Infected Thrombosis Leading to Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Dysfunction in Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension.

Nosocomial infections and thrombosis are frequent complications during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Preventative measures and close monitoring for early recognition of these complications are imperative in patients supported with ECMO. We report the case of a 41 year old female on veno-venous ECMO awaiting surgical thrombectomy for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension that developed profound bacteremia leading to gross purulence and thrombosis of the membrane oxygenator. Recannulation in addition to targeted antibiotics, frequent cultures, imaging, and surgery were diagnostic and therapeutic interventions that led to ultimate resolution.

Outcomes following additional drainage during veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A single-center retrospective study.

Refractory hypoxemia during veno-venous (V-V) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) may require an additional cannula (VV-V ECMO) to improve oxygenation. This intervention includes risk of recirculation and other various adverse events (AEs) such as injury to the lung, cannula malpositioning, bleeding, circuit or cannula thrombosis requiring intervention (i.e., clot), or cerebral injury. During the study period, 23 of 142 V-V ECMO patients were converted to VV-V utilizing two separate cannulas for bi-caval drainage with an additional upper extremity cannula placed for return. Of those, 21 had COVID-19. In the first 24 h after conversion, ECMO flow rates were higher (5.96 vs 5.24 L/min, p = .002) with no significant change in pump speed (3764 vs 3630 revolutions per minute [RPMs], p = .42). Arterial oxygenation (PaO2) increased (87 vs 64 mmHg, p < .0001) with comparable pre-oxygenator venous saturation (61 vs 53.3, p = .12). By day 5, flows were similar to pre-conversion values at lower pump speed but with improved PaO2. Unadjusted survival was similar in those converted to VV-V ECMO compared to V-V ECMO alone (70% [16/23] vs 66.4% [79/119], p = .77). In a mixed effect regression model, any incidence of AEs, demonstrated a negative impact on PaO2 in the first 48 h but not at day 5. VV-V ECMO improved oxygenation with increasing flows without a significant difference in AEs or pump speed. AEs transiently impacted oxygenation. VV-V ECMO is effective and feasible strategy for refractory hypoxemia on VV-ECMO allowing for higher flow rate and unchanged pump speed.

Early Tracheostomy May Be Performed Safely in Obese COVID-19 Patients Supported on VV-ECMO.

OBJECTIVE: Obese patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated acute respiratory failure (ARDS) often require prolonged intubation. However, data are sparse regarding optimal tracheostomy timing in obese adults with COVID-19 requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). This study retrospectively describes the course of obese patients with COVID-19 who underwent tracheostomy on VV-ECMO between March 2020 and December 2022. METHODS: There were 62 participants with a median age of 43 (interquartile range [IQR] 33 to 53) years and a median body mass index of 42 (IQR 34 to 50) kg/m2 who received VV-ECMO for COVID-19-associated ARDS. Of those, 42 underwent tracheostomy on VV-ECMO, and 50% (n = 21) of the 42 patients underwent early (within 14 days of initiated ventilatory support) tracheostomy. RESULTS: Among patients who received tracheostomies, the combined respiratory tract and lung parenchymal bleeding rate was 29% (n = 12), but only 7% required surgical intervention for bleeding from the tracheostomy site (n = 3). The hospital length of stay (LOS) was 42 (IQR 36 to 57) days, and mortality rate was 38% (n = 16). Tracheostomy timing was not associated with differences in respiratory tract bleeding, mechanical ventilatory support duration, VV-ECMO support duration, intensive care unit LOS, hospital LOS, mortality, or survival probability. CONCLUSIONS: Although an individualized and holistic approach to clinical decision making continues to be necessary, the findings of this study suggest that early tracheostomy may be performed safely in obese patients with COVID-19 on VV-ECMO.

Pneumothorax in acute respiratory distress syndrome on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support.

