Core Outcome Measures for Research in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Acute Respiratory or Cardiac Failure: An International, Multidisciplinary, Modified Delphi Consensus Study

Long-term outcomes of patients supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly used to support patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The impact of ECMO on long-term outcomes of patients with severe ARDS is unclear.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases from inception to January 17th 2023. We selected clinical trials and observational studies reporting on long-term outcomes of patients supported with ECMO for ARDS. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included cognitive function, mental health, functional status, respiratory symptoms, and return to work.

RESULTS

Of the 7126 screened citations, 1 randomized clinical trial and 31 observational studies were included, of which 7 compared conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) and ECMO. Overall quality of studies of the included studies was limited, with the majority being either low (45%) or fair (32%) quality. There was no significant difference in HRQoL measured with the SF-36 score between ECMO and CMV patients (physical component score [PCS]: mean difference 3.91 (- 6.22 to 14.05), mental component score [MCS] mean difference 1.33 (- 3.93 to 6.60)). There was no difference between cognitive function, mental health, functional status, and respiratory symptoms between ECMO and CMV, but data available for comparison were limited. There were high rates of disability for ECMO survivors with 49% of patients returning to work and 23% needing assistance at home on follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Survivors of ECMO for ARDS experience significant disability in multiple domains. Further studies are needed to examine the effect of ECMO on long-term outcomes of patients compared to CMV.

Instruments to assess post-intensive care syndrome assessment: a scoping review and modified Delphi method study

BACKGROUND

The assessment of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) is challenging due to the numerous types of instruments. We herein attempted to identify and propose recommendations for instruments to assess PICS in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review to identify PICS follow-up studies at and after hospital discharge between 2014 and 2022. Assessment instruments used more than two times were included in the modified Delphi consensus process. A modified Delphi meeting was conducted three times by the PICS committee of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine, and each score was rated as not important (score: 1-3), important, but not critical (4-6), and critical (7-9). We included instruments with ≥ 70% of respondents rating critical and ≤ 15% of respondents rating not important.

RESULTS

In total, 6972 records were identified in this scoping review, and 754 studies were included in the analysis. After data extraction, 107 PICS assessment instruments were identified. The modified Delphi meeting reached 20 PICS assessment instrument recommendations: (1) in the physical domain: the 6-min walk test, MRC score, and grip strength, (2) in cognition: MoCA, MMSE, and SMQ, (3) in mental health: HADS, IES-R, and PHQ-9, (4) in the activities of daily living: the Barthel Index, IADL, and FIM, (5) in quality of life: SF-36, SF-12, EQ-5D-5L, 3L, and VAS (6), in sleep and pain: PSQI and Brief Pain Inventory, respectively, and (7) in the PICS-family domain: SF-36, HADS, and IES-R.

CONCLUSION

Based on a scoping review and the modified Delphi method, 20 PICS assessment instruments are recommended to assess physical, cognitive, mental health, activities of daily living, quality of life, sleep, and pain in ICU survivors and their families.

Expert consensus on training and accreditation for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation an international, multidisciplinary modified Delphi Study

BACKGROUND

A multidisciplinary group of stakeholders were used to identify: (1) the core competencies of a training program required to perform in-hospital ECPR initiation (2) additional competencies required to perform pre-hospital ECPR initiation and; (3) the optimal training method and maintenance protocol for delivering an ECPR program.

METHODS

A modified Delphi process was undertaken utilising two web based survey rounds and one virtual meeting. Experts rated the importance of different aspects of ECPR training, competency and governance on a 9-point Likert scale. A diverse, representative group was targeted. Consensus was achieved when greater than 70% respondents rated a domain as critical (> or = 7 on the 9 point Likert scale).

