Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for critically ill adults.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) may provide benefit in certain populations of adults, including those with severe cardiac failure, severe respiratory failure, and cardiac arrest. However, it is also associated with serious short- and long-term complications, and there remains a lack of high-quality evidence to guide practice. Recently several large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published, therefore, we undertook an update of our previous systematic review published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether venovenous (VV), venoarterial (VA), or ECMO cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) improve mortality compared to conventional cardiopulmonary support in critically ill adults. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was March 2022. The search was limited to English language only. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs, quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs that compared VV ECMO, VA ECMO or ECPR to conventional support in critically ill adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was 1. all-cause mortality at day 90 to one year. Our secondary outcomes were 2. length of hospital stay, 3. survival to discharge, 4. disability, 5. adverse outcomes/safety events, 6. health-related quality of life, 7. longer-term health status, and 8. cost-effectiveness. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Five RCTs met our inclusion criteria, with four new studies being added to the original review (total 757 participants). Two studies were of VV ECMO (429 participants), one VA ECMO (41 participants), and two ECPR (285 participants). Four RCTs had a low risk of bias and one was unclear, and the overall certainty of the results (GRADE score) was moderate, reduced primarily due to indirectness of the study populations and interventions. ECMO was associated with a reduction in 90-day to one-year mortality compared to conventional treatment (risk ratio [RR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70 to 0.92; P = 0.002, I2 = 11%). This finding remained stable after performing a sensitivity analysis by removing the single trial with an uncertain risk of bias. Subgroup analyses did not reveal a significant subgroup effect across VV, VA, or ECPR modes (P = 0.73). Four studies reported an increased risk of major hemorrhage with ECMO (RR 3.32, 95% CI 1.90 to 5.82; P < 0.001), while two studies reported no difference in favorable neurologic outcome (RR 2.83, 95% CI 0.36 to 22.42; P = 0.32). Other secondary outcomes were not consistently reported across the studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In this updated systematic review, which included four additional RCTs, we found that ECMO was associated with a reduction in day-90 to one-year all-cause mortality, as well as three times increased risk of bleeding. However, the certainty of this result was only low to moderate, limited by a low number of small trials, clinical heterogeneity, and indirectness across studies.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of critically ill patients with one, two and three doses of vaccination against COVID-19 in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination has been shown to be highly effective in preventing death and severe disease from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Currently, few studies have directly compared vaccinated and unvaccinated patients with severe COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU). AIMS: To compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of vaccine recipients and unvaccinated patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to the ICU in a nationwide setting. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Short PeRiod IncideNce sTudy of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection Australia, in 57 ICU during Delta and Omicron predominant periods of the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome was inhospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay and ICU mortality. RESULTS: There were 2970 patients admitted to ICU across participating sites from 26 June 2021 to 8 February 2022; 1134 (38.2%) patients were vaccine recipients, and 1836 (61.8%) patients were unvaccinated. Vaccine recipients were older, more comorbid and less likely to require organ support. Unadjusted inhospital mortality was greater in the vaccinated cohort. After adjusting for age, gender and comorbid status, no statistically significant association between inhospital or ICU mortality, and vaccination status, was apparent. CONCLUSION: We found COVID-19 infection can cause severe disease and death in vaccine recipients, though comorbid status and older age were significant contributors to mortality. Organ support requirements and the number of deaths were highest in the unvaccinated cohort.

Angiotensin II infusion in COVID-19: An international, multicenter, registry-based study.

To expand our understanding of the role of angiotensin II (ANGII) in coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19), we conducted an international, multicenter registry study to assess the use of ANGII in patients with COVID-19 compared to patients not receiving ANGII. Critically ill adult patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and received ANGII were matched with COVID-19 patients not receiving ANGII according to age, respiratory support, history of hypertension, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and/or ANGII receptor blocker, and date of admission. All outcomes were exploratory in nature and included improvement in oxygenation, duration of organ support, and mortality. In one year, 132 patients were included (65 in the ANGII group and 67 in the control group), and patients were comparable in baseline characteristics. During the first 12 h of infusion, patients in the ANGII had a faster decrease in FiO2  and maintained similar mean arterial pressure levels. Hospital mortality was not statistically significantly different between the groups (53.8% vs. 40.3%; p = 0.226). Within the limitations of such a study design, our findings confirm previous observations of a potentially positive effect of ANGII on blood pressure and FiO2 but no effect on patient-centered outcomes.