INTRODUCTION: Pneumothorax is associated with poor prognosis in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We sought to examine the outcomes of patients who are supported on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) and develop a pneumothorax. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all adult VV ECMO patients supported for ARDS between 8/2014-7/2020 at our institution, excluding patients with recent lung resection and trauma. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients with a pneumothorax to those without a pneumothorax. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty patients with ARDS on VV ECMO were analyzed. Of those, 213 did not have a pneumothorax and 67 did. Patients with a pneumothorax had a longer duration of ECMO support (30 days [16-55] versus 12 [7-22], p < 0.001) and hospital length of stay (51 days [27-93] versus 29 [18-49], p < 0.001), and lower survival-to-discharge (58.2% versus 77.5%, p = 0.002) compared to patients without a pneumothorax. Controlling for age, BMI, sex, RESP score and pre-ECMO ventilator days, the odds ratio of survival-to-discharge was 0.41 (95% CI 0.22-0.78) in patients with a pneumothorax compared to those without. There was a lower incidence of significant bleeding when chest tubes were placed by proceduralist services (2.4% versus 16.2%, p = 0.03). Removal of the chest tube prior to ECMO decannulation compared to removal after decannulation was associated with need for replacement (14.3% versus 0%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Patients who develop a pneumothorax and are supported with VV ECMO for ARDS have longer duration on ECMO and decreased survival. Further studies are needed to assess risk factors for development of pneumothorax in this patient population.

Contralateral Lower Extremity Ischemia on Femoral Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

Ipsilateral lower extremity ischemia is a common and morbid complication during veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). The cannula can impede ipsilateral distal arterial flow leading to critical limb ischemia. Cannula size, placement, and utilization of distal perfusion catheters are strategies that have been used to prevent this complication. We report the novel case of a 19-year-old female on VA-ECMO complicated by contralateral lower extremity ischemia. Diagnosis was made by computed tomography, and with repositioning of the femoral arterial cannula, she had a complete resolution of symptoms.

COVID-19 outcomes of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory failure vs historical cohort of non-COVID-19 viral infections.

INTRODUCTION: Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has become a support modality for patients with acute respiratory failure refractory to standard therapies. VV ECMO has been increasingly used during the current COVID-19 pandemic for patients with refractory respiratory failure. The object of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of VV ECMO in patients with COVID-19 compared to patients with non-COVID-19 viral infections. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients supported with VV ECMO between 8/2014 and 8/2020 whose etiology of illness was a viral pulmonary infection. The primary outcome of this study was to evaluate in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included length of ECMO course, ventilator duration, hospital length of stay, incidence of adverse events through ECMO course. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were included (35 COVID-19 vs 54 non-COVID-19). Forty (74%) of the non-COVID-19 patients had influenza virus. Prior to cannulation, COVID-19 patients had longer ventilator duration (3 vs 1 day, p = .003), higher PaCO2 (64 vs 53 mmHg, p = .012), and white blood cell count (14 vs 9 ×103/µL, p = .004). Overall in-hospital mortality was 33.7% (n = 30). COVID-19 patients had a higher mortality (49% vs. 24%, p = .017) when compared to non-COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 survivors had longer median time on ECMO than non-COVID-19 survivors (24.4 vs 16.5 days p = .03) but had a similar hospital length of stay (HLOS) (41 vs 48 Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenationdays p = .33). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients supported with VV ECMO have a higher mortality than non-COVID-19 patients. While COVID-19 survivors had significantly longer VV ECMO runs than non-COVID-19 survivors, HLOS was similar. This data add to a growing body of literature supporting the use of ECMO for potentially reversible causes of respiratory failure.

A descriptive evaluation of causes of death in venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has become an important support modality for patients with acute respiratory failure refractory to optimal medical therapy, such as low tidal volume mechanical ventilator support, early paralytic infusion, and early prone positioning. The objective of this cohort study was to investigate the causes and timing of in-hospital mortality in patients on VV ECMO. All patients, excluding trauma and bridge to lung transplant, admitted 8/2014-6/2019 to a specialty ICU for VV ECMO were reviewed. Two hundred twenty-five patients were included. In-hospital mortality was 24.4% (n = 55). Most non-survivors (46/55, 84%) died prior to lung recovery and decannulation from VV ECMO. Most common cause of death (COD) for patients who died on VV ECMO was removal of life sustaining therapy (LST) in setting of multisystem organ failure (MSOF) (n = 24). Nine patients died a median of 9 days [6, 11] after decannulation. Most common COD in these patients was palliative withdrawal of LST due to poor prognosis (n = 3). Non-survivors were older and had worse predictive mortality scores than survivors. We found that death in patients supported with VV ECMO in our study most often occurs prior to decannulation and lung recovery. This study demonstrated that the most common cause of death in patients supported with VV ECMO was removal of LST due MSOF. Acute hemorrhage (systemic or intracranial) was not found to be a common cause of death in our patient population.