RESULTS

35 international ECPR experts from 9 countries formed the expert panel, with a median number of 14 years of ECMO practice (interquartile range 11-38). Participant response rates were 97% (survey round one), 63% (virtual meeting) and 100% (survey round two). After the second round of the survey, 47 consensus statements were formed outlining a core set of competencies required for ECPR provision. We identified key elements required to safely train and perform ECPR including skill pre-requisites, surrogate skill identification, the importance of competency-based assessment over volume of practice and competency requirements for successful ECPR practice and skill maintenance.

CONCLUSIONS

We present a series of core competencies, training requirements and ongoing governance protocols to guide safe ECPR implementation. These findings can be used to develop training syllabus and guide minimum standards for competency as the growth of ECPR practitioners continues.

Standardized Definitions for Cardiogenic Shock Research and Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices: Scientific Expert Panel From the Shock Academic Research Consortium (SHARC)

The Shock Academic Research Consortium is a multi-stakeholder group, including representatives from the US Food and Drug Administration and other government agencies, industry, and payers, convened to develop pragmatic consensus definitions useful for the evaluation of clinical trials enrolling patients with cardiogenic shock, including trials evaluating mechanical circulatory support devices. Several in-person and virtual meetings were convened between 2020 and 2022 to discuss the need for developing the standardized definitions required for evaluation of mechanical circulatory support devices in clinical trials for cardiogenic shock patients. The expert panel identified key concepts and topics by performing literature reviews, including previous clinical trials, while recognizing current challenges and the need to advance evidence-based practice and statistical analysis to support future clinical trials. For each category, a lead (primary) author was assigned to perform a literature search and draft a proposed definition, which was presented to the subgroup. These definitions were further modified after feedback from the expert panel meetings until a consensus was reached. This manuscript summarizes the expert panel recommendations focused on outcome definitions, including efficacy and safety.

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.

Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal in acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a systematic review, Bayesian meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Purpose:

To assess the safety and efficacy of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R)versusstandard care in patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF).

Methods:

MEDLINE, Embase and clinical trial registries were searched from 1994 to 31 December 2021. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Pairs of reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included ventilator-free days, length of stay, safety and adverse events and physiological changes. As a primary analysis, we performed a meta-analysis of mortality until day 30 using a Bayesian random effects model. We then performed a trial sequential analysis of RCTs.

Results:

21 studies met inclusion criteria: three RCTs, enrolling 531 patients, and 18 observational studies. In a pooled analysis of RCTs, the posterior probability of increased mortality with the use of ECCO2R was 73% (relative risk 1.19, 95% credible interval 0.70–2.29). There was substantial heterogeneity in the reporting of safety and adverse events. However, the incidence of extra and intracranial haemorrhage was higher (relative risk 3.00, 95% credible interval 0.41–20.51) among those randomised to ECCO2R. Current trials have accumulated 80.8% of the diversity-adjusted required information size and the lack of effect reaches futility for a 10% absolute risk reduction in mortality.

Conclusions:

The use of ECCO2R in patients with AHRF is not associated with improvements in clinical outcomes. Furthermore, it is likely that further trials of ECCO2R aiming to achieve an absolute risk reduction in mortality of ≥10% are futile.

Incidence of death or disability at 6 months after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in Australia: a prospective, multicentre, registry-embedded cohort study

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an invasive procedure used to support critically ill patients with the most severe forms of cardiac or respiratory failure in the short term, but long-term effects on incidence of death and disability are unknown. We aimed to assess incidence of death or disability associated with ECMO up to 6 months (180 days) after treatment.

METHODS

This prospective, multicentre, registry-embedded cohort study was done at 23 hospitals in Australia from Feb 15, 2019, to Dec 31, 2020. The EXCEL registry included all adults (≥18 years) in Australia who were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) in a participating centre at the time of the study and who underwent ECMO. All patients who received ECMO support for respiratory failure, cardiac failure, or cardiac arrest during their ICU stay were eligible for this study. The primary outcome was death or moderate-to-severe disability (defined using the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0, 12-item survey) at 6 months after ECMO initiation. We used Fisher's exact test to compare categorical variables. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03793257.

