Breathing Life Back Into the Kidney-Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy and Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in patients supported with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO). Secondary outcomes included mortality and the need for hemodialysis on hospital discharge. We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients admitted to a specialty unit on VV ECMO between August 2014 and August 2018. Trauma and bridge to lung transplant patients were excluded. Demographics, comorbidities, pre-ECMO, ECMO, and renal replacement therapy outcome data were collected and analyzed with parametric and nonparametric statistics as appropriate. One hundred eighty-seven patients were enrolled. Median age was 45 (32, 55) years; precannulation pH, 7.21 (7.12, 7.30); PaO2/FiO2 ratio, 69 (56, 86); respiratory ECMO survival prediction score, 3 (0, 5); sequential organ failure assessment score, 12 (10, 14); and creatinine, 1.45 (0.93, 2.35) mg/dL. Overall survival to hospital discharge was 74.6%. Ninety-four (50.3%) patients had CRRT while on VV ECMO. Median time on CRRT was 14 (7, 21) days with 59 (61.4%) of these patients surviving to hospital discharge. Four (6.8%) patients, none with documented preexisting renal disease, required hemodialysis on discharge. CRRT patients had a statistically higher precannulation sequential organ failure assessment score, creatinine, total bilirubin and lower precannulation pH, respiratory ECMO survival prediction score, and platelet count compared with non-CRRT patients. Survival was 61.4% vs. 88.1% (p < 0.001). More than half of our patients received CRRT while on VV ECMO. CRRT was used in a more critically ill patient population and was associated with higher in-hospital mortality. However, for patients who survived to hospital discharge, the majority have full renal recovery.

Outcomes of Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation When Stratified by Age: How Old Is Too Old?

The purpose of this study was to evaluate survival to hospital discharge for patients on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) when stratified by age. We performed a retrospective study at single, academic, tertiary care center intensive care unit for VV ECMO. All patients, older than 17 years of age, on VV ECMO admitted to a specialized intensive care unit for the management of VV ECMO between August 2014 and May 2018 were included in the study. Trauma and bridge-to-lung transplant patients were excluded for this analysis. Demographics, pre-ECMO and ECMO data were collected. Primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge when stratified by age. Secondary outcomes included time on VV ECMO and hospital length of stay (HLOS). One hundred eighty-two patients were included. Median P/F ratio at time of cannulation was 69 [56-85], and respiratory ECMO survival prediction (RESP) score was 3 [1-5]. Median time on ECMO was 319 [180-567] hours. Overall survival to hospital discharge was 75.8%. Lowess and cubic spline curves demonstrated an inflection point associated with increased mortality at age >45 years. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated significantly greater survival in patients <45 years of age (p = 0.0001). Survival to hospital discharge for those

Pilot study evaluating a non-titrating, weight-based anticoagulation scheme for patients on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

OBJECTIVE: There is no universally accepted algorithm for anticoagulation in patients on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The purpose of this pilot study was to compare a non-titrating weight-based heparin infusion to that of a standard titration algorithm. METHODS: We performed a prospective randomized non-blinded study of patients: Arm 1-standard practice of titrating heparin to activated partial thromboplastin times goal of 45-55 seconds, and Arm 2-a non-titrating weight-based (10 units/kg/h) infusion. Primary outcome was need for oxygenator/circuit changes. Secondary outcomes included differences in hemolysis and bleeding episodes. Descriptive statistics were performed for the continuous data, and primary and secondary outcomes were compared using Fisher's exact test as appropriate. RESULTS: Six patients were randomized to Arm 1 and four to Arm 2. There was no difference in age, pH, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, peak inspiratory pressure, positive end expiratory pressure, mean airway pressure at time of cannulation, time on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or survival to hospital discharge in the two arms. Arm 1 had a statistically higher median activated partial thromboplastin times (48 (43, 52) vs 38 (35, 42), p < 0.008) and lower LDH (808 units/L (727, 1112) vs 940 units/L (809, 1137), p = 0.02) than Arm 2. There was no difference in plasma hemoglobin (4.3 (2.5, 8.7) vs 4.3 (3.0, 7.3), p = 0.65) between the two arms. There was no difference in mean oxygenator/circuit change, transfused packed red blood cell, or documented bleeding complications per patient in each arm (p = 0.56, 0.43, 0.77, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this pilot study, a non-titrating, weight-based heparin infusion appears safe and as effective in preventing veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation circuit thrombotic complications as compared to a titration algorithm. Larger studies are needed to confirm these preliminary findings.