Comparative Propensity Matched Outcomes in Severe COVID-19 Respiratory Failure-Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation or Maximum Ventilation Alone.

OBJECTIVE: Does extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) improve outcomes in ECMO-eligible patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure compared to maximum ventilation alone (MVA)? SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: ECMO is beneficial in severe cases of respiratory failure when mechanical ventilation is inadequate. Outcomes for ECMO-eligible COVID-19 patients on MVA have not been reported. Consequently, a direct comparison between COVID-19 patients on ECMO and those on MVA has not been established. METHODS: A total of 3406 COVID-19 patients treated at two major medical centers in Chicago were studied. One hundred ninety-five required maximum ventilatory support, and met ECMO eligibility criteria. Eighty ECMO patients were propensity matched to an equal number of MVA patients using detailed demographic, physiological, and comorbidity data. Primary outcome was survival and disposition at discharge. RESULTS: Seventy-one percent of patients were decannulated from ECMO. Mechanical ventilation was discontinued in 75% ECMO and 16% MVA patients. Twenty-five percent of patients in the ECMO arm expired, 21% while on ECMO, compared with 74% in the MVA cohort. Mortality was significantly lower across all age and BMI groups in the ECMO arm. Sixty-eight percent ECMO and 26% MVA patients were discharged from the hospital. Fewer ECMO patients required long-term rehabilitation. Major complications such as septic shock, ventilator associated pneumonia, inotropic requirements, acute liver and kidney injuries are less frequent among ECMO patients. CONCLUSIONS: ECMO-eligible patients with severe COVID-19 respiratory failure demonstrate a 3-fold improvement in survival with ECMO. They are also in a better physical state at discharge and have lower overall complication rates. As such, strong consideration should be given for ECMO when mechanical ventilatory support alone becomes insufficient in treating COVID-19 respiratory failure.

The development of aortic insufficiency in continuous-flow left ventricular assist device-supported patients.

BACKGROUND: Significant aortic insufficiency (AI) after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement affects device performance and end-organ perfusion. This study examined the development and progression of AI after implantation of continuous-flow LVAD. METHODS: Seventy-nine patients undergoing Heart Mate II (Thoratec Corp, Pleasanton, CA) LVAD implantation for predominantly destination therapy (n = 69 [87%]) were examined. Preoperative and postoperative echocardiograms for all patients were reviewed at the intervals of 0 to 3, 3 to 6, 6 to 12, 12 to 18, and 18 to 24 months. AI was graded on an interval scale of 0, none; 0.5, trivial; 1, mild; 1.5, mild to moderate; 2, moderate; 2.5, moderate to severe; and 3, severe. Development and progression of AI were analyzed. RESULTS: The incidence of significant AI (mild or greater) was 52% (n = 41). Median time to AI development was 187 days. The median duration of VAD support was 761 days. Mild AI developed in 41 patients (52%). No severe AI developed. In the Cox regression model (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]), aortic valve closure (2.51 [1.06 to 5.89]; p = 0.03), and age (1.04 [1.008 to 1.08]; p = 0.01) were independent predictors of AI development. There was no difference in mortality rates in the two groups (p = 0.40 by log-rank test). A mixed-model linear regression analysis showed a significant overall progression of AI over time (ß ± standard error, 0.06 ± 0.02; p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: AI develops over time in a significant number of Heart Mate II LVAD patients. AI is more common in patients with closed aortic valves and in the older age group. As more patients require long-term VAD support, the development of AI will need careful attention and monitoring.

Experience with noncardiac surgery in destination therapy left ventricular assist devices patients.

Continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVAD) are increasing the life expectancy of patients with advanced heart failure, with these patients undergoing more noncardiac operations after implantation. The purpose of this study was to determine the safety of noncardiac operations in destination therapy CF-LVAD patients. In a retrospective study of 110 CF-LVAD patients, we reviewed 36 patients who underwent 63 noncardiac operations 315.1 ± 333.5 days after LVAD placement. Fifty-four (84%) operations were elective and 10 were emergent. The mean age of the cohort was 61.4 ± 11.4 years, with the majority (81%) being men. Most patients (n = 24, 38%) underwent total abdominal operation. Of the 36 patients in the study, 23 (63.8%) patients required one surgical procedure, and 13(36.1%) patients underwent more than one procedure. Six critically ill patients (16%) of 37 expired within 30 days after emergent operation. Our study demonstrates overall good clinical outcomes with minimal intraoperative complications in LVAD patients undergoing noncardiac surgeries, except an increased propensity for intra- and postoperative transfusion of blood products because of complex coagulopathies.

Incidence and management of gastrointestinal bleeding with continuous flow assist devices.

BACKGROUND: Continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) have emerged as the standard of care for patients in advanced heart failure (HF) requiring long-term mechanical circulatory support. Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding has been frequently reported within this population. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 101 patients implanted with the Heart Mate II from January 2005 to August 2011 was performed to identify incidence, etiology, and management of GI bleeding. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis was conducted to identify related risk factors. RESULTS: A significant incidence of GI bleeding (22.8%) occurred in our predominantly destination therapy (DT) (93%) population. Fifty-seven percent of the patients with bleeding episodes bled from the upper GI (UGI) tract (with 54% bleeding from gastric erosions and 37% from ulcers/angiodysplasias), whereas 35% of patients bled from the lower GI (LGI) tract. Previous history of GI bleeding (odds ratio [OR], 22.7; 95% CI, 2.2-228.6; p=0.008), elevated international normalized ratio (INR) (OR, 3.9; CI, 1.2-12.9; p=0.02), and low platelet count (OR, -0.98; CI, 0.98 -0.99; p=0.001) were independent predictors of GI hemorrhage. Recurrent bleeding was more common in older patients (mean, 70 years; p=0.01). The majority of bleeders (60%) rebled from the same site. Management strategies included temporarily withholding anticoagulation, decreasing the speed of LVADs, and using octreotide. Octreotide did not impact the amount of packed red blood cells used, rebleeding rates, length of hospital stay, or all-cause mortality. Only 1 patient died as a direct consequence of GI bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple factors account for GI bleeding in patients on CF-VADs. A previous history of bleeding increases risk significantly and warrants careful monitoring.