Mechanical ventilation settings during weaning from venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of weaning from venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) and its modalities have been rarely studied. METHODS: Retrospective, multicenter cohort study over 7 years in two tertiary ICUs, high-volume ECMO centers in France and Italy. Patients with ARDS on ECMO and successfully weaned from VV ECMO were classified based on their mechanical ventilation modality during the sweep gas-off trial (SGOT) with either controlled mechanical ventilation or spontaneous breathing (i.e. pressure support ventilation). The primary endpoint was the time to successful weaning from mechanical ventilation within 90 days post-ECMO weaning. RESULTS: 292 adult patients with severe ARDS were weaned from controlled ventilation, and 101 were on spontaneous breathing during SGOT. The 90-day probability of successful weaning from mechanical ventilation was not significantly different between the two groups (sHR [95% CI], 1.23 [0.84-1.82]). ECMO-related complications were not statistically different between patients receiving these two mechanical ventilation strategies. After adjusting for covariates, older age, higher pre-ECMO sequential organ failure assessment score, pneumothorax, ventilator-associated pneumonia, and renal replacement therapy, but not mechanical ventilation modalities during SGOT, were independently associated with a lower probability of successful weaning from mechanical ventilation after ECMO weaning. CONCLUSIONS: Time to successful weaning from mechanical ventilation within 90 days post-ECMO was not associated with the mechanical ventilation strategy used during SGOT. Further research is needed to assess the optimal ventilation strategy during weaning off VV ECMO and its impact on short- and long-term outcomes.

Thrombolysis before venoarterial ECMO for high-risk pulmonary embolism: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Despite systemic thrombolysis, a few patients with high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) remain hemodynamically unstable. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a considerable lifesaving therapy but systemic thrombolysis before cannulation could carry a high risk of hemorrhage and alter the prognosis. METHODS: Between June 2012 and June 2023, we retrospectively analyzed from three intensive care units in Sorbonne University, ECMO-related complications and 90-day mortality for high-risk PE patients who received ECMO without previous systemic thrombolysis compared to those cannulated after systemic thrombolysis failure. Hospital discharge survivors were assessed for long-term health-related quality of life and echocardiographic evaluations. RESULTS: 72 high-risk PE patients [median age 48 (37-61) years, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) 74 (60-85)] were placed on VA-ECMO for 5 (5-7) days. 31 (43%) patients underwent pre-ECMO thrombolysis (thrombolysis ECMO group, T +) compared to 41 patients (57%, no thrombolysis ECMO group, T-). There was more pre-ECMO cardiac arrest in the thrombolysis ECMO group (94% vs. 67%, p = 0.02). Ninety-day survival was not different between groups (39% vs 46%, log-rank test, p = 0.31). There was no difference in severe hemorrhages (61% vs 59%, p = 1). Twenty-five over 28 patients attended follow-up at a median time of 69 (52-95) months. Long-term quality of life was acceptable and none of them experienced chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: Ninety-day survival and bleeding events rates did not differ in patients treated with VA-ECMO after systemic thrombolysis compared to those who were not. Recent systemic thrombolysis, as a single parameter, should not be considered as a contraindication for VA-ECMO in high-risk PE.

Agreement Between Viscoelastic Coagulation Monitor (VCM), TEG 5000, and Coagulation Tests in Critically Ill Patients: A Multicenter Study.

The performance of viscoelastic coagulation monitor (VCM) compared with TEG 5000 (TEG) is unknown. In this multicenter study, the authors evaluated the agreement among VCM/TEG parameters and their relationship with standard coagulation tests in critically ill patients. Viscoelastic coagulation monitor, TEG, and laboratory samples were analyzed simultaneously. Viscoelastic coagulation monitor/TEG agreement was computed by Bland and Altman's plots, association with laboratory parameters was studied with Spearman's correlation coefficient and random-intercept linear models. One-hundred and twenty-seven patients enrolled, 320 paired observations: 210 (65.6%) under unfractioned heparin (UFH), 94 (29.4%) under low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), 16 (5.0%) no heparin. Under UFH prolonged clot formation times and reduced the amplitude of viscoelastic tracings on both devices, especially on TEG. The type of heparin affected the agreement between VCM/TEG homolog parameters. Reaction time (TEG-R) resulted 23.1 min longer than the homolog clotting time (VCM-CT) under UFH; maximum amplitude (TEG-MA) resulted 29.5 mm higher than maximum clot firmness (VCM-MCF) under LMWH. Weak correlation was observed between VCM-CT/TEG-R and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT)/anti-Xa; no correlation was found between VCM-alpha/TEG-angle and fibrinogen concentration. Viscoelastic coagulation monitor-MCF showed strong (LWMH) to moderate (UFH) correlation with platelet count, while TEG-MA only showed lower correlation. Viscoelastic coagulation monitor and TEG are differently affected by heparin. The platelet count is well represented by VCM-MCF even during UFH administration.