Beneficial Effect of Prone Positioning During Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Coronavirus Disease 2019

Morbid obesity's impact on COVID-19 patients requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: The covid-19 critical care consortium database review

Introduction: Obesity is associated with a worse prognosis in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Veno-venous (V-V) Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) can be a rescue option, however, the direct impact of morbid obesity in this select group of patients remains unclear.Methods: This is an observational study of critically ill adults with COVID-19 and ARDS supported by V-V ECMO. Data are from 82 institutions participating in the COVID-19 Critical Care Consortium international registry. Patients were admitted between 12 January 2020 to 27 April 2021. They were stratified based on Body Mass Index (BMI) at 40 kg/m2. The endpoint was survival to hospital discharge.Results: Complete data available on 354 of 401 patients supported on V-V ECMO. The characteristics of the high BMI (>40 kg/m2) and lower BMI (≤40 kg/m2) groups were statistically similar. However, the 'high BMI' group were comparatively younger and had a lower APACHE II score. Using survival analysis, older age (Hazard Ratio, HR 1.49 per-10-years, CI 1.25-1.79) and higher BMI (HR 1.15 per-5 kg/m2 increase, CI 1.03-1.28) were associated with a decreased patient survival. A safe BMI threshold above which V-V ECMO would be prohibitive was not apparent and instead, the risk of an adverse outcome increased linearly with BMI.Conclusion: In COVID-19 patients with severe ARDS who require V-V ECMO, there is an increased risk of death associated with age and BMI. The risk is linear and there is no BMI threshold beyond which the risk for death greatly increases.

Prone Positioning During Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome With COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis

The available literature has furnished substantial evidence indicating the favorable outcomes of prone positioning (PP) on oxygenation parameters among patients afflicted with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, there is a notable disparity in the reported influence of PP on the overall outcomes of COVID-19 patients undergoing venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) across studies. This article has been prepared in adherence with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were utilized for data retrieval. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the cumulative survival rate among COVID-19 patients receiving V-V ECMO, comparing those who received PP to those who did not. Secondary endpoints included the duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, ECMO duration, and mechanical ventilation duration. A total of 15 studies involving 2286 patients were analyzed in the meta-analysis. PP significantly improved the cumulative survival rate (0.48, 95% CI: 0.40-0.55); risk ratio (RR) of 1.24 (95% CI: 1.11-1.38).PP during ECMO for COVID-19 patients yielded favorable outcomes in terms of 60-day survival, 90-day survival, ICU survival, and hospital survival. In contrast, patients who underwent PP had longer ECMO duration (8.1 days, 95% CI: 6.2-9.9, p<0.001) and mechanical ventilation duration (9.6 days, 95% CI: 8.0-11.2, p<0.001). PP demonstrated improved survival in COVID-19 patients with ARDS receiving V-V ECMO. However, additional well-designed prospective trials are warranted to further explore the effects of this combination on survival outcomes in COVID-19 patients.

Prone Positioning During Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Patients With Severe ARDS: The PRONECMO Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Prone positioning may improve outcomes in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but it is unknown whether prone positioning improves clinical outcomes among patients with ARDS who are undergoing venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) compared with supine positioning.

Objective

To test whether prone positioning vs supine positioning decreases the time to successful ECMO weaning in patients with severe ARDS supported by VV-ECMO.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Randomized clinical trial of patients with severe ARDS undergoing VV-ECMO for less than 48 hours at 14 intensive care units (ICUs) in France between March 3, 2021, and December 7, 2021.

Interventions

Patients were randomized 1:1 to prone positioning (at least 4 sessions of 16 hours) (n = 86) or to supine positioning (n = 84).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was time to successful ECMO weaning within 60 days following randomization. Secondary outcomes included ECMO and mechanical ventilation-free days, ICU and hospital length of stay, skin pressure injury, serious adverse events, and all-cause mortality at 90-day follow-up.

Results

Among 170 randomized patients (median age, 51 [IQR, 43-59] years; n = 60 women [35%]), median respiratory system compliance was 15.0 (IQR, 10.7-20.6) mL/cm H2O; 159 patients (94%) had COVID-19-related ARDS; and 164 (96%) were in prone position before ECMO initiation. Within 60 days of enrollment, 38 of 86 patients (44%) had successful ECMO weaning in the prone ECMO group compared with 37 of 84 (44%) in the supine ECMO group (risk difference, 0.1% [95% CI, -14.9% to 15.2%]; subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.71-1.75]; P = .64). Within 90 days, no significant difference was observed in ECMO duration (28 vs 32 days; difference, -4.9 [95% CI, -11.2 to 1.5] days; P = .13), ICU length of stay, or 90-day mortality (51% vs 48%; risk difference, 2.4% [95% CI, -13.9% to 18.6%]; P = .62). No serious adverse events were reported during the prone position procedure.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among patients with severe ARDS supported by VV-ECMO, prone positioning compared with supine positioning did not significantly reduce time to successful weaning of ECMO.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04607551.

