Use of oxygenator with short-term ventricular assist devices.

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) serves as a conventional short-term mechanical circulatory assist to support heart and lung functions. The short-term ventricular assist devices (ST-VAD) can, on the contrary, offer only circulatory support. A combination of VAD and oxygenator (Oxy-VAD) could help overcome this potential disadvantage. This is a retrospective case note study of patients supported on ST-VAD which required adding an oxygenator for extra respiratory support. The oxygenator was introduced in the ST-VAD circuit, either on the left or the right side. Twenty-two patients with the etiology of refractory cardiogenic shock in decompensation were supported on Oxy-VAD between years 2009 and 2019 at tertiary care . All patients were classified into class-I INTERMACS with a mean SOFA Score of 14 ± 2.58. 86.4% of patients were already on mechanical support pre-ST-VAD implant, 80% on VA-ECMO. The BiVAD implant accounted for 63.6%, followed by LVAD and RVAD with 27.3% and 9.1%. Mean duration of the ST-VAD was 8.5 days. The oxygenator was introduced in 14 RVAD and 8 LVAD circuits. The oxygenator was successfully weaned in 54.5% while ST-VAD was explanted in 31.8%. Discharge to home survival was 22.7%. Oxy-VAD proves a viable, and probably, a better option to VA-ECMO in acute cardiorespiratory decompensation. It offers organ-specific tailor-made support to the right and/or left heart and/or lungs. While on Oxy-VAD support, each organ performance can be assessed independently, and the assistance of the specifically improved organ can be weaned off without discontinuing the support for the rest.

Extracorporeal Life Support in "Awake" Patients as a Bridge to Lung Transplant.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are sedated and mechanically ventilated, which increases risk of complications related to immobility and mechanical ventilation. The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and highlight the benefits of a bridge to lung transplant (LTx) using "awake ECMO" support. METHODS: The peripheral venovenous or venoarterial ECMO was implanted at a bedside. A retrospective study of patients undergoing LTx between January 2007 and March 2013 was performed. Outcomes in patients supported on ECMO as a bridge to LTx and kept "awake" (Group 1) were compared with the rest of the LTx patients (Group 2). RESULTS: In this period, 249 LTx were performed and in them 7 patients were bridged to LTx using "awake ECMO" strategy. Two patients were awake at ECMO implantation and throughout the therapy, and two patients were on ventilator support at the time of ECMO implantation who were extubated later and maintained awake until LTx. The remaining three patients were awake for some time during the ECMO. There was no statistically significant difference in most donor characteristics and recipient baseline characteristics as well as post-LTx parameters between the two groups. One-year survival estimate was not different between the groups: Group 1, 85.7% vs. Group 2, 86.3% (log rank p = 0.99). CONCLUSION: In end-stage lung disease, the ECMO can be commenced in "awake" patients and patients can be awakened on ECMO. The "awake ECMO" strategy may avoid complications related to mechanical ventilation, sedation, and immobilization and provide comparable outcomes in the high-risk LTx patients.

Distal limb perfusion: Achilles' heel in peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a temporary mechanical circulatory assist method that offers circulatory as well as respiratory support efficiently via peripheral access; however, it is liable to complications. Limb ischemia is one of the notorious complications of ECMO but can be avoided utilizing a proper distal limb perfusion method. A retrospective study of patients undergoing peripheral venoarterial (VA) ECMO for various reasons between June 2010 and December 2012 was performed. All patients were evaluated by our multidisciplinary team for suitability as candidates for ECMO. A peripheral VA-ECMO circuit was implanted via groin: inflow cannula in the femoral vein, an outflow cannula and distal-perfusion cannula, or an introducer sheath in the femoral artery. During the study period, 83 patients underwent various types of ECMO; 45 received peripheral VA-ECMO. Distal limb perfusion was achieved with an introducer sheath (6-8 Fr) in 13 cases and with a distal-perfusion cannula (10-12 Fr) in 32 cases. Nine (20%) patients developed signs of ischemia; five (11.2%) were treated conservatively, while four (8.8%) required surgical intervention. One patient required a below-knee amputation. The incidences of limb ischemia and limb ischemia requiring surgical intervention were significantly higher for the introducer sheath compared with the cannula (30.6 vs. 15.6% and 15.4 vs. 6.25%, respectively). Moreover, the patients supported on ECMO with a distal-perfusion cannula spent a significantly longer time on ECMO compared with the ones in whom an introducer sheath was used (11.9 ± 9.1 vs. 7.7 ± 4.3 days). The mean cannula size was significantly greater than the mean introducer sheath size (11.1 ± 1.3 vs. 7.0 ± 1.1 Fr). Use of a distal-perfusion cannula is a most reliable method of limb perfusion in peripheral VA-ECMO. The cannula can ensure adequate and smooth perfusion of the limb owing to its large caliber, its less turbulent flow, the ability it provides to monitor the flow, and the option to attach a side port.

Comparison of temporary ventricular assist devices and extracorporeal life support in post-cardiotomy cardiogenic shock.

OBJECTIVES: Post-cardiotomy cardiogenic shock (PCCS) results in substantial morbidity and mortality, whereas refractory cases require mechanical circulatory support (MCS). The aim of the study was to compare extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and ventricular assist devices (VADs) utilized in the management of PCCS. METHODS: In total, 56 consecutive patients who developed PCCS from 2005 to 2014 required MCS as a bridge to decision-24 were supported with a VAD and 32 with an ECMO. Groups were compared with respect to pre- and intraoperative characteristics and early and long-term outcomes to evaluate the impact of the type of MCS on complications and survival. Data are mean ± standard deviation and median with quartiles. RESULTS: EuroSCORE II was significantly higher in the VAD group than in the ECMO group (28 ± 20 vs 13 ± 16, P = 0.020) corresponding to significantly higher New York Heart Association (P = 0.031) class and Canadian Cardiovascular Society class (P = 0.040) in the cohort. The median duration of support was 10 (4-23) and 7 (4-10) days in the VAD and ECMO groups, respectively. There were no significant differences in ITU (P = 0.262), hospital stay (P = 0.193) and incidences of most postoperative complications. A significantly higher proportion of patients was successfully weaned/upgraded in the VAD group [13 (54%) vs 4 (13%), P = 0.048] with a trend towards higher discharge rate [9 (38%) vs 5 (16%), P = 0.061]. Overall cumulative survival in early follow-up [Breslow (Generalized Wilcoxon) P = 0.017] and long-term follow-up [Log-rank (Mantel-Cox) p = 0.015] was significantly better in the VAD group. CONCLUSIONS: VAD and ECMO represent essential tools to support patients with PCCS. Our preliminary results might indicate some benefits of using VAD in this group of patients; however, this evidence should be further assessed in larger multicentre trials.