Anticoagulation and Bleeding during Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Insights from the PROTECMO Study.

Rationale: Definitive guidelines for anticoagulation management during veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) are lacking, whereas bleeding complications continue to pose major challenges. Objectives: To describe anticoagulation modalities and bleeding events in adults receiving VV ECMO. Methods: This was an international prospective observational study in 41 centers, from December 2018 to February 2021. Anticoagulation was recorded daily in terms of type, dosage, and monitoring strategy. Bleeding events were reported according to site, severity, and impact on mortality. Measurements and Main Results: The study cohort included 652 patients, and 8,471 days on ECMO were analyzed. Unfractionated heparin was the initial anticoagulant in 77% of patients, and the most frequently used anticoagulant during the ECMO course (6,221 d; 73%). Activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) was the most common test for monitoring coagulation (86% of days): the median value was 52 seconds (interquartile range, 39 to 61 s) but dropped by 5.3 seconds after the first bleeding event (95% confidence interval, -7.4 to -3.2; P < 0.01). Bleeding occurred on 1,202 days (16.5%). Overall, 342 patients (52.5%) experienced at least one bleeding event (one episode every 215 h on ECMO), of which 10 (1.6%) were fatal. In a multiple penalized Cox proportional hazard model, higher aPTT was a potentially modifiable risk factor for the first episode of bleeding (for 20-s increase; hazard ratio, 1.07). Conclusions: Anticoagulation during VV ECMO was a dynamic process, with frequent stopping in cases of bleeding and restart according to the clinical picture. Future studies might explore lower aPTT targets to reduce the risk of bleeding.

Safety and utility of indwelling pleural catheters in lung transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: The safety and efficacy of indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) in lung allograft recipients is under-reported. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, retrospective analysis between 1/1/2010 and 6/1/2022 of consecutive IPCs placed in lung transplant recipients. Outcomes included incidence of infectious and non-infectious complications and rate of auto-pleurodesis. RESULTS: Seventy-one IPCs placed in 61 lung transplant patients at eight centers were included. The most common indication for IPC placement was recurrent post-operative effusion. IPCs were placed at a median of 59 days (IQR 40-203) post-transplant and remained for 43 days (IQR 25-88). There was a total of eight (11%) complications. Infection occurred in five patients (7%); four had empyema and one had a catheter tract infection. IPCs did not cause death or critical illness in our cohort. Auto-pleurodesis leading to the removal of the IPC occurred in 63 (89%) instances. None of the patients in this cohort required subsequent surgical decortication. CONCLUSIONS: The use of IPCs in lung transplant patients was associated with an infectious complication rate comparable to other populations previously studied. A high rate of auto-pleurodesis was observed. This work suggests that IPCs may be considered for the management of recurrent pleural effusions in lung allograft recipients.

Complications Associated With Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation-What Can Go Wrong?

OBJECTIVES: Despite increasing use and promising outcomes, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) introduces the risk of a number of complications across the spectrum of ECMO care. This narrative review describes the variety of short- and long-term complications that can occur during treatment with ECMO and how patient selection and management decisions may influence the risk of these complications. DATA SOURCES: English language articles were identified in PubMed using phrases related to V-V ECMO, acute respiratory distress syndrome, severe respiratory failure, and complications. STUDY SELECTION: Original research, review articles, commentaries, and published guidelines from the Extracorporeal Life support Organization were considered. DATA EXTRACTION: Data from relevant literature were identified, reviewed, and integrated into a concise narrative review. DATA SYNTHESIS: Selecting patients for V-V ECMO exposes the patient to a number of complications. Adequate knowledge of these risks is needed to weigh them against the anticipated benefit of treatment. Timing of ECMO initiation and transfer to centers capable of providing ECMO affect patient outcomes. Choosing a configuration that insufficiently addresses the patient's physiologic deficit leads to consequences of inadequate physiologic support. Suboptimal mechanical ventilator management during ECMO may lead to worsening lung injury, delayed lung recovery, or ventilator-associated pneumonia. Premature decannulation from ECMO as lungs recover can lead to clinical worsening, and delayed decannulation can prolong exposure to complications unnecessarily. Short-term complications include bleeding, thrombosis, and hemolysis, renal and neurologic injury, concomitant infections, and technical and mechanical problems. Long-term complications reflect the physical, functional, and neurologic sequelae of critical illness. ECMO can introduce ethical and emotional challenges, particularly when bridging strategies fail. CONCLUSIONS: V-V ECMO is associated with a number of complications. ECMO selection, timing of initiation, and management decisions impact the presence and severity of these potential harms.