Minor Procedures in Trauma.

Procedures such as central access and tube thoracostomy are integral in the care of the injured patient. However, both increasing life span and patient complexity of comorbidities can hinder procedural success. Careful forethought should be completed before, simply, charging ahead with a procedure. This article covers the details needed to be successful in carrying out these 2 procedural "staples" in trauma. From anatomy to pain control to postprocedural management, this article will be the building block for technical success. Understanding what you are doing and careful planning ahead are now more than ever crucial to patient care.

The Big Five-Lifesaving Procedures in the Trauma Bay.

Although resuscitation in trauma requires a multidisciplinary and multifaceted approach, one of the Big Five procedures may need to be performed as lifesaving and improving intervention. Your patient's lives depend on understanding, timing, and techniques of these elusive and difficult-to-master procedures. This article focuses on and reviews these five critical procedures: cricothyroidotomy, burr hole craniotomy, resuscitative thoracotomy, emergent hysterotomy, and lateral canthotomy. Prepare the team, system, and yourself when performing any of these procedures. It is important to be facile with your equipment and familiar with the steps to maximize success.

Transfer of Patients with Spontaneous Intracranial Hemorrhage who Need External Ventricular Drain: Does Admission Location Matter?

INTRODUCTION: Patients with spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) are associated with high mortality and require early neurosurgical interventions. At our academic referral center, the neurocritical care unit (NCCU) receives patients directly from referring facilities. However, when no NCCU bed is immediately available, patients are initially admitted to the critical care resuscitation unit (CCRU). We hypothesized that the CCRU expedites transfer of sICH patients and facilitates timely external ventricular drain (EVD) placement comparable to the NCCU. METHODS: This is a pre-post study of adult patients transferred with sICH and EVD placement. Patients admitted between January 2011-July 2013 (2011 Control) were compared with patients admitted either to the CCRU or the NCCU (2013 Control) between August 2013-September 2015. The primary outcome was time interval from arrival at any intensive care units (ICU) to time of EVD placement (ARR-EVD). Secondary outcomes included time interval from emergency department transfer request to arrival, and in-hospital mortality. We assessed clinical association by multivariable logistic regressions. RESULTS: We analyzed 259 sICH patients who received EVDs: 123 (48%) CCRU; 81 (31%) 2011 Control; and 55 (21%) in the 2013 Control. The groups had similar characteristics, age, disease severity, and mortality. Median ARR-EVD time was 170 minutes [106-311] for CCRU patients; 241 minutes [152-490] (p < 0.01) for 2011 Control; and 210 minutes [139-574], p = 0.28) for 2013 Control. Median transfer request-arrival time for CCRU patients was significantly less than both control groups. Multivariable logistic regression showed each minute delay in ARR-EVD was associated with 0.03% increased likelihood of death (odds ratio 1.0003, 95% confidence interval, 1.0001-1.006, p = 0.043). CONCLUSION: Patients admitted to the CCRU had shorter transfer times when compared to patients admitted directly to other ICUs. Compared to the specialty NCCU, the CCRU had similar time interval from arrival to EVD placement. A resuscitation unit like the CCRU can complement the specialty unit NCCU in caring for patients with sICH who require EVDs.

A Dedicated Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Unit during a Respiratory Pandemic: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Part I: System Planning and Care Teams.

