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

A comparative study of femoral artery and combined femoral and axillary artery cannulation in veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients

Objective

Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is a critical support technique for cardiac surgery patients. This study compares the outcomes of femoral artery cannulation vs. combined femoral and axillary artery cannulation in post-cardiotomy VA-ECMO patients. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of critically ill patients post-cardiac surgery under VA-ECMO support using different cannulation strategies. Specifically, the focus was on the impact of femoral artery (FA) cannulation vs. combined femoral artery and axillary artery (FA+AA) cannulation on patient outcomes.

Methods

Through a retrospective analysis, we compared 51 adult patients who underwent cardiac surgery and received VA-ECMO support based on the cannulation strategy employed-FA cannulation in 27 cases vs. FA+AA cannulation in 24 cases.

Results

The FA+AA group showed significant advantages over the FA group in terms of the incidence of chronic renal failure (CRF) (37.50% vs. 14.81%, p = 0.045), preoperative blood filtration requirement (37.50% vs. 11.11%, p = 0.016), decreased platelet count (82.67 ± 44.95 vs. 147.33 ± 108.79, p = 0.014), and elevated creatinine (Cr) levels (151.80 ± 60.73 vs. 110.26 ± 57.99, p = 0.041), although the two groups had similar 30-day mortality rates (FA group 40.74%, FA+AA group 33.33%). These findings underscore that a combined approach may offer more effective hemodynamic support and better clinical outcomes when selecting an ECMO cannulation strategy.

Conclusion

Despite the FA+AA group patients presenting with more preoperative risk factors, this group has exhibited lower rates of complications and faster recovery during ECMO treatment. While there has been no significant difference in 30-day mortality rates between the two cannulation strategies, the FA+AA approach may be more effective in reducing complications and improving limb ischemia. These findings highlight the importance of individualized treatment strategies and meticulous monitoring in managing post-cardiac surgery ECMO patients.

Early reapplication of prone position during venovenous ECMO for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a prospective observational study and propensity-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

A combination of prone positioning (PP) and venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) is safe, feasible, and associated with potentially improved survival for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, whether ARDS patients, especially non-COVID-19 patients, placed in PP before VV-ECMO should continue PP after a VV-ECMO connection is unknown. This study aimed to test the hypothesis that early use of PP during VV-ECMO could increase the proportion of patients successfully weaned from ECMO support in severe ARDS patients who received PP before ECMO.

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, patients with severe ARDS who were treated with VV-ECMO were divided into two groups: the prone group and the supine group, based on whether early PP was combined with VV-ECMO. The proportion of patients successfully weaned from VV-ECMO and 60-day mortality were analyzed before and after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

A total of 165 patients were enrolled, 50 in the prone and 115 in the supine group. Thirty-two (64%) and 61 (53%) patients were successfully weaned from ECMO in the prone and the supine groups, respectively. The proportion of patients successfully weaned from VV-ECMO in the prone group tended to be higher, albeit not statistically significant. During PP, there was a significant increase in partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2) without a change in ventilator or ECMO settings. Tidal impedance shifted significantly to the dorsal region, and lung ultrasound scores significantly decreased in the anterior and posterior regions. Forty-five propensity score-matched patients were included in each group. In this matched sample, the prone group had a higher proportion of patients successfully weaned from VV-ECMO (64.4% vs. 42.2%; P = 0.035) and lower 60-day mortality (37.8% vs. 60.0%; P = 0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with severe ARDS placed in PP before VV-ECMO should continue PP after VV-ECMO support. This approach could increase the probability of successful weaning from VV-ECMO.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.Gov: NCT04139733. Registered 23 October 2019.

[COVID-19 in the intensive care unit]

The acute respiratory failure as well as ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome) have challenged clinicians since the initial description over 50 years ago. Various causes can lead to ARDS and therapeutic approaches for ARDS/ARF are limited to the support or replacement of organ functions and the prevention of therapy-induced consequences. In recent years, triggered by the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen, numerous cases of acute lung failure (C-ARDS) have emerged. The pathophysiological processes of classical ARDS and C-ARDS are essentially similar. In their final stages of inflammation, both lead to a disruption of the blood-air barrier. Treatment strategies for C-ARDS, like classical ARDS, focus on supporting or replacing organ functions and preventing consequential damage. This article summarizes the treatment strategies in the intensive care unit.

Healthcare-associated infections in patients with severe COVID-19 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Both critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support exhibit a high incidence of healthcare-associated infections (HAI). However, data on incidence, microbiology, resistance patterns, and the impact of HAI on outcomes in patients receiving ECMO for severe COVID-19 remain limited. We aimed to report HAI incidence and microbiology in patients receiving ECMO for severe COVID-19 and to evaluate the impact of ECMO-associated infections (ECMO-AI) on in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

For this study, we analyzed data from 701 patients included in the ECMOSARS registry which included COVID-19 patients supported by ECMO in France.

RESULTS

Among 602 analyzed patients for whom HAI and hospital mortality data were available, 214 (36%) had ECMO-AI, resulting in an incidence rate of 27 ECMO-AI per 1000 ECMO days at risk. Of these, 154 patients had bloodstream infection (BSI) and 117 patients had ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). The responsible microorganisms were Enterobacteriaceae (34% for BSI and 48% for VAP), Enterococcus species (25% and 6%, respectively) and non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli (13% and 20%, respectively). Fungal infections were also observed (10% for BSI and 3% for VAP), as were multidrug-resistant organisms (21% and 15%, respectively). Using a Cox multistate model, ECMO-AI were not found associated with hospital death (HR = 1.00 95% CI [0.79-1.26], p = 0.986).