Simulation Versus Interactive Mobile Learning for Teaching Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation to Clinicians: A Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has become integral to critical care. Data informing optimal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation education modalities are lacking. We aimed to compare the effect of high-fidelity simulation versus interactive mobile learning on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation knowledge acquisition and retention among clinicians. DESIGN: Observer-blinded, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: A single academic medical center. SUBJECTS: Forty-four critical care clinicians with limited extracorporeal membrane oxygenation experience. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to receive: 1) simulation: three high-fidelity training scenarios, 2) QuizTime: 15 total multiple-choice questions delivered over 3 weeks via mobile device, or 3) experiential: no formal training. Participants completed a survey, written knowledge examination, and simulation assessment prior to randomization, immediately following the intervention, and 4 month postintervention. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was knowledge about extracorporeal membrane oxygenation assessed by score on the immediate postintervention written examination. Secondary outcomes included performance in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation simulation postintervention and 4 months later assessed by a rater blinded to group assignment. Clinicians randomized to simulation (n = 15), QuizTime (n = 14), and experiential (n = 15) had similar baseline characteristics. Adjusting for baseline knowledge, postintervention examination scores were higher in the simulation group (90.0%; interquartile range, 85.0-90.0%) than the QuizTime group (70.0%; interquartile range, 65.0-80.0%; p = 0.0003) and the experiential group (75.0%; interquartile range, 65.0-80.0%; p = 0.001). Scores did not differ between the groups at 4 months (p > 0.05 in all analyses). In postintervention extracorporeal membrane oxygenation simulations, the simulation group demonstrated shorter time to critical action compared with QuizTime (80.0 s [interquartile range, 54.0-111.0 s] vs 300.0 s [interquartile range 85.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.02) and compared with both QuizTime (45.0 s [interquartile range, 34.0-92.5 s] vs 255.5 s [interquartile range, 102.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.008) and experiential (300.0 s [interquartile range, 58.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.009) at 4 months. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation was superior to QuizTime and experiential learning with regard to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation knowledge acquisition. Further studies are needed to ascertain the effect of these interventions on knowledge retention, clinical performance, and patient outcomes.

Clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infection and recovery in lung transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Reports on outcomes following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in lung transplant recipients remain limited. METHODS: We performed a single-center, observational study of outcomes in lung transplant recipients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 between 5/1/2020 and 3/15/2022 that were followed for a median of 123 days. We analyzed changes in spirometry, acute lung allograft dysfunction (ALAD) incidence, hospitalization, mechanical ventilation needs, secondary infection, and survival. RESULTS: In our cohort of 336 patients, 103 developed coronavirus disease (COVID) (27 pre-Delta, 20 Delta, and 56 Omicron-era). Twenty-five patients (24%) required hospitalization and 10 patients ultimately died (10%). Among 85 survivors who completed ambulatory spirometry, COVID-19 did not alter change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1 ) or forced vital capacity (FVC) over time compared to the preceding 6 months. The pre-COVID FEV1 change was -0.05 ml/day (IQR -0.50 to 0.60) compared to -0.20 ml/day (IQR -1.40 to 0.70) post-COVID (p = .16). The pre-COVID change in FVC was 0.20 ml/day (IQR -0.60 to 0.70) compared to 0.05 ml/day (IQR -1.00 to 1.10) post-COVID (p = .76). Although the cohort overall had stable lung function, 33 patients (39%) developed ALAD or accelerated chronic lung allograft dysfunction (FEV1 decline >10% from pre-COVID baseline). Nine patients (35%) with ALAD recovered lung function. Within 3 months of acute COVID infection, 18 patients (17%) developed secondary infections, the majority being bacterial pneumonia. Finally, vaccination with at least two doses of mRNA vaccine was not associated with improved outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the natural history of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a large cohort of lung transplant recipients. Although one third of patients develop ALAD requiring augmented immunosuppression, infection with SARS-CoV-2 is not associated with worsening lung function.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation as a Bridge to Lung Transplant.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a cardiopulmonary technology capable of supporting cardiac and respiratory function in the presence of end-stage lung disease. Initial experiences using ECMO as a bridge to lung transplant (ECMO-BTLT) were characterized by high rates of ECMO-associated complications and poor posttransplant outcomes. More recently, ECMO-BTLT has garnered success in preserving patients' physiologic condition and candidacy prior to lung transplant due to technological advances and improved management. Despite recent growth, clinical practice surrounding use of ECMO-BTLT remains variable, with little data to inform optimal patient selection and management. Although many questions remain, the use of ECMO-BTLT has shown promising outcomes suggesting that ECMO-BTLT can be an effective strategy to ensure that complex and rapidly decompensating patients with end-stage lung disease can be safely transplanted with good outcomes. Further studies are needed to refine and inform practice patterns, management, and lung allocation in this high-risk and fragile patient population.

