RESUMEN
The prone position is an immediately available and easily implemented procedure that was introduced more than 50 years ago as a method for improvement of gas exchange in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In the meantime, a survival advantage could also be shown in patients with severe ARDS, which led to the recommendation of the prone position for treatment of severe ARDS by expert consensus and specialist society guidelines. The continuing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic moved the prone position to the forefront of medicine, including the widespread implementation of the prone position for awake, spontaneously breathing nonintubated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory insufficiency. The survival advantage is possible due to a reduction of the ventilator-associated lung damage. In this article, the physiological effects, data on clinical results, practical considerations and open questions with respect to the prone position are discussed.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Posicionamiento del Paciente , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria , Humanos , Posición Prona/fisiología , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapia , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/fisiopatología , Posicionamiento del Paciente/métodos , Adulto , Respiración Artificial/métodosRESUMEN
Target values for arterial carbon dioxide tension (PaCO2) in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are unknown. We hypothesized that lower PaCO2 values on ECMO would be associated with lighter sedation. We used data from two independent patient cohorts with ARDS spending 1,177 days (discovery cohort, 69 patients) and 516 days (validation cohort, 70 patients) on ECMO and evaluated the associations between daily PaCO2, pH, and bicarbonate (HCO3) with sedation. Median PaCO2 was 41 (interquartile range [IQR] = 37-46) mm Hg and 41 (IQR = 37-45) mm Hg in the discovery and the validation cohort, respectively. Lower PaCO2 and higher pH but not bicarbonate (HCO3) served as significant predictors for reaching a Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) target range of -2 to +1 (lightly sedated to restless). After multivariable adjustment for mortality, tracheostomy, prone positioning, vasoactive inotropic score, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II or Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Score and day on ECMO, only PaCO2 remained significantly associated with the RASS target range (adjusted odds ratio 1.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.01-1.21], p = 0.032 and 1.29 [95% CI = 1.1-1.51], p = 0.001 per mm Hg decrease in PaCO2 for the discovery and the validation cohort, respectively). A PaCO2 ≤40 mm Hg, as determined by the concordance probability method, was associated with a significantly increased probability of a sedation level within the RASS target range in both patient cohorts (adjusted odds ratio = 2.92 [95% CI = 1.17-7.24], p = 0.021 and 6.82 [95% CI = 1.50-31.0], p = 0.013 for the discovery and the validation cohort, respectively).
RESUMEN
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening condition affecting >10% of intensive care unit (ICU) patients worldwide with a mortality of up to 59% depending on severity. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a potentially life-saving procedure in severe ARDS but is technically and financially challenging. In recent years, various scoring systems have been proposed to select patients most likely to benefit from ECMO, with the PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy (PRESET) score being one of the most used. We collected data from 283 patients with ARDS of various etiology who underwent veno-venous (V-V) ECMO therapy at a German tertiary care ICU from January 2012 to December 2022. Median age in the cohort was 56 years, and 64.31% were males. The in-hospital mortality rate was 50.88% (n = 144). The median (25%; 75% quartile) severity scores were 38 (31; 49) for Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, 12 (10; 13) for Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and 7 (5; 8) for PRESET. Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II displayed the best prognostic value (area under the receiver operating characteristic [AUROC]: 0.665 [confidence interval (CI): 0.574-0.756; p = 0.046]). Prediction performance was weak in all analyzed scores despite good calibration. Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II had the best discrimination after adjustment of our original cohort. The use of scores explored in this study for patient selection for eligibility for V-V ECMO is not recommendable.
RESUMEN
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common condition in intensive care medicine. Various intra- and extrapulmonal causes may trigger an epithelial and endothelial permeability increase, which leads to impaired gas exchange due to fluid overload of the alveoli and transmigration of leukocytes. This results in hypoxemia and hypercapnia, as well as deleterious consequences for the macro- and microcirculation with the risk of multi-organ failure and high mortality. This review summarizes ARDS pathophysiology and clinical consequences.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria , Desequilibrio Hidroelectrolítico , Humanos , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapia , Cuidados Críticos , Insuficiencia MultiorgánicaRESUMEN
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an important rescue therapy method for the treatment of severe hypoxic lung injury. In some cases, oxygen saturation and oxygen partial pressure in the arterial blood are low despite ECMO therapy. There are case reports in which patients with such instances of refractory hypoxemia received a second membrane lung, either in series or in parallel, to overcome the hypoxemia. It remains unclear whether the parallel or serial connection is more effective. Therefore, we used an improved version of our full-flow ECMO mock circuit to test this. The measurements were performed under conditions in which the membrane lungs were unable to completely oxygenate the blood. As a result, only the photometric pre- and post-oxygenator saturations, blood flow and hemoglobin concentration were required for the calculation of oxygen transfer rates. The results showed that for a pre-oxygenator saturation of 45% and a total blood flow of 10 L/min, the serial connection of two identical 5 L rated oxygenators is 17% more effective in terms of oxygen transfer than the parallel connection. Although the idea of using a second membrane lung if refractory hypoxia occurs is intriguing from a physiological point of view, due to the invasiveness of the solution, further investigations are needed before this should be used in a wider clinical setting.