[Ventilatory management of SARS-CoV-2 acute respiratory failure]

COVID-19 pneumonia presents several particularities in its clinical presentation (cytokine storm, silent hypoxemia, thrombo-embolic risk) and may lead to a number of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) phenotypes. While the optimal oxygenation strategy in cases of hypoxemic acute respiratory failure (ARF) is still under debate, ventilatory management of COVID-19-related ARF has confirmed the efficacy of high-flow oxygen therapy and restored interest in other ventilatory approaches such as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and noninvasive ventilation involving a helmet, which due to patient overflow are sometimes implemented outside of critical care units. However, further studies are still needed to determine which patients should be given which oxygenation technique, and under which conditions they require invasive mechanical ventilation, given that delayed initiation potentially burdens prognosis. During invasive mechanical ventilation, ventral decubitus and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation have become increasingly prevalent. While innovative therapies such as awake prone position or lung transplantation have likewise been developed, their indications, modalities and efficacy remain to be determined.

Use of prone position ventilation in patients with COVID-19 induced severe ARDS supported with V-V ECMO: A danish cohort study with focus on adverse events

INTRODUCTION

Prone position ventilation (PPV) of patients with adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) supported with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) may improve oxygenation and alveolar recruitment and is recommended when extensive dorsal consolidations are present, but only few data regarding adverse events (AE) related to PPV in this group of patients have been published.

METHODS

Nationwide retrospective analysis of 68 COVID-19 patients admitted from March 2020 - December 2021 with severe ARDS and need of V-V ECMO support. The number of patients treated with PPV, number of PPV-events, timing, the time spent in prone position, number and causes of AE are reported. Causes to stop the PPV regimen and risk factors for AE were explored.

RESULTS

44 out of 68 patients were treated with PPV, and 220 PPV events are evaluated. AE were identified in 99 out of 220 (45%) PPV events and occurred among 31 patients (71%). 1 fatal PPV related AE was registered. Acute supination occurred in 19 events (9%). Causes to stop the PPV regimen were almost equally distributed between effect (weaned from ECMO), no effect, death (of other reasons) and AE. Frequent causes of AE were pressures sores and ulcers, hypoxia, airway related and ECMO circuit related. Most AE occurred during patients first or second PPV event.

CONCLUSIONS

PPV treatment was found to carry a high incidence of PPV related AE in these patients. Causes and preventive measures to reduce occurrence of PPV related AE during V-V ECMO support need further exploration.

Mechanical ventilation during pediatric extracorporeal life support

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the role of ventilator induced lung injury (VILI) and patient self-inflicted lung injury in ventilated children supported on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

RECENT FINDINGS

While extracorporeal life support is used routinely used every day around the globe to support neonatal, pediatric, and adult patients with refractory cardiac and/or respiratory failure, the optimal approach to mechanical ventilation, especially for those with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), remains unknown and controversial. Given the lack of definitive data in this population, one must rely on available evidence in those with ARDS not supported with ECMO and extrapolate adult observations. Ventilatory management should include, as a minimum standard, limiting inspiratory and driving pressures, providing a sufficient level of positive end-expiratory pressure, and setting a low rate to reduce mechanical power. Allowing for spontaneous breathing and use of pulmonary specific ancillary treatment modalities must be individualized, while balancing the risk and benefits. Future studies delineating the best strategies for optimizing MV during pediatric extracorporeal life support are much needed.

SUMMARY

Future investigations will hopefully provide the needed evidence and better understanding of the overall goal of reducing mechanical ventilation intensity to decrease risk for VILI and promote lung recovery for those supported with ECMO.

Prone Positioning for Patients With COVID-19-Induced Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: Flipping the Script

During the COVID-19 pandemic, prone positioning (PP) emerged as a widely used supportive therapy for patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure caused by COVID-19 infection. In particular, awake PP (APP)-the placement of non-intubated patients in the prone position-has gained popularity and hence is detailed first herein. This review discusses recent publications on the use of PP for non-intubated and intubated subjects with COVID-19, highlighting the physiological responses, clinical outcomes, influential factors affecting treatment success, and strategies to improve adherence with APP. The use of prolonged PP and the use of PP for patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation are also presented.