FINDINGS

Outcome data were available for 391 (88%) of 442 enrolled patients. The primary outcome of death or moderate-to-severe disability at 6 months was reported in 260 (66%) of 391 patients: 136 (67%) of 202 who received veno-arterial (VA)-ECMO, 60 (54%) of 111 who received veno-venous (VV)-ECMO, and 64 (82%) of 78 who received extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR). After adjustment for age, comorbidities, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV score, days between ICU admission and ECMO start, and use of vasopressors before ECMO, death or moderate-to-severe disability was higher in patients who received eCPR than in those who received VV-ECMO (VV-ECMO vs eCPR: risk difference [RD] -32% [95% CI -49 to -15]; p&lt;0·001) but not VA-ECMO (VA-ECMO vs eCPR -8% [-22 to 6]; p=0·27).

INTERPRETATION

In our study, only a third of patients were alive without moderate-to-severe disability at 6 months after initiation of ECMO. The finding that disability was common across all areas of functioning points to the need for long-term, multidisciplinary care and support for surviving patients who have had ECMO. Further studies are needed to understand the 180-day and longer-term prognosis of patients with different diagnoses receiving different modes of ECMO, which could have important implications for the selection of patients for ECMO and management strategies in the ICU.

FUNDING

The National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia.

Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal for acute respiratory failure: a review of potential indications, clinical practice and open research questions

Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO₂R) is a form of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) largely aimed at removing carbon dioxide in patients with acute hypoxemic or acute hypercapnic respiratory failure, so as to minimize respiratory acidosis, allowing more lung protective ventilatory settings which should decrease ventilator-induced lung injury. ECCO₂R is increasingly being used despite the lack of high-quality evidence, while complications associated with the technique remain an issue of concern. This review explains the physiological basis underlying the use of ECCO₂R, reviews the evidence regarding indications and contraindications, patient management and complications, and addresses organizational and ethical considerations. The indications and the risk-to-benefit ratio of this technique should now be carefully evaluated using structured national or international registries and large randomized trials.

Rehabilitation of adult patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to conduct a scoping review to comprehensively map the breadth of literature related to the rehabilitation of adult patients whilst on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and identify gaps and areas for future research.

REVIEW METHOD USED

This review was conducted using recommended frameworks for methods and reporting including the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.

DATE SOURCES

We searched seven databases from inception to June 2021 and included all study designs and grey literature.

REVIEW METHODS

Eligibility screening was completed by two independent reviewers according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, with any disagreement resolved by consensus or with consultation with a third reviewer. Two independent reviewers extracted data related to intervention characteristics, patient outcomes, feasibility, safety, hospital outcomes, and mortality using a custom-designed piloted form.

RESULTS

Of 8507 records, 185 original studies met inclusion criteria, with the majority being small retrospective studies. Rehabilitation was more commonly reported in patients on veno-venous rather than veno-arterial ECMO. Ambulation was the most commonly reported intervention (51% of studies). Critical gaps were identified including incomplete reporting of the intervention along with heterogeneity in the type and timing of outcome measures. Less than 50% of patients met eligibility criteria to participate, but screening for eligibility was infrequently reported (9% of studies). Delivery of rehabilitation during ECMO may be facilitated by an expert multidisciplinary team, along with a strategy that targets low sedation levels and an upper body cannulation approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Rehabilitation during ECMO is an emerging area of research and mostly consisted of small retrospective single-centre studies. Future research requires more robust methodological designs that include comprehensive screening of potential candidates with reporting of eligibility, more detailed descriptions of the rehabilitation interventions, inclusion of a core outcome set with defined measurement instruments, and consistent timing of outcome measurement.

An unbelievable ordeal: The experiences of adult survivors treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a rescue treatment option for adult patients with severe cardiac dysfunction or respiratory failure. While short-term patient outcomes, such as in-hospital mortality and complications, have been widely described, little is known about the illness or recovery experience from the perspectives of survivors. Subjective reports of health are important indicators of the full, long-term impact of critical illness and treatment with ECMO on survivors' lives.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to describe the experiences and needs of adults treated with ECMO, from onset of illness symptoms through the process of survivorship.

