Differences in outcomes were analyzed using propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability of treatment weighting adjustment (IPTW). RESULTS: As compared to femoral cannulation (n = 320 patients), subclavian cannulation (n = 52 patients) did not reduce the occurrence of new onset of PO or LV unloading after PSM [HR 0.99 (95% CI 0.51-1.91)]. There was no other difference in outcomes in PSM cohort. In IPTW adjustment cohort, subclavian cannulation was associated with reduced recovery and increased serious bleeding with four accidental decannulations observed. CONCLUSION: Subclavian artery cannulation was not associated with reduced LV distension related complications, thrombotic complications and 28 day mortality. Rather, it may increase serious bleeding and accidental decannulations, and reduce recovery. Therefore, subclavian cannulation should be limited to vascular accessibility issues.