Temporary Right Ventricular Assist Device Support for Acute Right Heart Failure: A Single-Center Experience.

INTRODUCTION: Severe right ventricular (RV) failure is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Although right ventricular assist devices (RVADs) are increasingly used for refractory RV failure, there is limited data on their short- and long-term outcomes. Therefore, we undertook this study to better understand our experience with temporary RVADs. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all RVADS performed from 2017 to 2021. Patients supported with surgical RVADs, the Protek Duo device, and the Impella RP device were included. Patients were stratified by the type of RVAD and by etiology of RV failure. Survival was assessed by the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: From 2017 to 2021, 42 patients underwent RVAD implantation: 32 with a Protek Duo, 6 with an Impella RP, and 4 with a surgical RVAD. Majority of patients were already supported with an alternate form of mechanical support. Most patients had impaired renal function, decreased hepatic function, and lactic acidosis at the time of cannulation. The median duration of RVAD support was 8.5 [5-19] d. Survival to decannulation was 68.4%, to discharge was 47.4%, and to 1-y was 40.2%. Multivariable analysis identified elevated total bilirubin levels to be associated with 30-d mortality while increased hemoglobin levels were protective. After RVAD cannulation, the median number of pressors and inotropes was lower (P < 0.01) and the lactic acidosis was less (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, RVAD support is associated with lower lactate levels, and decreased number of vasoactive medications, but is associated with significant morbidity and mortality.

Blood Product Utilization in Patients With COVID-19 on ECMO.

INTRODUCTION: Although extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been associated with improved outcomes in COVID patients with respiratory failure, data regarding the need for blood product utilization in this population is inadequate. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all COVID patients requiring ECMO support at our facility. Patient demographics, co-morbidities, measures of acuity, and blood product utilization were identified. Patients were stratified by the presence of a major bleed and the need for dialysis. The primary outcome was blood product utilization. Linear regression models were used to assess predictors of the need for blood products. RESULTS: From 2020 to 2021, 41 patients with COVID-19 were included in our study. Overall 1601 d of support, COVID ECMO patients received 755 units of packed red blood cells (PRBC), 51 units of fresh frozen plasma (FFP), 326 platelets, and 1702 cryoprecipitate, amounting to 18.4 units PRBC per patient or 3.30 units per week of ECMO support. Both major bleeding and the need for dialysis were associated with higher rates of transfusion of PRBC, FFP, and platelets. The average non-bleeding COVID ECMO patient who did not need dialysis required 2.17 units of PRBC, 0.12 units of FFP, 0.76 platelets, and 8.36 of cryoprecipitate per week of ECMO support. On multivariable linear regression analysis, each day on ECMO was associated with 0.30 [0.19-0.42, P < 0.01] units of PRBC. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, COVID ECMO is associated with a significant need for blood and blood products. Major bleeding and dialysis are important drivers of blood product requirements.

Intermediate-term survival and functional outcomes of COVID-19 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been associated with acceptable short-term survival in patients with refractory respiratory failure secondary to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. Previous studies have demonstrated acceptable long-term outcomes in patients supported with ECMO for respiratory failure of other etiologies. However, long-term survival and functional outcomes in COVID ECMO patients remain unknown. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all COVID patients requiring ECMO at our hospital. The primary outcomes measured were survival to discharge and contemporary survival. Secondary outcomes included two simple functional assessments: the ongoing need for oxygen supplementation and the ability to return to work. Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios were calculated using Cox hazards regression models. RESULTS: From 2020 to 2021, 48 COVID patients have been supported with ECMO at our hospital. Four patients remain on support and were excluded from further analysis. The average age was 47 ± 8 years, 34 (77%) were males, and the plurality (19, 43%) were Hispanic. Median duration of support was 23 (12-51) days. Median follow-up was 106 (29-226) days. Survival to discharge was 59%. Kaplan-Meier 180-day survival was 51%. Long-term survival conditioned on survival to discharge was 89%. In evaluating functional outcomes, the overwhelming majority of patients no longer required oxygen supplementation (74%), and most had returned to work (52%). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, COVID ECMO patients have acceptable intermediate-term survival with adequate functional recovery.

Bloodstream and respiratory coinfections in patients with COVID-19 on ECMO.