RESUMEN
Veno-arterial extracorporeal life support (ECLS) may be indicated in patients with refractory heart failure. The list of conditions in which ECLS is successfully used is growing and includes cardiogenic shock following myocardial infarction, refractory cardiac arrest, septic shock with low cardiac output and severe intoxication. Femoral ECLS is the most common and often preferred ECLS-configuration in the emergency setting. Although femoral access is usually quick and easy to establish, it is also associated with specific adverse haemodynamic effects due to the direction of blood flow and access-site complications are inherent. Femoral ECLS provides adequate oxygen delivery and compensates for impaired cardiac output. However, retrograde blood flow into the aorta increases left ventricular afterload and may worsen left ventricular stroke work. Therefore, femoral ECLS is not equivalent to left ventricular unloading. Daily haemodynamic assessments are crucial and should include echocardiography and laboratory tests determining tissue oxygenation. Common complications include the harlequin-phenomenon, lower limb ischaemia or cerebral events and cannula site or intracranial bleeding. Despite a high incidence of complications and high mortality, ECLS is associated with survival benefits and better neurological outcomes in selected patient groups.
Asunto(s)
Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Paro Cardíaco , Humanos , Choque Cardiogénico/terapia , Choque Cardiogénico/etiología , Función Ventricular Izquierda , Paro Cardíaco/complicaciones , Cuidados Críticos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Interhospital transport of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients bears transport-associated risks. It is unknown how interhospital extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) transfer of COVID-19 patients by mobile ECMO units affects ARDS mortality. We compared the outcome of 94 COVID-19 patients cannulated in primary care hospitals and retrieved by mobile ECMO-teams to that of 84 patients cannulated at five German ECMO centers. Patients were recruited from March 2020 to November 2021. Twenty-six transports were airborne, 68 were land-based. Age, sex, body-mass-index, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, days invasively ventilated, and P/F-Ratio before ECMO initiation were similar in both groups. Counting only regional transports (≤250 km), mean transport distance was 139.5 km ± 17.7 km for helicopter (duration 52.5 ± 10.6 minutes) and 69.8 km ± 44.1 km for ambulance or mobile intensive care unit (duration 57.6 ± 29.4 minutes). Overall time of vvECMO support (20.4 ± 15.2 ECMO days for transported patients vs. 21.0 ± 20.5 for control, p = 0.83) and days invasively ventilated (27.9 ± 18.1 days vs. 32.6 ± 25.1 days, p = 0.16) were similar. Overall mortality did not differ between transported patients and controls (57/94 [61%] vs. 51/83 [61%], p = 0.43). COVID-19 patients cannulated and retrieved by mobile ECMO-teams have no excess risk compared with patients receiving vvECMO at experienced ECMO centers. Patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS, limited comorbidities, and no contraindication for ECMO should be referred early to local ECMO centers.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Neumonía , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria , Humanos , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , COVID-19/terapia , Ambulancias , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/etiología , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapiaRESUMEN
Critically ill patients in need of specialized diagnostic or therapeutic procedures, but are being cared for in a hospital without such equipment, have to be transferred to appropriate centers without discontinuation of current critical care (interhospital critical care transfer). These transfers are resource intensive, challenging, and require high logistical effort, which must be managed by a specialized and highly trained team, predeployment planning and efficient crew-resource management strategies. If planned adequately, interhospital critical care transfers can be performed safely without frequent adverse events. Beside routine interhospital critical care transfers, there are special missions (e.g., for patients in quarantine or supported by extracorporeal organ support) that might require adaption of the team composition or standard equipment. This article describes interhospital critical care transport missions including their different phases and special circumstances.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV2 pandemic posed unexpected challenges for hospitals worldwide and in addition to the supply emergency, simultaneously caused a high pressure to innovate. Due to the high number of cases of COVID-19 patients requiring intensive care, structured networking of hospitals gained particular importance. The tele-ICU communication platform TeleCOVID was developed to improve the quality of intensive care both by enabling teleconsultations and by supporting patient transfers. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to survey user experiences with TeleCOVID. The study investigated the extent to which the app is used, the user experiences of the participating hospitals, and the resulting implications for the further development of the telemedicine application. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A user survey was conducted in May 2022 using an online questionnaire. The survey contained both closed and open questions with a free text field. It was sent via the Hessian Ministry of Social Affairs and Integration (HMSI). All 135 hospitals in Hesse were contacted by email and invited to participate in the study. The results of the closed questions were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and the results of the open questions were clustered and thematically summarized using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The study showed that TeleCOVID was used primarily for transfer requests, followed by the need for a treatment consultation without a transfer request. Most often, ECMO treatment or treatment in a hospital of a higher care level was required. The content analysis showed that users particularly rated the possibility of a data protection-compliant and structured transfer of patient data as advantageous. It is also worth mentioning that in almost 25% of the cases a transfer of patients could be prevented by TeleCOVID. Disadvantages frequently mentioned by respondents were the lack of connection to the electronic hospital information system, the increased time required for the registration process, and the poor primary accessibility of contact persons. CONCLUSION: In a further development of the application the connection to the electronic hospital information system should be considered particularly urgent. In addition, the time expenditure should be reduced by a simplified login process. Due to interface barriers, an alternative data infrastructure would also be conceivable to create interoperability. The introduction of a web client could also increase usability. The main beneficiaries of hospital networking are physicians and patients in a context associated with a high workload and specific medical issues. Continuation and expansion of the app to intensive care medicine and beyond are therefore recommended. In further studies on the project, personal interviews with decision makers could be useful to conduct a more targeted needs analysis.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Cuidados Críticos , Consulta Remota , Humanos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Satisfacción del Paciente , Telemedicina , Pandemias , AlemaniaRESUMEN
Critically ill patients in need of specialized diagnostic or therapeutic procedures, but are being cared for in a hospital without such equipment, have to be transferred to appropriate centers without discontinuation of current critical care (interhospital critical care transfer). These transfers are resource intensive, challenging, and require high logistical effort, which must be managed by a specialized and highly trained team, predeployment planning and efficient crew-resource management strategies. If planned adequately, interhospital critical care transfers can be performed safely without frequent adverse events. Beside routine interhospital critical care transfers, there are special missions (e.g., for patients in quarantine or supported by extracorporeal organ support) that might require adaption of the team composition or standard equipment. This article describes interhospital critical care transport missions including their different phases and special circumstances.
Asunto(s)
Ambulancias , Transferencia de Pacientes , Humanos , Cuidados Críticos/métodos , Transporte de Pacientes/métodos , Enfermedad Crítica/terapiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: At the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, concerns were raised about sufficiency of available intensive care resources. In many places, routine interventions were postponed and criteria for the allocation of scarce resources were formulated. In Germany, some hospitals were at times seriously burdened during the course of the pandemic. Intensive care units in particular experienced a shortage of resources, which may have led to a restriction of services and a stricter indication setting for resource-intensive measures such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The aim of this work is to provide an overview of how these pressures were managed at large ECMO centers in Germany. METHODS: One representative of each major ECMO referral center in Germany was invited to participate in an online survey in spring 2021. RESULTS: Of 34 invitations that were sent out, the survey was answered by 23 participants. In all centers, routine procedures were postponed during the pandemic. Half of the centers increased the number of beds on which ECMO procedures could be offered. Nevertheless, in one-third of the centers, the start of at least one ECMO support was delayed because of a feared resource shortage. In 17% of centers, at least one patient was denied ECMO that he or she would have most likely received under prepandemic conditions. CONCLUSION: The results of this online survey indicate that the experienced pressures and resource constraints led some centers to be cautious about ECMO indications.
Asunto(s)
Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Femenino , Humanos , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/métodos , Pandemias , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , AlemaniaRESUMEN
In recent years, the use of mechanical support for patients with cardiac or circulatory failure has continuously increased, leading to 3,000 ECLS/ECMO (extracorporeal life support/extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) implantations annually in Germany. Due to the lack of guidelines, there is an urgent need for evidence-based recommendations addressing the central aspects of ECLS/ECMO therapy. In July 2015, the generation of a guideline level S3 according to the standards of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) was announced by the German Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (GSTCVS). In a well-structured consensus process, involving experts from Germany, Austria and Switzerland, delegated by 16 scientific societies and the patients' representation, the guideline "Use of extracorporeal circulation (ECLS/ECMO) for cardiac and circulatory failure" was created under guidance of the GSTCVS, and published in February 2021. The guideline focuses on clinical aspects of initiation, continuation, weaning and aftercare, herein also addressing structural and economic issues. This article presents an overview on the methodology as well as the final recommendations.