Impact of COVID-19 on Sedation Requirements during Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

COVID-19-associated ARDS (C-ARDS) is mentioned to express higher analgosedation needs, in comparison to ARDS of other etiologies. The objective of this monocentric retrospective cohort study was to compare the analgosedation needs between C-ARDS and non-COVID-19 ARDS (non-C-ARDS) on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). Data were collected from the electronic medical records of all adult patients treated with C-ARDS in our Department of Intensive Care Medicine between March 2020 and April 2022. The control group included patients treated with non-C-ARDS between the years 2009 and 2020. A sedation sum score was created in order to describe the overall analgosedation needs. A total of 115 (31.5%) patients with C-ARDS and 250 (68.5%) with non-C-ARDS requiring VV-ECMO therapy were included in the study. The sedation sum score was significantly higher in the C-ARDS group (p < 0.001). COVID-19 was significantly associated with analgosedation in the univariable analysis. By contrast, the multivariable model did not show a significant association between COVID-19 and the sum score. The year of VV-ECMO support, BMI, SAPS II and prone positioning were significantly associated with sedation needs. The potential impact of COVID-19 remains unclear, and further studies are warranted in order to evaluate specific disease characteristics linked with analgesia and sedation.

Expert consensus statement on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation ECMO for COVID-19 severe ARDS: an international Delphi study

BACKGROUND

The high-quality evidence on managing COVID-19 patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support is insufficient. Furthermore, there is little consensus on allocating ECMO resources when scarce. The paucity of evidence and the need for guidance on controversial topics required an international expert consensus statement to understand the role of ECMO in COVID-19 better. Twenty-two international ECMO experts worldwide work together to interpret the most recent findings of the evolving published research, statement formulation, and voting to achieve consensus.

OBJECTIVES

To guide the next generation of ECMO practitioners during future pandemics on tackling controversial topics pertaining to using ECMO for patients with COVID-19-related severe ARDS.

METHODS

The scientific committee was assembled of five chairpersons with more than 5 years of ECMO experience and a critical care background. Their roles were modifying and restructuring the panel's questions and, assisting with statement formulation in addition to expert composition and literature review. Experts are identified based on their clinical experience with ECMO (minimum of 5 years) and previous academic activity on a global scale, with a focus on diversity in gender, geography, area of expertise, and level of seniority. We used the modified Delphi technique rounds and the nominal group technique (NGT) through three face-to-face meetings and the voting on the statement was conducted anonymously. The entire process was planned to be carried out in five phases: identifying the gap of knowledge, validation, statement formulation, voting, and drafting, respectively.

RESULTS

In phase I, the scientific committee obtained 52 questions on controversial topics in ECMO for COVID-19, further reviewed for duplication and redundancy in phase II, resulting in nine domains with 32 questions with a validation rate exceeding 75% (Fig. 1). In phase III, 25 questions were used to formulate 14 statements, and six questions achieved no consensus on the statements. In phase IV, two voting rounds resulted in 14 statements that reached a consensus are included in four domains which are: patient selection, ECMO clinical management, operational and logistics management, and ethics.

CONCLUSION

Three years after the onset of COVID-19, our understanding of the role of ECMO has evolved. However, it is incomplete. Tota14 statements achieved consensus; included in four domains discussing patient selection, clinical ECMO management, operational and logistic ECMO management and ethics to guide next-generation ECMO providers during future pandemic situations.

Setting and Monitoring of Mechanical Ventilation During Venovenous ECMO

This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2023. Other selected articles can be found online at  https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/annualupdate2023 . Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from  https://link.springer.com/bookseries/8901 .

Surgical Science and the Evolution of Critical Care Medicine

Surgical science has driven innovation and inquiry across adult and pediatric disciplines that provide critical care regardless of location. Surgically originated but broadly applicable knowledge has been globally shared within the pages Critical Care Medicine over the last 50 years.

Impact of Prone Position in COVID-19 Patients on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

OBJECTIVES

Prone positioning and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are both useful interventions in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Combining the two therapies is feasible and safe, but the effectiveness is not known. Our objective was to evaluate the potential survival benefit of prone positioning in venovenous ECMO patients cannulated for COVID-19-related ARDS.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of a multicenter cohort.