BACKGROUND: The most critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may require advanced support modalities, such as veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). A systematic, methodical approach to a respiratory pandemic on a state and institutional level is critical. METHODS: We conducted retrospective review of our institutional response to the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the creation of a dedicated airlock biocontainment unit (BCU) to treat patients with refractory COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS). Data were collected through conversations with staff on varying levels in the BCU, those leading the effort to make the BCU and hospital incident command system, email communications regarding logistic changes being implemented, and a review of COVID-19 patient census at our institution from March through June 2020. RESULTS: Over 2100 patients were successfully admitted to system hospitals; 29% of these patients required critical care. The response to this respiratory pandemic augmented intensive care physician staffing, created a 70-member nursing team, and increased the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) capability by nearly 200%. During this time period, 40 COVID-19 patients on VV-ECMO were managed in the BCU. Challenges in an airlock unit included communication, scarcity of resources, double-bunking, and maintaining routine care. CONCLUSIONS: Preparing for a surge of critically ill patients during a pandemic can be a daunting task. The implementation of a coordinated, system-level approach can help with the allocation of resources as needed. Focusing on established strengths of hospitals within the system can guide triage based on individual patient needs. The management of ECMO patients is still a specialty care, and a systematic and hospital based approach requiring an ECMO team composed of multiple experienced individuals is paramount during a respiratory viral pandemic.

A Dedicated Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Unit during a Respiratory Pandemic: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Part II: Clinical Management.

(1) Background: COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS) has several distinctions from traditional acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); however, patients with refractory respiratory failure may still benefit from veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) support. We report our challenges caring for CARDS patients on VV-ECMO and alterations to traditional management strategies. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of our institutional strategies for managing patients with COVID-19 who required VV-ECMO in a dedicated airlock biocontainment unit (BCU), from March to June 2020. The data collected included the time course of admission, VV-ECMO run, ventilator length, hospital length of stay, and major events related to bleeding, such as pneumothorax and tracheostomy. The dispensation of sedation agents and trial therapies were obtained from institutional pharmacy tracking. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed. (3) Results: Forty COVID-19 patients on VV-ECMO were managed in the BCU during this period, from which 21 survived to discharge and 19 died. The criteria for ECMO initiation was altered for age, body mass index, and neurologic status/cardiac arrest. All cannulations were performed with a bedside ultrasound-guided percutaneous technique. Ventilator and ECMO management were routed in an ultra-lung protective approach, though varied based on clinical setting and provider experience. There was a high incidence of pneumothorax (n = 19). Thirty patients had bedside percutaneous tracheostomy, with more procedural-related bleeding complications than expected. A higher use of sedation was noted. The timing of decannulation was also altered, given the system constraints. A variety of trial therapies were utilized, and their effectiveness is yet to be determined. (4) Conclusions: Even in a high-volume ECMO center, there are challenges in caring for an expanded capacity of patients during a viral respiratory pandemic. Though institutional resources and expertise may vary, it is paramount to proceed with insightful planning, the recognition of challenges, and the dynamic application of lessons learned when facing a surge of critically ill patients.

Mortality Risk Assessment in COVID-19 Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

BACKGROUND: A life-threatening complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) refractory to conventional management. Venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (VV-ECMO) is used to support patients with ARDS in whom conventional management fails. Scoring systems to predict mortality in VV-ECMO remain unvalidated in COVID-19 ARDS. This report describes a large single-center experience with VV-ECMO in COVID-19 and assesses the utility of standard risk calculators. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospective database of all patients with COVID-19 who underwent VV-ECMO cannulation between March 15 and June 27, 2020 at a single academic center was performed. Demographic, clinical, and ECMO characteristics were collected. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; survivor and nonsurvivor cohorts were compared by using univariate and bivariate analyses. RESULTS: Forty patients who had COVID-19 and underwent ECMO were identified. Of the 33 patients (82.5%) in whom ECMO had been discontinued at the time of analysis, 18 patients (54.5%) survived to hospital discharge, and 15 (45.5%) died during ECMO. Nonsurvivors presented with a statistically significant higher Prediction of Survival on ECMO Therapy (PRESET)-Score (mean ± SD, 8.33 ± 0.8 vs 6.17 ± 1.8; P = .001). The PRESET score demonstrated accurate mortality prediction. All patients with a PRESET-Score of 6 or lowers survived, and a score of 7 or higher was associated with a dramatic increase in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that favorable outcomes are possible in patients with COVID-19 who undergo ECMO at high-volume centers. This study demonstrated an association between the PRESET-Score and survival in patients with COVID-19 who underwent VV-ECMO. Standard risk calculators may aid in appropriate selection of patients with COVID-19 ARDS for ECMO.