Impact of anticoagulation intensity on blood transfusion for venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during lung transplantation.

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is increasingly used for mechanical circulatory support during lung transplant. Optimal intensity of intraoperative anticoagulation would be expected to mitigate thromboembolism without increasing bleeding and blood product transfusions. Yet, the optimal intensity of intraoperative anticoagulation is unknown. We performed a retrospective cohort study of 163 patients who received a bilateral lung transplant at a single center. We categorized the intensity of anticoagulation into 4 groups (very low to high) based on the bolus dose of unfractionated heparin given during lung transplant and compared the rates of intraoperative blood transfusions and the occurrence of thromboembolism between groups. When compared to the very low-intensity group, each higher intensity group was associated with higher red blood cell, fresh frozen plasma, and platelet transfusions. The occurrence of thromboembolism was similar across groups. These preliminary data suggest that lower intensity anticoagulation may reduce the rate of intraoperative blood transfusions, although further study is needed.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Selection by Multidisciplinary Consensus: The ECMO Council.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has increased the demand for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and introduced distinct challenges to patient selection for ECMO. Standardized processes for patient selection amidst resource limitations are lacking, and data on ECMO consults are underreported. We retrospectively reviewed consecutive adult ECMO consults for acute respiratory failure received at a single academic medical center from April 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021, and evaluated the implementation of a multidisciplinary selection committee (ECMO Council) and standardized framework for patient selection for ECMO. During the 334-day period, there were 202 total ECMO consults; 174 (86.1%) included a diagnosis of COVID-19. Among all consults, 157 (77.7%) were declined and 41 (20.3%) resulted in the initiation of ECMO. Frequent reasons for decline included the presence of multiple relative contraindications (n = 33), age greater than 60 years (n = 32), and resource limitations (n = 27). The ECMO Council deliberated on every case in which an absolute contraindication was not present (n = 96) via an electronic teleconference platform. Utilizing multidisciplinary consensus together with a standardized process for patient selection in ECMO is feasible during a pandemic and may be reliably exercised over time. Whether such an approach is feasible at other centers remains unknown.

Area Deprivation Index and Distress Community Index Scores Are Not Associated With Short-Term and Long-Term Extracorporeal Life Support Outcomes.