METHODS

This study was guided by the qualitative method of interpretive description. We conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with 16 adult survivors of ECMO who were treated at two participating regional ECMO centres in the northeast United States. Additional data were collected from demographic questionnaires, field notes, memos, and medical record review. Development of interview guides and data analysis were informed by the Family Management Style Framework. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis techniques.

RESULTS

The sample (n = 16) included 75% male participants; ages ranged from 23 to 65 years. Duration from hospital discharge to interviews ranged from 11 to 90 (M = 54; standard deviation = 28) months. Survivors progressed through three stages: Trauma and Vulnerability, Resiliency and Recovery, and Survivorship. Participants described short- and long-term impacts of the ECMO experience: all experienced physical challenges, two-thirds had at least one psychological or cognitive difficulty, and 25% were unable to return to work. All were deeply influenced by their own specific contexts, family support, and interactions with healthcare providers.

CONCLUSIONS

The ECMO experience is traumatic and complex. Recovery requires considerable time, perseverance, and support. Long-term sequelae include impairments in cognitive, mental, emotional, physical, and social health. Survivors could likely benefit from specialised posthospital health services that include integrated, comprehensive follow-up care.

A Core Outcome Set for Research in Patients on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

OBJECTIVES

A core set of outcomes have been identified and published, which are essential to include in all clinical research evaluating the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in critically ill patients, particularly regarding safety and adverse events. The purpose of this international modified Delphi study was to determine which measurement tools and the timing of measurement should be selected for the core outcome set for research evaluating patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

DESIGN

This was a two-round international, multidisciplinary web-based, modified Delphi study.

PATIENTS

Participants were identified from the International Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Network and the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization, including consumers, multidisciplinary clinicians, researchers and industry partners.

MEASUREMENTS

Measurement tools and the timing of measurement were identified from a systematic review of the literature and clinical trials registrations. The primary outcome was the percentage of respondents who completed each survey and indicated that a measurement tool as well as the timing of the measurement should "always" be included in a core outcome set.

MAIN RESULTS

Participant response rates were 46 of 65 (71%) and 40 of 46 (87%) for rounds one and two, respectively, with participants representing, researchers, consumers, and industry partners from 15 countries over five continents. Seven measurement tools were identified for the core outcome set of patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has identified appropriate measurement instruments and the timing of measurement to include in the core outcome set for research evaluating patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. This was an important final step to standardize and synthesize research efforts internationally.

Cognitive, Psychiatric, and Quality of Life Outcomes in Adult Survivors of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Therapy: A Scoping Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVES

To perform a scoping literature review of cognitive, psychiatric, and quality of life outcomes in adults undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for any indication.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO from inception to June 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Observational studies, clinical trials, qualitative studies, and case series with at least 10 adult subjects were included for analysis. Outcomes of interest consisted of general or domain-specific cognition, psychiatric illness, and quality of life measures that included both mental and physical health.

DATA EXTRACTION

Study selection, data quality assessment, and interpretation of results were performed by two independent investigators in accordance with the PRISMA statement.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-two articles were included in this review. Six described cognitive outcomes, 12 described psychiatric outcomes of which two were qualitative studies, and 16 described quality of life outcomes. Cognitive impairment was detected in varying degrees in every study that measured it. Three studies examined neuroimaging results and found neurologic injury to be more frequent in venoarterial versus venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, but described a variable correlation with cognitive impairment. Rates of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder were similar to other critically ill populations and were related to physical disability after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation survivors' physical quality of life was worse than population norms but tended to improve with time, while mental quality of life did not differ significantly from the general population. Most studies did not include matched controls and instead compared outcomes to previously published values.