BACKGROUND: Although several studies have characterized the risk of coinfection in COVID pneumonia, the risk of the bloodstream and respiratory coinfection in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) supports severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is poorly understood. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of patients with COVID-19 ARDS on ECMO at a single center between January 2020 and December 2021. Patient characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Of 44 patients placed on ECMO support for COVID-19 ARDS, 30 (68.2%) patients developed a coinfection, and 14 (31.8%) patients did not. Most patients underwent venovenous ECMO (98%; 43/44) cannulation in the right internal jugular vein (98%; 43/44). Patients with coinfection had a longer duration of ECMO (34 [interquartile range, IQR: 19.5, 65] vs. 15.5 [IQR 11, 27.3] days; p = .02), intensive care unit (ICU; 44 [IQR: 27,75.5] vs 31 [IQR 20-39.5] days; p = .03), and hospital (56.5 [IQR 27,75.5] vs 37.5 [IQR: 20.5-43.3]; p = .02) length of stay. When stratified by the presence of a coinfection, there was no difference in hospital mortality (37% vs. 29%; p = .46) or Kaplan-Meier survival (logrank p = .82). Time from ECMO to first positive blood and respiratory culture were 12 [IQR: 3, 28] and 10 [IQR: 1, 15] days, respectively. Freedom from any coinfection was 50 (95% confidence interval: 37.2-67.2)% at 15 days from ECMO initiation. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high rate of co-infections in patients placed on ECMO for COVID-19 ARDS. Although patients with coinfections had a longer duration of extracorporeal life support, and longer length of stays in the ICU and hospital, survival was not inferior.

Early mobilization in coronavirus-19 patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia can be associated with refractory respiratory failure requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation(ECMO). Although ECMO has helped many COVID patients, optimal management strategies for these patients remain unknown. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all COVID patients requiring ECMO at our hospital. Six months into the pandemic, we changed our management strategy to focus on early mobilization. The early mobilization effort included tracheostomy within 48 h of cannulation, decreasing sedation, and an aggressive physical and occupational therapy program progressing toward early ambulation while on ECMO. The primary outcome measured was survival to discharge. The primary stratification was based on the mobilization strategy. RESULTS: From 2020 to 2021, 47 COVID patients have been supported with ECMO at our institution. Five are still in the hospital on ECMO. 39 (83%) were supported with venovenous ECMO while 8 (17%) were supported with venoarterial or a right ventricular assist device type configuration. All 47 (100%) were cannulated at bedside with transesophageal echocardiographic guidance. The average age was 47 ± 9 years; 36(77%) were male; and 20 (43%) were Hispanic. The median duration of support was 22 (11-44) days. Excluding those who remain in the hospital and on support, overall survival to discharge was 24/42 (57%). When stratified by mobilization strategy, early tracheostomy and mobilization were associated with significantly improved survival (74% [17/23] vs. 37% [7/19], p = .02). There were no changes in patient acuity or duration of support throughout the study period. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, early tracheostomy, decreased sedation, and aggressive mobilization of COVID-19 ECMO patients is associated with improved survival.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for large pulmonary emboli.

Massive and submassive pulmonary emboli (PE) are increasingly being treated with percutaneous lytic and embolectomy procedures. While these procedures are overwhelmingly safe, patients with significant right ventricular strain are at risk for hemodynamic compromise requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We conducted a retrospective study of all patients requiring ECMO support for PE from 2014 through 2022. The primary outcome was survival. Secondary outcomes included commonly encountered ECMO complications. From 2014 to 2022, 10 patients with submassive or massive PE required ECMO support. All 10 patients (100%) had right ventricular strain on echocardiography, 7 (70%) had a saddle PE, and 3 (30%) had extensive bilateral PE. Six (60%) patients required cardiopulmonary resuscitation prior to ECMO cannulation, and 4 (40%) were undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation while being cannulated. Nine (90%) patients were placed on venoarterial ECMO through the femoral vessels, while 1 (10%) was cannulated with right atrial to pulmonary artery ECMO. The median duration of support was 4 [3-8] days. During their course, 5 patients underwent percutaneous embolectomy, 1 underwent surgical embolectomy, and 4 underwent percutaneous lytic therapy. All patients (100%) survived to ECMO decannulation, and 6 (60%) survived to discharge. With a mean follow-up of 496 days, there were no postdischarge mortalities. In conclusion, although therapy for large PE is well tolerated, a small number of patients will experience periprocedural hemodynamic collapse requiring ECMO support. ECMO for PE patients is associated with acceptable morbidity and mortality. Further investigation is warranted to better characterize which patients are likely to require ECMO support.

Outcomes of surgical Impella placement in acute cardiogenic shock.