Distressed Communities Index (DCI) and Area Deprivation Index (ADI) are two composite ranking scores that report community level socioeconomic status (SES) by ZIP codes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of SES as estimated by DCI and ADI scores on short-term and long-term outcomes after extracorporeal life support (ECLS) at a quaternary medical center. All patients on ECLS between January 1, 2015 and August 31, 2020 (N = 428) at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee, had their ADI and DCI scores calculated. Primary outcome was mortality during index hospitalization, and secondary outcome was survival to end of study follow-up. There was no significant difference in primary outcome between the top 25% ADI vs . bottom 75% ADI (53.8% vs . 50.6%; p = 0.56) or between top 25% DCI vs . bottom 75% DCI (56.1 vs . 49.2; p = 0.21). Adjusted odds ratio for the primary outcome with ADI and DCI was 1.13 (95% CI, 0.63-2.0; p = 0.67) and 1.28 (95% CI, 0.70-2.34; p = 0.41), respectively. Additionally, there was no significant difference in long-term survival curves based on their ADI or DCI scores. In conclusion, SES as estimated by baseline DCI and ADI scores does not appear to impact short- or long-term survival post-ECLS at a large volume center. http://links.lww.com/ASAIO/A951.

Transfusion practice in patients receiving VV ECMO (PROTECMO): a prospective, multicentre, observational study.

BACKGROUND: In patients receiving venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion thresholds are usually higher than in other patients who are critically ill. Available guidelines suggest a restrictive approach, but do not provide specific recommendations on the topic. The main aim of this study was, in a short timeframe, to describe the actual values of haemoglobin and the rate and the thresholds for transfusion of PRBC during VV ECMO. METHODS: PROTECMO was a multicentre, prospective, cohort study done in 41 ECMO centres in Europe, North America, Asia, and Australia. Consecutive adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who were receiving VV ECMO were eligible for inclusion. Patients younger than 18 years, those who were not able to provide informed consent when required, and patients with an ECMO stay of less than 24 h were excluded. Our main aim was to monitor the daily haemoglobin concentration and the value at the point of PRBC transfusion, as well as the rate of transfusions. The practice in different centres was stratified by continent location and case volume per year. Adjusted estimates were calculated using marginal structural models with inverse probability weighting, accounting for baseline and time varying confounding. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2018, and Feb 22, 2021, 604 patients were enrolled (431 [71%] men, 173 [29%] women; mean age 50 years [SD 13·6]; and mean haemoglobin concentration at cannulation 10·9 g/dL [2·4]). Over 7944 ECMO days, mean haemoglobin concentration was 9·1 g/dL (1·2), with lower concentrations in North America and high-volume centres. PRBC were transfused on 2432 (31%) of days on ECMO, and 504 (83%) patients received at least one PRBC unit. Overall, mean pretransfusion haemoglobin concentration was 8·1 g/dL (1·1), but varied according to the clinical rationale for transfusion. In a time-dependent Cox model, haemoglobin concentration of less than 7 g/dL was consistently associated with higher risk of death in the intensive care unit compared with other higher haemoglobin concentrations (hazard ratio [HR] 2·99 [95% CI 1·95-4·60]); PRBC transfusion was associated with lower risk of death only when transfused when haemoglobin concentration was less than 7 g/dL (HR 0·15 [0·03-0·74]), although no significant effect in reducing mortality was reported for transfusions for other haemoglobin classes (7·0-7·9 g/dL, 8·0-9·9 g/dL, or higher than 10 g/dL). INTERPRETATION: During VV ECMO, there was no universally accepted threshold for transfusion, but PRBC transfusion was invariably associated with lower mortality only when done with haemoglobin concentration of less than 7 g/dL. FUNDING: Extracorporeal Life Support Organization.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Circuits in Parallel for Refractory Hypoxemia in COVID-19: A Case Series.

Refractory hypoxemia despite the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome remains a challenging problem. A single ECMO circuit may not provide adequate physiologic support in the setting of an elevated cardiac output, physiologic demand, and impaired gas exchange. In select patients with refractory hypoxemia, addition of a second ECMO circuit in parallel can improve oxygenation, facilitate lung protective ventilation, awakening, and physical rehabilitation. We report the largest case series to date of patients receiving ECMO circuits in parallel and the first to report this approach in COVID-19.

Bridge to Transplant: Central Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation With Pulmonary Artery Drainage.