CONCLUSIONS

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation survivors experience cognitive impairment, psychiatric morbidity, and worse quality of life compared with the general population and similar to other survivors of critical illness. Physical disability in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients plays a significant role in psychiatric morbidity. However, it remains unclear if structural brain injury plays a role in these outcomes and whether extracorporeal membrane oxygenation causes secondary brain injury.

A Core Outcome Set for Research Evaluating Interventions to Prevent and/or Treat Delirium in Critically Ill Adults: An International Consensus Study (Del-COrS)

OBJECTIVES

Delirium in critically ill adults is highly prevalent and has multiple negative consequences. To-date, trials of interventions to prevent or treat delirium report heterogenous outcomes. To develop international consensus among key stakeholders for a core outcome set for future trials of interventions to prevent and/or treat delirium in critically ill adults.

DESIGN

Core outcome set development, as recommended by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Handbook. Methods of generating items for the core outcome set included a systematic review and qualitative interviews with ICU survivors and family members. Consensus methods include a two-round web-based Delphi process and a face-to-face meeting using nominal group technique methods.

SUBJECTS

International representatives from three stakeholder groups: 1) clinical researchers, 2) ICU interprofessional clinicians, and 3) ICU survivors and family members.

SETTING

Telephone interviews, web-based surveys, and a face-to-face consensus meeting held at the 2019 European Delirium Association's annual meeting in Edinburgh, Scotland.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Qualitative interviews with 24 ICU survivors and family members identified 36 potential outcomes; six were additional to the 97 identified from the systematic review. After item reduction, 32 outcomes were presented in Delphi Round 1; 179 experts participated, 38 ICU survivors/family members (21%), 100 clinicians (56%), 41 researchers (23%). Three additional outcomes were added to Round 2; 134 Round 1 participants (75%) completed it. Upon conclusion of the consensus building processes, the final core outcome set comprised seven outcomes: delirium occurrence (including prevalence or incidence); delirium severity; time to delirium resolution; health-related quality of life; emotional distress (i.e., anxiety, depression, acute and posttraumatic stress); cognition (including memory); and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

This core outcome set, endorsed by the American and Australian Delirium Societies and European Delirium Association, is recommended for future clinical trials evaluating delirium prevention or treatment interventions in critically ill adults.

What outcomes should be evaluated in critically ill patients?

Randomized clinical trials in intensive care prioritize disease-focused outcomes rather than patient-centered outcomes. A paradigm shift considering the evaluation of measures after hospital discharge and measures focused on quality of life and common symptoms, such as pain and dyspnea, could better reflect the wishes of patients and their families. However, barriers related to the systematization of the interpretation of these outcomes, the heterogeneity of measurement instruments and the greater difficulty in performing the studies, to date, seem to hinder this change. In addition, the joint participation of patients, families, researchers, and clinicians in the definition of study outcomes is not yet a reality.

Core outcomes sets for studies evaluating critical illness and patient recovery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Given the growing body of critical care clinical research publications, core outcome sets (COSs) are important to help mitigate heterogeneity in outcomes assessed and measurement instruments used, and have potential to reduce research waste. This article provides an update on COS projects in critical care medicine, and related resources and tools for COS developers.

RECENT FINDINGS

We identified 28 unique COS projects, of which 15 have published results as of May 2020. COS topics relevant to critical care medicine include mechanical ventilation, cardiology, stroke, rehabilitation, and long-term outcomes (LTOs) after critical illness. There are four COS projects for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with a 'meta-COS' summarizing common outcomes across these projects. To help facilitate COS development, there are existing resources, standards, guidelines, and tools available from the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative (www.comet-initiative.org/) and the National Institutes of Health-funded Improve LTO project (www.improvelto.com/).

SUMMARY

Many COS projects have been completed in critical care, with more on-going COS projects, including foci from across the spectrum of acute critical care, COVID-19, critical care rehabilitation, and patient recovery and LTOs. Extensive resources are accessible to help facilitate rigorous COS development.