PATIENTS

Patients on venovenous ECMO who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction or with a diagnosis on chest CT were eligible.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

All patients on venovenous ECMO for respiratory failure in whom prone position status while on ECMO and in-hospital mortality were known were included. Of 647 patients in 41 centers, 517 were included. Median age was 55 (47-61), 78% were male and 95% were proned before cannulation. After cannulation, 364 patients (70%) were proned and 153 (30%) remained in the supine position for the whole ECMO run. There were 194 (53%) and 92 (60%) deaths in the prone and the supine groups, respectively. Prone position on ECMO was independently associated with lower in-hospital mortality (odds ratio = 0.49 [0.29-0.84]; p = 0.010). In 153 propensity score-matched pairs, mortality rate was 49.7% in the prone position group versus 60.1% in the supine position group (p = 0.085). Considering only patients alive at decannulation, propensity-matched proned patients had a significantly lower mortality rate (22.4% vs 37.8%; p = 0.029) than nonproned patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Prone position may be beneficial in patients supported by venovenous ECMO for COVID-19-related ARDS but more data are needed to draw definitive conclusions.

Timing of Prone Positioning During Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

OBJECTIVES

To assess the association of timing to prone positioning (PP) during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) with the probability of being discharged alive from the ICU at 90 days (primary endpoint) and the improvement of the respiratory system compliance (Cpl,rs).

DESIGN

Pooled individual data analysis from five original observational cohort studies.

SETTING

European extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) centers.

PATIENTS

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients who underwent PP during ECMO.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Time to PP during V-V ECMO was explored both as a continuous and a categorical variable with Cox proportional hazard models. Three hundred patients were included in the analysis. The longer the time to PP during V-V ECMO, the lower the adjusted probability of alive ICU discharge (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.90 for each day increase; 95% CI, 0.87-0.93). Two hundred twenty-three and 77 patients were included in the early PP (≤ 5 d) and late PP (> 5 d) groups, respectively. The cumulative 90-day probability of being discharged alive from the ICU was 61% in the early PP group vs 36% in the late PP group (log-rank test, p <0.001). This benefit was maintained after adjustment for confounders (adjusted HR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.66-3.81; p <0.001). In the early PP group, PP was associated with a significant improvement of Cpl,rs (4 ± 9 mL/cm H2O vs 0 ± 12 in the late PP group, p=0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large cohort of ARDS patients on ECMO, early PP during ECMO was associated with a higher probability of being discharged alive from the ICU at 90 days and a greater improvement of Cpl,rs.

Impact of Prone Position in COVID-19 Patients on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

OBJECTIVES

Prone positioning and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are both useful interventions in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Combining the two therapies is feasible and safe, but the effectiveness is not known. Our objective was to evaluate the potential survival benefit of prone positioning in venovenous ECMO patients cannulated for COVID-19-related ARDS.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of a multicenter cohort.

PATIENTS

Patients on venovenous ECMO who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction or with a diagnosis on chest CT were eligible.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

All patients on venovenous ECMO for respiratory failure in whom prone position status while on ECMO and in-hospital mortality were known were included. Of 647 patients in 41 centers, 517 were included. Median age was 55 (47-61), 78% were male and 95% were proned before cannulation. After cannulation, 364 patients (70%) were proned and 153 (30%) remained in the supine position for the whole ECMO run. There were 194 (53%) and 92 (60%) deaths in the prone and the supine groups, respectively. Prone position on ECMO was independently associated with lower in-hospital mortality (odds ratio = 0.49 [0.29-0.84]; p = 0.010). In 153 propensity score-matched pairs, mortality rate was 49.7% in the prone position group versus 60.1% in the supine position group (p = 0.085). Considering only patients alive at decannulation, propensity-matched proned patients had a significantly lower mortality rate (22.4% vs 37.8%; p = 0.029) than nonproned patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Prone position may be beneficial in patients supported by venovenous ECMO for COVID-19-related ARDS but more data are needed to draw definitive conclusions.

Prone positioning in ARDS patients supported with VV ECMO, what we should explore?

Background

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a prevalent cause of admittance to intensive care units, is associated with high mortality. Prone positioning has been proven to improve the outcomes of moderate to severe ARDS patients owing to its physiological effects. Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) will be considered in patients with severe hypoxemia. However, for patients with severe hypoxemia supported with VV ECMO, the potential effects and optimal strategies of prone positioning remain unclear. This review aimed to present these controversial questions and highlight directions for future research.