CONCLUSIONS

In a nationwide cohort of COVID-19 patients receiving ECMO support, we observed a high incidence of ECMO-AI. ECMO-AI were not found associated with hospital death. Trial registration number NCT04397588 (May 21, 2020).

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.

COVID-19 versus Other Disease Etiologies as the Cause of ARDS in Patients Necessitating Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation-A Comparison of Patients' Data during the Three Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Considering the characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), we compared the clinical course and outcomes of patients with ARDS who received venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) based on the etiology of ARDS. This retrospective single-center study included adult patients with severe ARDS necessitating VV ECMO during the COVID-19 pandemic. Among 45 patients who received VV ECMO, 21 presented with COVID-19. COVID-19 patients exhibited lower sequential organ failure assessment scores (9 [8-12.75] versus 8 [4-11.5], p = 0.033) but longer duration of VV ECMO support (10.5 days [3.25-29.25] versus 28 days [10.5-70.5] p = 0.018), which was accompanied by an weaning off rate from VV ECMO in 12/24 (50%) versus 12/21 (57.1%) and 28-day mortality in 9/24 [37.5%] versus 2/21 [9.5%] in non-COVID-19 and COVID-19 patients (p = 0.767, p = 0.040), respectively. Finally, in the adjusted Cox regression model for hospital mortality, the hazard ratio of COVID-19 was not significant (hazard ratio 0.350, 95% confidence interval 0.110-1.115, p = 0.076). Although the VV ECMO period was longer, COVID-19 did not significantly impact ECMO weaning off and mortality rates. Nonetheless, judicious patient selections based on risk factors should be followed.

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.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

The utilization of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for cardiopulmonary support continues to increase globally, with > 190,000 ECMO cases reported to the international Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry. The present review aims to synthesize important contributions to the literature surrounding the management of mechanical ventilation, prone positioning, anticoagulation, bleeding complications, and neurologic outcomes for infants, children, and adults undergoing ECMO in 2022. Additionally, issues related to cardiac ECMO, Harlequin syndrome, and anticoagulation during ECMO will be discussed.

Barriers and facilitators of adherence to awake prone positioning: a qualitative study using the COM-B model

BACKGROUND

Awake prone positioning (APP) is a recommended therapy for non-intubated ARDS patients, but adherence can be challenging. Understanding the barriers and facilitators of adherence to APP is essential to increase the adherence of therapy and improve patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to explore the barriers and facilitators of adherence to awake prone ventilation using a qualitative approach and the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behavior (COM-B) model.

METHODS

Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with patients involved in awake prone ventilation. Data were analyzed using an adapted inductive thematical approach and mapped onto the COM-B model to identify barriers and facilitators to adherence of APP.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients were interviewed (aged 55-92 years). Fifteen themes were identified and mapped directly on to the six COM-B constructs, with "physical challenges" related to physical capability being the primary barrier. These COM-B sub-items reflected five other barriers, including low self-efficacy(M), treatment environment(O), availability of time(O), misconceptions about the treatment(C), and insufficient knowledge(C). Key facilitators in adhering to APP were ability to identify and overcome obstacles(C), availability and affordability of treatment(O), family influences(O), beliefs and trust in treatment(M), fear about the disease(M), and perceived benefits(M). In addition, three factors played the role of both facilitator and barrier, such as media influences(O), healthcare influences(O), and behavioral habits(M).

CONCLUSION

The COM-B model was proved to be a useful framework for identifying the barriers and facilitators of adherence to awake prone ventilation. The findings suggest that adherence behavior is a dynamic and balanced process and interventions aimed at improving adherence to APP should address the barriers related to capability, opportunity, and motivation. Healthcare providers should focus on providing proper guidance and training, creating a comfortable environment, and offering social support to improve patients' capability and opportunity. Additionally, promoting patients' positive beliefs and attitudes towards the treatment and addressing misconceptions and fears can further enhance patients' motivation to adhere to the treatment plan.

New and personalized ventilatory strategies in patients with COVID-19

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and may lead to severe respiratory failure and the need for mechanical ventilation (MV). At hospital admission, patients can present with severe hypoxemia and dyspnea requiring increasingly aggressive MV strategies according to the clinical severity: noninvasive respiratory support (NRS), MV, and the use of rescue strategies such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Among NRS strategies, new tools have been adopted for critically ill patients, with advantages and disadvantages that need to be further elucidated. Advances in the field of lung imaging have allowed better understanding of the disease, not only the pathophysiology of COVID-19 but also the consequences of ventilatory strategies. In cases of refractory hypoxemia, the use of ECMO has been advocated and knowledge on handling and how to personalize strategies have increased during the pandemic. The aims of the present review are to: (1) discuss the evidence on different devices and strategies under NRS; (2) discuss new and personalized management under MV based on the pathophysiology of COVID-19; and (3) contextualize the use of rescue strategies such as ECMO in critically ill patients with COVID-19.