Providing optimal support in patients with concomitant cardiac and pulmonary failure presents multiple challenges. We report a novel approach to central extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support using a minimal access approach to successfully bridge a patient to heart-lung transplant.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation circuits in parallel for refractory hypoxemia in patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Refractory hypoxemia can occur in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome from COVID-19 despite support with venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Parallel ECMO circuits can be used to increase physiologic support. We report our clinical experience using ECMO circuits in parallel for select patients with persistent severe hypoxemia despite the use of a single ECMO circuit. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome who received VV-ECMO with an additional circuit in parallel at Vanderbilt University Medical Center between March 1, 2020, and March 1, 2022. We report demographic characteristics and clinical characteristics including ECMO settings, mechanical ventilator settings, use of adjunctive therapies, and arterial blood gas results after initial cannulation, before and after receipt of a second ECMO circuit in parallel, and before removal of the circuit in parallel, and outcomes. RESULTS: Of 84 patients with COVID-19 who received VV-ECMO during the study period, 22 patients (26.2%) received a circuit in parallel. The median duration of ECMO was 40.0 days (interquartile range, 31.6-53.1 days), of which 19.0 days (interquartile range, 13.0-33.0 days) were spent with a circuit in parallel. Of the 22 patients who received a circuit in parallel, 16 (72.7%) survived to hospital discharge and 6 (27.3%) died before discharge. CONCLUSIONS: In select patients, the additional use of an ECMO circuit in parallel can increase ECMO blood flow and improve oxygenation while allowing for lung-protective mechanical ventilation and excellent outcomes.

Clinician Ethical Perspectives on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Practice.

PURPOSE: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an expensive and scarce life sustaining treatment provided to certain critically ill patients. Little is known about the informed consent process for ECMO or clinician viewpoints on ethical complexities related to ECMO in practice. METHODS: We sent a cross-sectional survey to all departments providing ECMO within 7 United States hospitals in January 2021. One clinician from each department completed the 42-item survey representing their department. RESULTS: Fourteen departments within 7 hospitals responded (response rate 78%, N = 14/18). The mean time spent consenting patients or surrogate decision-makers for ECMO varied, from 7.5 minutes (95% CI 5-10) for unstable patients to 20 minutes (95% CI 15-30) for stable patients (p = 0.0001). Few clinician respondents (29%) report patients or surrogate decision-makers always possess informed consent for ECMO. Most departments (92%) have absolute exclusion criteria for ECMO such as older age (43%, cutoffs ranging from 60-75 years), active malignancy (36%), and elevated body mass index (29%). A significant minority of departments (29%) do not always offer the option to withdraw ECMO to patients or surrogate decision-makers. For patients who cannot be liberated from ECMO and are ineligible for heart or lung transplant, 36% of departments would recommend the patient be removed from ECMO and 64% would continue ECMO support. CONCLUSION: Adequate informed consent for ECMO is a major ethical challenge, and the content of these discussions varies. Use of categorical exclusion criteria and withdrawal of ECMO if a patient cannot be liberated from it differ among departments and institutions.

Disposable Component Selection in Extracorporeal Life Support: A Cost Analysis.

Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is a resource-intensive technology. Disposable components are modifiable through device selection. Cost analysis tools are needed to inform cost-conscious device selection. We generated a disposable cost analysis to forecast estimated costs of device disposables that included an assumption table, net present value (NPV) analysis, and sensitivity analysis to examine device disposable costs over 5 years with different case volumes and device mixes. To demonstrate the function of the analysis, we included four device options using the following assumptions: 100 cases in year 1, 2.5% case growth rate, 10% discount rate, and $5,000 incremental cost (Device 4 only). Using estimated device costs of $3,000, $12,000, $13,000, and $20,000 and device mix percentages of 65%, 8%, 25%, and 2% for Device 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively, the 5 year unadjusted and NPV of disposable device costs were $3,691,000 and $2,765,000, respectively. The sensitivity analysis incorporated six separate models with different device mix percentages. The highest and lowest estimated costs were found in Model F (75% Device 3 and 25% Device 4; NPV = $6,64,400) and Model B (100% Device 1; NPV = 1,246,000) respectively. Extracorporeal life support programs may apply this disposable cost analysis tool to reduce programmatic costs.