Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Coronavirus Disease 2019: Crisis Standards of Care

Multi-modal prediction of extracorporeal support-a resource intensive therapy, utilizing a large national database

Objective

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is among the most resource-intensive therapies in critical care. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the lack of ECMO resource allocation tools. We aimed to develop a continuous ECMO risk prediction model to enhance patient triage and resource allocation.

Material and Methods

We leveraged multimodal data from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) to develop a hierarchical deep learning model, labeled "PreEMPT-ECMO" (Prediction, Early Monitoring, and Proactive Triage for ECMO) which integrates static and multi-granularity time series features to generate continuous predictions of ECMO utilization. Model performance was assessed across time points ranging from 0 to 96 hours prior to ECMO initiation, using both accuracy and precision metrics.

Results

Between January 2020 and May 2023, 101 400 patients were included, with 1298 (1.28%) supported on ECMO. PreEMPT-ECMO outperformed established predictive models, including Logistic Regression, Support Vector Machine, Random Forest, and Extreme Gradient Boosting Tree, in both accuracy and precision at all time points. Model interpretation analysis also highlighted variations in feature contributions through each patient's clinical course.

Discussion and Conclusions

We developed a hierarchical model for continuous ECMO use prediction, utilizing a large multicenter dataset incorporating both static and time series variables of various granularities. This novel approach reflects the nuanced decision-making process inherent in ECMO initiation and has the potential to be used as an early alert tool to guide patient triage and ECMO resource allocation. Future directions include prospective validation and generalizability on non-COVID-19 refractory respiratory failure, aiming to improve patient outcomes.

The Use of ECMO for COVID-19: Lessons Learned

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has seen an increase in global cases of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), with a concomitant increased demand for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Outcomes of patients with severe ARDS due to COVID-19 infection receiving ECMO support are evolving. The need for surge capacity, practical and ethical limitations on implementing ECMO, and the prolonged duration of ECMO support in patients with COVID-19-related ARDS has revealed limitations in organization and resource utilization. Coordination of efforts at multiple levels, from research to implementation, resulted in numerous innovations in the delivery of ECMO.

Heart failure during the COVID-19 pandemic: clinical, diagnostic, management, and organizational dilemmas

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection pandemic has affected the care of patients with heart failure (HF). Several consensus documents describe the appropriate diagnostic algorithm and treatment approach for patients with HF and associated COVID-19 infection. However, few questions about the mechanisms by which COVID can exacerbate HF in patients with high-risk (Stage B) or symptomatic HF (Stage C) remain unanswered. Therefore, the type of HF occurring during infection is poorly investigated. The diagnostic differentiation and management should be focused on the identification of the HF phenotype, underlying causes, and subsequent tailored therapy. In this framework, the relationship existing between COVID and onset of acute decompensated HF, isolated right HF, and cardiogenic shock is questioned, and the specific management is mainly based on local hospital organization rather than a standardized model. Similarly, some specific populations such as advanced HF, heart transplant, patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD), or valve disease remain under investigated. In this systematic review, we examine recent advances regarding the relationships between HF and COVID-19 pandemic with respect to epidemiology, pathogenetic mechanisms, and differential diagnosis. Also, according to the recent HF guidelines definition, we highlight different clinical profile identification, pointing out the main concerns in understudied HF populations.

Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID-19 patients: A systematic review of literature

OBJECTIVE

Myocardial damage occurs in up to 25% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. While veno-venous extracorporeal life support (V-V ECLS) is used as respiratory support, mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may be required for severe cardiac dysfunction. This systematic review summarizes the available literature regarding MCS use rates, disease drivers for MCS initiation, and MCS outcomes in COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

PubMed/EMBASE were searched until October 14, 2021. Articles including adults receiving ECLS for COVID-19 were included. The primary outcome was the rate of MCS use. Secondary outcomes included mortality at follow-up, ECLS conversion rate, intubation-to-cannulation time, time on ECLS, cardiac diseases, use of inotropes, and vasopressors.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight observational studies (comprising both ECLS-only populations and ECLS patients as part of larger populations) included 4218 COVID-19 patients (females: 28.8%; median age: 54.3 years, 95%CI: 50.7-57.8) of whom 2774 (65.8%) required ECLS with the majority (92.7%) on V-V ECLS, 4.7% on veno-arterial ECLS and/or Impella, and 2.6% on other ECLS. Acute heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and cardiac arrest were reported in 7.8%, 9.7%, and 6.6% of patients, respectively. Vasopressors were used in 37.2%. Overall, 3.1% of patients required an ECLS change from V-V ECLS to MCS for heart failure, myocarditis, or myocardial infarction. The median ECLS duration was 15.9 days (95%CI: 13.9-16.3), with an overall survival of 54.6% and 28.1% in V-V ECLS and MCS patients. One study reported 61.1% survival with oxy-right ventricular assist device.