Temporary circulatory support for cardiogenic shock

Cardiogenic shock can occur due to acute ischaemic or non-ischaemic cardiac events, or from progression of long-standing underlying heart disease. When addressing the cause of underlying disease, the management of cardiogenic shock consists of vasopressors and inotropes; however, these agents can increase myocardial oxygen consumption, impair tissue perfusion, and are frequently ineffective. An alternative approach is to temporarily augment cardiac output using mechanical devices. The use of these devices-known as temporary circulatory support systems-has increased substantially in recent years, despite being expensive, resource intensive, associated with major complications, and lacking high-quality evidence to support their use. This Review summarises the physiological basis underlying the use of temporary circulatory support for cardiogenic shock, reviews the evidence informing indications and contraindications, addresses ethical considerations, and highlights the need for further research.

Planning and provision of ECMO services for severe ARDS during the COVID-19 pandemic and other outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases

WHO interim guidelines recommend offering extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) to eligible patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The number of patients with COVID-19 infection who might develop severe ARDS that is refractory to maximal medical management and require this level of support is currently unknown. Available evidence from similar patient populations suggests that carefully selected patients with severe ARDS who do not benefit from conventional treatment might be successfully supported with venovenous ECMO. The need for ECMO is relatively low and its use is mostly restricted to specialised centres globally. Providing complex therapies such as ECMO during outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases has unique challenges. Careful planning, judicious resource allocation, and training of personnel to provide complex therapeutic interventions while adhering to strict infection control measures are all crucial components of an ECMO action plan. ECMO can be initiated in specialist centres, or patients can receive ECMO during transportation from a centre that is not specialised for this procedure to an expert ECMO centre. Ensuring that systems enable safe and coordinated movement of critically ill patients, staff, and equipment is important to improve ECMO access. ECMO preparedness for the COVID-19 pandemic is important in view of the high transmission rate of the virus and respiratory-related mortality.

Contemporary strategies to improve clinical trial design for critical care research: insights from the First Critical Care Clinical Trialists Workshop

BACKGROUND

Conducting research in critically-ill patient populations is challenging, and most randomized trials of critically-ill patients have not achieved pre-specified statistical thresholds to conclude that the intervention being investigated was beneficial.

METHODS

In 2019, a diverse group of patient representatives, regulators from the USA and European Union, federal grant managers, industry representatives, clinical trialists, epidemiologists, and clinicians convened the First Critical Care Clinical Trialists (3CT) Workshop to discuss challenges and opportunities in conducting and assessing critical care trials. Herein, we present the advantages and disadvantages of available methodologies for clinical trial design, conduct, and analysis, and a series of recommendations to potentially improve future trials in critical care.

CONCLUSION

The 3CT Workshop participants identified opportunities to improve critical care trials using strategies to optimize sample size calculations, account for patient and disease heterogeneity, increase the efficiency of trial conduct, maximize the use of trial data, and to refine and standardize the collection of patient-centered and patient-informed outcome measures beyond mortality.

ECLS-associated infections in adults: what we know and what we don't yet know

Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is increasingly used in the management of patients with severe cardiopulmonary disease. Infections are frequently the etiologies underlying the respiratory, and occasionally cardiac, failure that necessitates ECLS. Just as importantly, infections are among the most commonly reported adverse events during ECLS. Infections in this setting may be the sequelae of prolonged critical illness or of underlying immune dysregulation; they may be hospital-acquired infections, and they may or may not be attributable to the presence of ECLS itself, the latter being an aspect that can be difficult to determine. Current registry data and evidence from the literature offer some insights, but also leave open many questions regarding the nature and significance of infections reported both before and during ECLS, including the question of any causal link between ECLS and the development of infections. An ongoing lack of consistency in the identification, diagnosis, management, and prevention of infections during ECLS is limiting our ability to interpret literature data and thus highlighting the need for more rigorous investigation and standardization of definitions. This review aims to characterize the current understanding of infections associated with the use of ECLS, taking into account data from the updated Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry, which provides important context for understanding the epidemiology and outcomes of these patients.