Main body

The clinically significant benefit of prone positioning and early VV ECMO alone was confirmed in patients with severe ARDS. However, a number of questions regarding the combination of VV ECMO and prone positioning remain unanswered. We discussed the potential effects of prone positioning on gas exchange, respiratory mechanics, hemodynamics, and outcomes. Strategies to achieve optimal outcomes, including indications, timing, duration, and frequency of prone positioning, as well as the management of respiratory drive during prone positioning sessions in ARDS patients receiving VV ECMO, are challenging and controversial. Additionally, whether and how to implement prone positioning according to ARDS phenotypes should be evaluated. Lung morphology monitored by computed tomography, lung ultrasound, or electrical impedance tomography might be a potential indication to make an individualized plan for prone positioning therapy in patients supported with VV ECMO.

Conclusion

For patients with ARDS supported with VV ECMO, the potential effects of prone positioning have yet to be clarified. Ensuring an optimal strategy, especially an individualized plan for prone positioning therapy during VV ECMO, is particularly challenging and requires further research.

Effect of prone position in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome supported by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a retrospective cohort study

Background

The application of prone position (PP) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) supported by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) is controversial.

Objectives

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of application of PP during VV-ECMO in patients with ARDS.

Methods

This was a single-center, retrospective study of patients who met the Berlin definition of ARDS, and were supported with VV-ECMO. We divided the patients into two groups. The prone group included patients who were supported by VV-ECMO, and experienced at least one period of PP, while those without PP during VV-ECMO were defined as the supine group. Propensity score matching (PSM) at a ratio of 1:1 was introduced to minimize potential confounders. The primary outcomes were the complications of PP and the change of arterial oxygen pressure/fraction of the inspiration (PaO₂/FiO₂) ratio after PP. The secondary outcomes were hospital survival, ICU survival, and ECMO weaning rate.

Results

From April 2013 to October 2020, a total of 91 patients met the diagnostic criteria of ARDS who were supported with ECMO. 38 patients (41.8%) received at least one period of PP during ECMO, while 53 patients (58.2%) were maintained in supine position during ECMO. 22 minor complications were reported in the prone group and major complications were not found. The other ECMO-related complications were similar between two groups. The PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio significantly improved after PP compared with before (174.50 (132.40–228.25) mmHg vs. 158.00 (122.93–210.33) mmHg, p < 0.001). PSM selected 25 pairs of patients with similar characteristics. Hospital survival or ICU survival did not differ between the two groups (40% vs. 28%, p = 0.370; 40% vs. 32%, p = 0.556). Significant difference of ECMO weaning rate between two groups was not found (56% vs. 32%, p = 0.087).

Conclusions

PP during VV-ECMO was safe and could improve oxygenation. A large-scale and well-designed RCT is needed in the future.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12890-022-02026-7.

Mechanical Ventilation during ECMO: Lessons from Clinical Trials and Future Prospects

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) accounts for 10% of ICU admissions and affects 3 million patients each year. Despite decades of research, it is still associated with one of the highest mortality rates in the critically ill. Advances in supportive care, innovations in technologies and insights from recent clinical trials have contributed to improved outcomes and a renewed interest in the scope and use of Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) as a treatment for severe ARDS, including high flow veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV-ECMO) and low flow Extracorporeal Carbon Dioxide Removal (ECCO2R). The rationale being that extracorporeal gas exchange allows the use of lung protective ventilator settings, thereby minimizing ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). Ventilation strategies are adapted to the patient's condition during the different stages of ECMO support. Several areas in the management of mechanical ventilation in patients on ECMO, such as the best ventilator mode, extubation-decannulation sequence and tracheostomy timing, are tailored to the patients' recovery. Reduction in sedation allowing mobilization, nutrition and early rehabilitation are subsequent therapeutic goals after lung rest has been achieved.

Respiratory indications for ECMO: focus on COVID-19

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly being used for patients with severe respiratory failure and has received particular attention during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Evidence from two key randomized controlled trials, a subsequent post hoc Bayesian analysis, and meta-analyses support the interpretation of a benefit of ECMO in combination with ultra-lung-protective ventilation for select patients with very severe forms of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). During the pandemic, new evidence has emerged helping to better define the role of ECMO for patients with COVID-19. Results from large cohorts suggest outcomes during the first wave of the pandemic were similar to those in non-COVID-19 cohorts. As the pandemic continued, mortality of patients supported with ECMO has increased. However, the precise reasons for this observation are unclear. Known risk factors for mortality in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients are higher patient age, concomitant extra-pulmonary organ failures or malignancies, prolonged mechanical ventilation before ECMO, less experienced treatment teams and lower ECMO caseloads in the treating center. ECMO is a high resource-dependent support option; therefore, it should be used judiciously, and its availability may need to be constrained when resources are scarce. More evidence from high-quality research is required to better define the role and limitations of ECMO in patients with severe COVID-19.