CONCLUSION

MCS use for cardiocirculatory compromise has been reported in 7.3% of COVID-19 patients requiring ECLS, which is a lower percentage compared to the incidence of any severe cardiocirculatory complication. Based on the poor survival rates, further investigations are warranted to establish the most appropriated indications and timing for MCS in COVID-19.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation during Respiratory Pandemics: Past, Present, and Future

The role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in the management of severe acute respiratory failure, including acute respiratory distress syndrome, has become better defined in recent years in light of emerging high-quality evidence and technological advances. Use of ECMO has consequently increased throughout many parts of the world. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, however, has highlighted deficiencies in organizational capacity, research capability, knowledge sharing, and resource use. Although governments, medical societies, hospital systems, and clinicians were collectively unprepared for the scope of this pandemic, the use of ECMO, a highly resource-intensive and specialized form of life support, presented specific logistical and ethical challenges. As the pandemic has evolved, there has been greater collaboration in the use of ECMO across centers and regions, together with more robust data reporting through international registries and observational studies. Nevertheless, centralization of ECMO capacity is lacking in many regions of the world, and equitable use of ECMO resources remains uneven. There are no widely available mechanisms to conduct large-scale, rigorous clinical trials in real time. In this critical care review, we outline lessons learned during COVID-19 and prior respiratory pandemics in which ECMO was used, and we describe how we might apply these lessons going forward, both during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and in the future.

Evolving outcomes of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been used extensively for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Reports early in the pandemic suggested that mortality in patients with COVID-19 receiving ECMO was comparable to non-COVID-19-related ARDS. However, subsequent reports suggested that mortality appeared to be increasing over time. Therefore, we conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis, to characterise changes in mortality over time and elucidate risk factors for poor outcomes.

Methods

We conducted a meta-analysis (CRD42021271202), searching MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases, from 1 December 2019 to 26 January 2022, for studies reporting on mortality among adults with COVID-19 receiving ECMO. We also captured hospital and intensive care unit lengths of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation and ECMO, as well as complications of ECMO. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses, assessed risk of bias of included studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist and evaluated certainty of pooled estimates using GRADE methodology.

Results

Of 4522 citations, we included 52 studies comprising 18,211 patients in the meta-analysis. The pooled mortality rate among patients with COVID-19 requiring ECMO was 48.8% (95% confidence interval 44.8–52.9%, high certainty). Mortality was higher among studies which enrolled patients later in the pandemic as opposed to earlier (1st half 2020: 41.2%, 2nd half 2020: 46.4%, 1st half 2021: 62.0%, 2nd half 2021: 46.5%, interaction p value = 0.0014). Predictors of increased mortality included age, the time of final patient enrolment from 1 January 2020, and the proportion of patients receiving corticosteroids, and reduced duration of ECMO run.

Conclusions

The mortality rate for patients receiving ECMO for COVID-19-related ARDS has increased as the pandemic has progressed. The reasons for this are likely multifactorial; however, as outcomes for these patients evolve, the decision to initiate ECMO should include the best contextual estimate of mortality at the time of ECMO initiation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-04011-2.

MUlticenter STudy of tissue plasminogen activator (alteplase) use in COVID-19 severe respiratory failure (MUST COVID): A retrospective cohort study

Background

Few therapies exist to treat severe COVID-19 respiratory failure once it develops. Given known diffuse pulmonary microthrombi on autopsy studies of COVID-19 patients, we hypothesized that tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) may improve pulmonary function in COVID-19 respiratory failure.

Methods

A multicenter, retrospective, observational study of patients with confirmed COVID-19 and severe respiratory failure who received systemic tPA (alteplase) was performed. Seventy-nine adults from seven medical centers were included in the final analysis after institutional review boards' approval; 23 were excluded from analysis because tPA was administered for pulmonary macroembolism or deep venous thrombosis. The primary outcome was improvement in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio from baseline to 48 h after tPA. Linear mixed modeling was used for analysis.