People in intensive care with COVID-19: demographic and clinical features during the first, second, and third pandemic waves in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the demographic and clinical features, management, and outcomes for patients admitted with COVID-19 to intensive care units (ICUs) during the first, second, and third waves of the pandemic in Australia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: People aged 16 years or more admitted with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 to the 78 Australian ICUs participating in the Short Period Incidence Study of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SPRINT-SARI) Australia project during the first (27 February - 30 June 2020), second (1 July 2020 - 25 June 2021), and third COVID-19 waves (26 June - 1 November 2021). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome: in-hospital mortality. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: ICU mortality; ICU and hospital lengths of stay; supportive and disease-specific therapies. RESULTS: 2493 people (1535 men, 62%) were admitted to 59 ICUs: 214 during the first (9%), 296 during the second (12%), and 1983 during the third wave (80%). The median age was 64 (IQR, 54-72) years during the first wave, 58 (IQR, 49-68) years during the second, and 54 (IQR, 41-65) years during the third. The proportion without co-existing illnesses was largest during the third wave (41%; first wave, 32%; second wave, 29%). The proportion of ICU beds occupied by patients with COVID-19 was 2.8% (95% CI, 2.7-2.9%) during the first, 4.6% (95% CI, 4.3-5.1%) during the second, and 19.1% (95% CI, 17.9-20.2%) during the third wave. Non-invasive (42% v 15%) and prone ventilation strategies (63% v 15%) were used more frequently during the third wave than during the first two waves. Thirty patients (14%) died in hospital during the first wave, 35 (12%) during the second, and 281 (17%) during the third. After adjusting for age, illness severity, and other covariates, the risk of in-hospital mortality was similar for the first and second waves, but 9.60 (95% CI, 3.52-16.7) percentage points higher during the third than the first wave. CONCLUSION: The demographic characteristics of patients in intensive care with COVID-19 and the treatments they received during the third pandemic wave differed from those of the first two waves. Adjusted in-hospital mortality was highest during the third wave.

Benchmarking as a quality of care improvement tool for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: an NCDR ACTION Registry experience in Latin America.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to examine the effect of benchmarking on quality-of-care metrics in patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) through the implementation of the American College of Cardiology (ACC) National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) ACTION Registry. DESIGN: From January 2005 to December 2017, 712 patients underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention PCI-499 before NCDR ACTION Registry implementation (prior to 2013) and 213 after implementation. SETTING: STEMI. PARTICIPANTS: 712 patients. INTERVENTION(S): Primary PCI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We examined hospital performance for the quality indicators in processes and outcomes of the management of patients presenting with STEMI. Outcome measures include door-to-balloon time (DBT), antiplatelet therapy and anti-ischemic drugs prescribed at discharge from pre-NCDR ACTION Registry to post-implementation. RESULTS: There was improvement in DBT, decreasing from 94 min in 2012 (before NCDR adoption) to reach a median of 47 min in 2017 (Ptrend < 0.001). The percentage of cases with the optimal DBT of < 90 min increased from 55.8% before to 90.1% after the implementation of the NCDR ACTION Registry (Ptrend < 0.001). The rate of aspirin (90.3-100%, P < 0.001), P2Y12 inhibitor (70.1-78.4%, P = 0.02), beta-blocker (76.8-100%, P < 0.001) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (60.1-99.5%, P < 0.001) prescribed at discharge increased from pre-NCDR ACTION Registry to post-implementation. Adjusted mortality before and after NCDR ACTION Registry implementation showed significant change (from 9.04 to 5.92%; P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of the ACC NCDR ACTION Registry led to incremental gains in the quality in STEMI management through the benchmarking of process of care and clinical outcomes, achieving reduced DBT, improving guideline-directed medication adherence and increasing patient safety, treatment efficacy and survival.