Introduction: Although a role for percutaneous Impella devices has been established, there is a paucity of data regarding the utility and outcomes of larger surgically implanted Impella devices. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of all surgical Impella implants at our institution. All Impella 5.0 and Impella 5.5 devices were included. The primary outcome was survival. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic and end-organ perfusion as well as commonly encountered surgical complications. Results: From 2012 to 2022, 90 surgical Impella devices were implanted. The median age was 63 [53-70] years, the mean creatinine was 2.07 ± 1.22 mg/dL, and the average lactate level was 3.32 ± 2.90 mmol/L. Prior to implantation, 47 patients (52%) were supported with vasoactive agents, while 43 (48%) were also supported with another device. The most common etiology of shock was acute on chronic heart failure (50, 56%), followed by acute myocardial infarction (22, 24%), and postcardiotomy (17, 19%). Overall, 69 patients (77%) survived to device removal, and 57 (65%) survived to hospital discharge. One-year survival was 54%. Neither etiology of heart failure nor device strategy was associated with 30-day or 1-year survival. On multivariable modeling, the number of vasoactive medications prior to device implantation was strongly associated with 30-day mortality (hazard ratio 1.94 [1.27-2.96], P < 0.01). Surgical Impella placement was associated with a significant decreased need for vasoactive infusions (P < 0.01) and decreased acidosis (P = 0.01). Conclusions: Surgical Impella support for patients in acute cardiogenic shock is associated with lower vasoactive medication use, improved hemodynamics, increased end-organ perfusion, and acceptable morbidity and mortality.

Managing Right Ventricular Failure After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implant at a Destination Therapy Center.

Although left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implant is associated with an increased survival in patients with end-stage heart failure, severe right ventricular failure requiring a right ventricular assist device (RVAD) placement is associated with increased short-term morbidity and mortality. Patients not eligible for transplant have limited options, which may impact decision-making and outcomes at nontransplant centers. We conducted a retrospective review of all LVAD implants at our nontransplant center. Primary stratification was by the need for a postoperative RVAD implant. The primary outcome was survival. The Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to further evaluate mortality. From 2017 to 2022, 128 patients underwent a primary LVAD implant and 24 (18.75%) required a perioperative RVAD placement. RVAD implant was associated with increased operative mortality (1.92% vs 33.33%, p <0.01) and decreased 1-year (91.29% vs 60.60%, p <0.01) and 2-year survival (84.05% vs 36.36%, p <0.01). However, in patients who survived their index hospitalization, 1-year (93.00% vs 91.67%, p = 0.78) and 2-year (86.16% vs 55.00%, p = 0.10) mortality were similar. On multivariable analysis, the need for a RVAD was associated with an increased hazard of 1-year (5.60 [1.96 to 16.01], p <0.01) and 2-year (5.17 [2.01 to 13.28], p <0.01) mortality. In conclusion, our series from a nontransplant center suggests that patients who survive the implant have acceptable short-term survival, even if they do not have a transplant option; thus, carefully selected patients with biventricular failure may benefit from an LVAD implant, even if an RVAD is needed.

An Interprofessional Approach to Mobilizing Patients With COVID-19 Receiving Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

OBJECTIVE: To assess survival outcomes with the intervention of an interprofessional mobilization program for patients with COVID-19 who were receiving venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). DESIGN: Preintervention and postintervention retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Survival outcomes of nonmobilized, adult patients (n = 16) with COVID-19 who were receiving VV-ECMO (May 2020 through December 2020) were compared with those of 26 patients who received a mobility care plan (January 2021 through November 2021). In the preintervention group, full sedation and paralysis were used. In the postintervention group, an early mobilization strategy involving interprofessional collaboration was introduced. RESULTS: The postintervention group had improved survival (73.1% vs 43.8%; P < .04); fewer days of receiving paralytics, fentanyl, and midazolam (P < .01 for all); but more days of dexmedetomidine, morphine, and ketamine administration (P < .01 for all). Concomitantly, more patients in the postintervention cohort received oral or transdermal analgesics, oral anxiolytics, and oral antipsychotics (P < .01 for all), and also required more VV-ECMO cannula adjustments (P = .03). CONCLUSION: Early mobilization of patients with COVID-19 who were receiving VV-ECMO improved survival rates but led to more cannula adjustments.

Directed Hypercapnia as a Strategy to Wean Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in COVID-19 Pneumonia.

Coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia with respiratory failure refractory to maximum medical therapy has been successfully managed with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. This report describes a process of using directed hypercapnia in 5 patients to wean them from prolonged extracorporeal support secondary to refractory hypercarbic respiratory failure.