Results

tPA was associated with significant PaO2/FiO2 improvement at 48 h (estimated paired difference = 23.1 ± 6.7), which was sustained at 72 h (interaction term p < 0.00). tPA administration was also associated with improved National Early Warning Score 2 scores at 24, 48, and 72 h after receiving tPA (interaction term p = 0.00). D-dimer was significantly elevated immediately after tPA, consistent with lysis of formed clot. Patients with declining respiratory status preceding tPA administration had more marked improvement in PaO2/FiO2 ratios than those who had poor but stable (not declining) respiratory status. There was one intracranial hemorrhage, which occurred within 24 h following tPA administration.

Conclusions

These data suggest tPA is associated with significant improvement in pulmonary function in severe COVID-19 respiratory failure, especially in patients whose pulmonary function is in decline, and has an acceptable safety profile in this patient population.

Oxigenación con membrana extracorpórea en el paciente COVID-19: resultados del Registro Español ECMO-COVID de la Sociedad Española de Cirugía Cardiovascular y Endovascular (SECCE)

Introducción y objetivos

La oxigenación con membrana extracorpórea (ECMO) ha resultado ser una opción terapéutica en los pacientes con insuficiencia respiratoria o cardiaca severa por COVID-19. Las indicaciones y manejo de estos pacientes están aún por determinar. Nuestro objetivo es evaluar los resultados de la terapia ECMO en pacientes con COVID-19 incluidos en un registro prospectivo e intentar optimizar los resultados.

Métodos

En marzo de 2020 se inició un registro multicéntrico anónimo prospectivo de pacientes con COVID-19 tratados mediante ECMO veno-arterial (V-A) o veno-venosa (V-V). Se registraron las variables clínicas, analíticas y respiratorias preimplante, datos de implante y evolución de la terapia. El evento primario fue la mortalidad hospitalaria de cualquier causa y los eventos secundarios fueron la recuperación funcional y el evento combinado de recuperación funcional y mortalidad de cualquier causa a partir de los 3 meses de seguimiento tras el alta.

Resultados

Se analizó a un total de 365 pacientes procedentes de 25 hospitales, 347 V-V y 18 V-A (edad media de 52,7 y 49,4 años, respectivamente). Los pacientes con ECMO V-V fueron más obesos, presentaban menos fracaso orgánico diferente al pulmonar y precisaron menos terapia inotrópica previa al implante. El 33,3% y el 34,9% de los pacientes con ECMO V-A y V-V, respectivamente, fueron dados de alta del hospital (p = NS) y la mortalidad fue similar, del 56,2% y 50,9% de los casos respectivamente, la inmensa mayoría durante la ECMO y sobre todo por fracaso multiorgánico. El 14,0% (51 pacientes) permanecían ingresados. El seguimiento medio fue de 196 ± 101,7 días. En el análisis multivariante, resultaron protectores de evento primario en pacientes con ECMO V-V el peso corporal (OR 0,967; IC 95%: 0,95-0,99; p = 0,004) y la procedencia del propio hospital (OR 0,48; IC 95%: 0,27-0,88; p = 0,018), mientras que la edad (OR 1,063; IC 95%: 1,005-1,12; p = 0,032), la hipertensión arterial (3,593; IC 95%: 1,06-12,19; p = 0,04) y las complicaciones en ECMO globales (2,44; IC 95%: 0,27-0,88; p = 0,019), digestivas (OR 4,23, IC 95%: 1,27-14,07; p = 0,019) y neurológicas (OR 4,66; IC 95%: 1,39-15,62; p = 0,013) fueron predictores independientes de mortalidad. El único predictor independiente de aparición de los eventos secundarios resultó el momento de seguimiento del paciente.