Asunto(s)
Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Choque , Humanos , Sociedades Científicas , Circulación Extracorporea , Sociedades Médicas , AlemaniaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Adverse neurological events during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are common and may be associated with devastating consequences. Close monitoring, early identification and prompt intervention can mitigate early and late neurological morbidity. Neuromonitoring and neurocognitive/neurodevelopmental follow-up are critically important to optimize outcomes in both adults and children. OBJECTIVE: To assess current practice of neuromonitoring during ECMO and neurocognitive/neurodevelopmental follow-up after ECMO across Europe and to inform the development of neuromonitoring and follow-up guidelines. METHODS: The EuroELSO Neurological Monitoring and Outcome Working Group conducted an electronic, web-based, multi-institutional, multinational survey in Europe. RESULTS: Of the 211 European ECMO centres (including non-ELSO centres) identified and approached in 23 countries, 133 (63%) responded. Of these, 43% reported routine neuromonitoring during ECMO for all patients, 35% indicated selective use, and 22% practiced bedside clinical examination alone. The reported neuromonitoring modalities were NIRS (n = 88, 66.2%), electroencephalography (n = 52, 39.1%), transcranial Doppler (n = 38, 28.5%) and brain injury biomarkers (n = 33, 24.8%). Paediatric centres (67%) reported using cranial ultrasound, though the frequency of monitoring varied widely. Before hospital discharge following ECMO, 50 (37.6%) reported routine neurological assessment and 22 (16.5%) routinely performed neuroimaging with more paediatric centres offering neurological assessment (65%) as compared to adult centres (20%). Only 15 (11.2%) had a structured longitudinal follow-up pathway (defined followup at regular intervals), while 99 (74.4%) had no follow-up programme. The majority (n = 96, 72.2%) agreed that there should be a longitudinal structured follow-up for ECMO survivors. CONCLUSIONS: This survey demonstrated significant variability in the use of different neuromonitoring modalities during and after ECMO. The perceived importance of neuromonitoring and follow-up was noted to be very high with agreement for a longitudinal structured follow-up programme, particularly in paediatric patients. Scientific society endorsed guidelines and minimum standards should be developed to inform local protocols.
Asunto(s)
Lesiones Encefálicas , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Humanos , Adulto , Niño , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/efectos adversos , Europa (Continente)RESUMEN
Background: Extracorporeal hemadsorption eliminates proinflammatory mediators in critically ill patients with hyperinflammation. The use of a pumpless extracorporeal hemadsorption technique allows its early usage prior to organ failure and the need for an additional medical device. In our animal model, we investigated the feasibility of pumpless extracorporeal hemadsorption over a wide range of mean arterial pressures (MAP). Methods: An arteriovenous shunt between the femoral artery and femoral vein was established in eight pigs. The hemadsorption devices were inserted into the shunt circulation; four pigs received CytoSorb® and four Oxiris® hemadsorbers. Extracorporeal blood flow was measured in a range between mean arterial pressures of 45-85 mmHg. Mean arterial pressures were preset using intravenous infusions of noradrenaline, urapidil, or increased sedatives. Results: Extracorporeal blood flows remained well above the minimum flows recommended by the manufacturers throughout all MAP steps for both devices. Linear regression resulted in CytoSorb® blood flow [mL/min] = 4.226 × MAP [mmHg] - 3.496 (R-square 0.8133) and Oxiris® blood flow [mL/min] = 3.267 × MAP [mmHg] + 57.63 (R-square 0.8708), respectively. Conclusion: Arteriovenous pumpless extracorporeal hemadsorption resulted in sufficient blood flows through both the CytoSorb® and Oxiris® devices over a wide range of mean arterial blood pressures and is likely an intriguing therapeutic option in the early phase of septic shock or hyperinflammatory syndromes.
