Outcomes of patients with COVID-19 supported by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for greater than 90 days.

Objective: To determine the characteristics and outcomes of patients requiring prolonged (>90 days) venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) support for refractory Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated respiratory failure. Methods: A retrospective, observational analysis of consecutive patients requiring VV ECMO for COVID-19-associated respiratory failure was performed at a single institution between March 2020 and January 2022. Data were collected from the medical records. Patients were predominantly cannulated and supported long-term with a single, dual-lumen cannula in the internal jugular vein with the tip positioned in the pulmonary artery. All patients were managed with an awake VV ECMO approach, emphasizing avoidance of sedatives, extubation, ambulation, physical therapy, and nutrition. Patients requiring >90 days of ECMO were identified, analyzed, and compared to those needing a shorter duration of support. Results: A total of 44 patients were supported on VV ECMO during the study period, of whom 36 (82%) survived to discharge. Thirty-one patients were supported for <90 days, of whom 28 (90%) were discharged alive. Thirteen patients required >90 days of ECMO. All patients were extubated. Eight patients (62%) survived to discharge, with 1 patient requiring lung transplantation prior to decannulation. All survivors were free from mechanical ventilation and alive at a 6-month follow-up. Of the 4 patients who died on prolonged ECMO, 2 developed hemothorax necessitating surgery and 2 succumbed to fatal intracranial hemorrhage. Conclusions: Patients treated with VV ECMO for COVID-19-associated respiratory failure may require prolonged support to recover. Extubation, ambulation, aggressive rehabilitation, and nutritional support while on ECMO can yield favorable outcomes.

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.

Health characteristics of heart transplant recipients surviving into their 80s.

BACKGROUND: Heart transplantation (HTx) is the preferred treatment for patients with end-stage heart failure and has been successful for >30 y. The clinical course of recipients at the extreme of age is unknown. We reviewed our experience to determine the overall health and prevalence of Tx-related medical problems for recipients in their ninth decade. METHODS: We reviewed the UCTP experience from 1985 to present to identify patients who survived into their 80s and matched (1:1) with other recipients for gender and age at HTx, but did not survive to ≥80 y. The end point was the prevalence of medical problems. RESULTS: Since 1985, 1129 adult HTx have been performed and 14 patients (1.2%) survived to ≥80 y old. The mean age at HTx was 63 ± 4 y. Of octogenarians, the majority were males with ischemic cardiomyopathy. The average survival after transplant was 19 ± 5 y in the octogenarians and 5 ± 5 y in the controls (P < 0.01). Over time, the prevalence of comorbidities increased. Compared with nonoctogenarians, we observed higher prevalence of dyslipidemia (P = 0.02), and chronic renal insufficiency (P = 0.02) during follow-up. Cardiac function was normal (ejection fraction > 55%) for all octogenarians at age 80 y. CONCLUSIONS: Despite improvements in posttransplant care, survival of HTx patients into the ninth decade is rare (1%). For those surviving into their 80s, cardiac function is preserved but dyslipidemia, renal insufficiency, and skin cancers are common. As the age of Htx patients continues to increase, posttransplant care should be tailored to minimize post-HTx complications and further extend survival.