Conclusiones

La terapia con ECMO permite supervivencias hospitalarias hasta del 50% en pacientes con COVID-19 grave. La edad, la hipertensión arterial y las complicaciones en ECMO son los predictores de mortalidad hospitalaria en pacientes con ECMO V-V. Un mayor peso corporal y la procedencia del propio hospital son factores protectores. La recuperación funcional solo se ve influida por el tiempo de seguimiento transcurrido tras el alta. La estandarización de los criterios de implante y manejo del paciente con COVID grave mejoraría los resultados y la futura investigación clínica.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for coronavirus disease 2019-related acute respiratory distress syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To understand the potential role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), highlighting evolving practices and outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

The role for ECMO in COVID-19-related ARDS has evolved throughout the pandemic. Early reports of high mortality led to some to advocate for withholding ECMO in this setting. Subsequent data suggested mortality rates were on par with those from studies conducted prior to the pandemic. However, outcomes are evolving and mortality in these patients may be worsening with time.

SUMMARY

ECMO has an established role in the treatment of severe forms of ARDS. Current data suggest adherence to the currently accepted algorithm for management of ARDS, including the use of ECMO. However, planning related to resource utilization and strain on healthcare systems are necessary to determine the feasibility of ECMO in specific regions at any given time. Utilization of national and local networks, pooling of resources and ECMO mobilization units are important to optimize access to ECMO as appropriate. Reported complications of ECMO in the setting of COVID-19-related ARDS have been predominantly similar to those reported in studies of non-COVID-19-related ARDS. Further high-quality research is needed.

Long Runs and Higher Incidence of Bleeding Complications in COVID-19 Patients Requiring Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Case Series from the United Arab Emirates

Although the pathophysiology of pulmonary disease caused by coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is not yet fully understood, successful extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use has been reported for COVID-19-related severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We report a case series of 12 patients who received long venovenous ECMO (VV ECMO) runs for refractory hypoxia (median PF ratio of 71.8, interquartile range (IQR) 53.5–78.5) from COVID-19-related ARDS. A majority (75%) of the patients were males with a median age of 44 (IQR 37–53.5). Overall, six (50%) patients survived to hospital discharge with five of them (83.3%) noted to be cerebral performance category 1 or 2 at the time of discharge. Survivors consistently showed an improvement in sequential organ failure assessment scores within 72 hours of ECMO initiation. The median ECMO duration was 28 days (IQR 13.5–50). Despite using standard anticoagulation strategy, six (50%) of our patients had one or more major bleeding episodes, which proved to be directly fatal in four (25%) patients. Although the overall outcomes of our cohort were acceptable, our patients had much longer ECMO runs (mean 38 days in survivors) and with much higher, often fatal bleeding complications. We compare our data with other published COVID-19 VV ECMO series.

Rapid Development and Deployment of an Intensivist-Led Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Cannulation Program

OBJECTIVES

To determine the safety and efficacy of a rapidly deployed intensivist-led venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cannulation program in a preexisting extracorporeal membrane oxygenation program.

DESIGN

A retrospective observational before-and-after study of 40 patients undergoing percutaneous cannulation for venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in an established cannulation program by cardiothoracic surgeons versus a rapidly deployed medical intensivist cannulation program.

SETTING

An adult ICU in a tertiary academic medical center in Camden, NJ.

PATIENTS

Critically ill adult subjects with severe respiratory failure undergoing percutaneous cannulation for venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTERVENTIONS

Percutaneous cannulation for venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation performed by cardiothoracic surgeons compared with cannulations performed by medical intensivists.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cannulation site attempts were retrospectively reviewed. Subject demographics, specialty of physician performing cannulation, type of support, cannulation configuration, cannula size, imaging guidance, success rate, and complications were recorded and summarized. Twenty-two cannulations were performed by three cardiothoracic surgeons in 11 subjects between September 2019 and February 2020. The cannulation program rapidly transitioned to an intensivist-led and performed program in March 2020. Fifty-seven cannulations were performed by eight intensivists in 29 subjects between March 2020 and December 2020. Mean body mass index for subjects did not differ between groups (33.86 vs 35.89; p = 0.775). There was no difference in days on mechanical ventilation prior to cannulation, configuration, cannula size, or discharge condition. There was no difference in success rate of cannulation on first attempt per cannulation site (95.5 vs 96.7; p = 0.483) or major complication rate per cannulation site (4.5 vs 3.5; p = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no difference between success and complication rates of percutaneous venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation canulation when performed by cardiothoracic surgeons versus medical intensivist in an already established extracorporeal membrane oxygenation program. A rapidly deployed cannulation program by intensivists for venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation can be performed with high success and low complication rates.