Transport of Critically Ill Patients in need of Extracorporeal Life Support

Mobile Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Teams: The North American Versus the European Experience

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate differences in the inclusion of anesthesiologists in mobile extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) teams between North American and European centers.

DESIGN

A retrospective review of North American versus European mobile ECMO teams. The search terms used to identify relevant articles were the following: "extracorporeal membrane transport," "mobile ECMO," and "interhospital transport."

SETTING

MEDLINE review of articles.

PARTICIPANTS

None.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

RESULTS

Between 1986 and 2015, 25 articles were published that reported the personnel makeup of mobile ECMO teams in North America and Europe: 6 from North American centers and 19 from European centers. The included articles reported a total of 1,329 cases: 389 (29%) adult-only cohorts and 940 (71%) mixed-age cohorts. Among North American studies, 0 of 6 (0%) reported the presence of an anesthesiologist on the mobile ECMO team in contrast to European studies, in which 10 of 19 (53%) reported the inclusion of an anesthesiologist (Fisher exact p for difference = 0.05). In terms of number of cases, this discrepancy translated to 543 total cases in North America (all without an anesthesiologist) and 499 cases in Europe (37%) including an anesthesiologist on the team (Fisher exact p for difference<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated significant geographic discrepancies in the inclusion of anesthesiologists on mobile ECMO teams, with European centers more likely to incorporate an anesthesiologist into the mobile ECMO process compared with North American centers.

Transportation of critically ill patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Serious pulmonary and cardiac failure may be treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) when conventional treatment fails. In some severely ill patients, it may be necessary to initiate ECMO at the local hospital and, thereafter, transport the patient back to the ECMO center. The aim of this study was to evaluate our experiences with transportation of patients on ECMO. From Oct 1992 to Jan 2008 23, patients were transported on ECMO from local hospitals to Rikshospitalet. The study included seventeen patients with pulmonary failure and four patients with cardiac failure. All age groups were represented. Aircraft were used in 17 cases, ground vehicles in six. The times from decision until ECMO was established, the time from ECMO to departure from the local hospital and the transportation time were registered. All transportations were uneventful. After 10.3 +/-6.7 days, six patients died on ECMO and another patient died within 30 days. Mean ECMO time for those who died was 13.3 +/- 9.6 vs. 8.5 +/- 4.7 days for survivors, p=0.34. Seventeen patients were able to be successfully weaned from ECMO. Thirty day survival was 67%. The mean age for survivors was 15.3+/-18.3 (range 0-54.6) vs. 23.6 +/- 20.3 years (range 0-55.9) in fatal cases, p=0.41. The time from referral to initiating ECMO was a mean of 7.32 +/- 2.3 (3.0-12.0) hours for survivors vs. 7.88 +/- 3.0 (3.50-13.40) hours for non- survivors, p=0.76. The time from initiating ECMO to departure was 5.1 +/- 6.5 (0.58-23.75) hours in survivors vs. 9.1 +/- 6.8 (0.55-18.45) hours in non-survivors, p=0.18. Time from departure to arrival at Rikshospitalet was a mean of 3.2 (0.50-5.10) hours for survivors versus 2.5 (0.5-4.40) for non-survivors, p=0.41. This study shows that ECMO can be successfully established at local hospitals, using an experienced team, and that transportation of patients on ECMO can be performed safely and without technical difficulties. Survival for this group of patients did not differ from patients treated at the ECMO center.

Referral and transportation for neonatal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Data from 32 patients who were transported for neonatal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) over a 66-month period were reviewed. One ground ambulance transport had to be postponed because of poor weather conditions; the patient died. One patient was excluded for ECMO on arrival at the ECMO centre. Of the remaining 30 infants, 20 (67%) required ECMO treatment, of which four (20%) died. All 10 (33%) patients who were treated with conventional therapy survived. During transportation all children remained stable in terms of oxygenation. Early referral and transportation by an experienced and well-equipped transport team allows safe transport of these critically ill neonates.

Complications of neonatal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

From 1973-1985 to 1988 the average patient complications per case were 1.44 per case and significantly increased during 1990 to 1992 to 2.10 per case (Figure 3). During the same periods patient survival significantly decreased from 84% (1973-1985 to 1988, n = 2463) to 80% (1990 to 1992, n = 4005) (Figure 4). The association between total complication rates and survival rate was examined by regression analysis (Table 5). The correlation of patient complication rate and total complication rate with survival is highly significant; however, causality cannot be established. When comparing different entry criteria (Table 2) for incidence of mechanical and patient complications, no significant differences are apparent. This is not surprising since each of the entry criteria were designed to identify the same patient population. When premature neonates (> 35 weeks) were placed on ECMO, 36% of them had intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) with 62% mortality while only 12% of the neonates < 35 weeks had ICH and a 49% mortality. Similar findings were noted with low birthweight neonates (< 2.2 kg), 28% had ICH with 64% mortality while only 12% of the neonates > 2.2 kg had ICH with a 50% mortality. Selection criteria remain problematic for a variety of reasons. They cannot be viewed as absolute because of variability between centres. What represents likely 80% mortality in one centre may not apply to another. Historical controls are misleading because changing respiratory therapy strategies make historical populations difficult to compare. Also, once an ECMO centre becomes established, a more challenging group of patients will be attracted than previously was the case. Further, a single entry criterion cannot be generalized for all entry diagnoses. Criteria for an 80% predicted mortality is probably not the same for MAS, CHN, PPHN, and sepsis. Subsequent patients registered in the Neonatal ECMO Registry of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization will address these issues more thoroughly, as specific details of the pre-ECMO condition and therapeutic strategies are collected. This collective review should help to identify trends which require reassessment of technique or patient management.