RESUMEN
Background: There is ongoing debate whether lung physiology of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) differs from ARDS of other origin. Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze and compare how critically ill patients with COVID-19 and Influenza A or B were ventilated in our tertiary care center with or without extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We ask if acute lung failure due to COVID-19 requires different intensive care management compared to conventional ARDS. Methods: 25 patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS were matched to a cohort of 25 Influenza patients treated in our center from 2011 to 2021. Subgroup analysis addressed whether patients on ECMO received different mechanical ventilation than patients without extracorporeal support. Results: Compared to Influenza-associated ARDS, COVID-19 patients had higher ventilatory system compliance (40.7 mL/mbar [31.8-46.7 mL/mbar] vs. 31.4 mL/mbar [13.7-42.8 mL/mbar], p = 0.198), higher ventilatory ratio (1.57 [1.31-1.84] vs. 0.91 [0.44-1.38], p = 0.006) and higher minute ventilation at the time of intubation (mean minute ventilation 10.7 L/min [7.2-12.2 L/min] for COVID-19 vs. 6.0 L/min [2.5-10.1 L/min] for Influenza, p = 0.013). There were no measurable differences in P/F ratio, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and driving pressures (ΔP). Respiratory system compliance deteriorated considerably in COVID-19 patients on ECMO during 2 weeks of mechanical ventilation (Crs, mean decrease over 2 weeks -23.87 mL/mbar ± 32.94 mL/mbar, p = 0.037) but not in ventilated Influenza patients on ECMO and less so in ventilated COVID-19 patients without ECMO. For COVID-19 patients, low driving pressures on ECMO were strongly correlated to a decline in compliance after 2 weeks (Pearson's R 0.80, p = 0.058). Overall mortality was insignificantly lower for COVID-19 patients compared to Influenza patients (40% vs. 48%, p = 0.31). Outcome was insignificantly worse for patients requiring veno-venous ECMO in both groups (50% mortality for COVID-19 on ECMO vs. 27% without ECMO, p = 0.30/56% vs. 34% mortality for Influenza A/B with and without ECMO, p = 0.31). Conclusion: The pathophysiology of early COVID-19-associated ARDS differs from Influenza-associated acute lung failure by sustained respiratory mechanics during the early phase of ventilation. We question whether intubated COVID-19 patients on ECMO benefit from extremely low driving pressures, as this appears to accelerate derecruitment and consecutive loss of ventilatory system compliance.
RESUMEN
Low flow extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) is a promising approach to correct hypercapnic lung failure, facilitate lung protective ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome and to possibly prevent the application of invasive ventilation. However, the predominant availability of adult membrane lungs (MLs) at most intensive care units are burdens for low flow ECCO2R that intends to reduce cannula size and promote the mobility of the patients. Herein, in a mock setup, we combine the idea of a low flow ECCO2R and the use of adult MLs by installing a recirculation channel into the circuit and comparing the new setup to an already clinically established setup, "the Homburg lung." Furthermore, to make stronger reference to hypercapnic respiratory failure, we investigate the influence of CO2 partial pressure in blood on CO2 removal of both setups. A linear association between CO2 partial pressure in blood and CO2 removal of the ML in the physiologically relevant range was observed. To understand this linear dependence, a simplified mathematical model was proposed. Our new ECCO2R mock setup combines the idea of a low flow ECCO2R and an adult size ML. It shows a reasonable alternative to the current available low flow setups based on pediatric MLs.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Adulto , Dióxido de Carbono , Niño , Circulación Extracorporea , Humanos , Hipercapnia , Respiración Artificial , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Severe COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) often requires extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Recent German health insurance data revealed low ICU survival rates. Patient characteristics and experience of the ECMO center may determine intensive care unit (ICU) survival. The current study aimed to identify factors affecting ICU survival of COVID-19 ECMO patients. METHODS: 673 COVID-19 ARDS ECMO patients treated in 26 centers between January 1st 2020 and March 22nd 2021 were included. Data on clinical characteristics, adjunct therapies, complications, and outcome were documented. Block wise logistic regression analysis was applied to identify variables associated with ICU-survival. RESULTS: Most patients were between 50 and 70 years of age. PaO2/FiO2 ratio prior to ECMO was 72 mmHg (IQR: 58-99). ICU survival was 31.4%. Survival was significantly lower during the 2nd wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A subgroup of 284 (42%) patients fulfilling modified EOLIA criteria had a higher survival (38%) (p = 0.0014, OR 0.64 (CI 0.41-0.99)). Survival differed between low, intermediate, and high-volume centers with 20%, 30%, and 38%, respectively (p = 0.0024). Treatment in high volume centers resulted in an odds ratio of 0.55 (CI 0.28-1.02) compared to low volume centers. Additional factors associated with survival were younger age, shorter time between intubation and ECMO initiation, BMI > 35 (compared to < 25), absence of renal replacement therapy or major bleeding/thromboembolic events. CONCLUSIONS: Structural and patient-related factors, including age, comorbidities and ECMO case volume, determined the survival of COVID-19 ECMO. These factors combined with a more liberal ECMO indication during the 2nd wave may explain the reasonably overall low survival rate. Careful selection of patients and treatment in high volume ECMO centers was associated with higher odds of ICU survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (study ID: DRKS00022964, retrospectively registered, September 7th 2020, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00022964 .