The PRESET-Score: the extrapulmonary predictive survival model for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome

Triage of V-V ECMO referrals for COVID-19 respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

As the pandemic progressed, the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome increased, and patient triage and transfer to ECMO centers became important to optimize patient outcomes. Our objectives are to identify predictors of patient transfer for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) evaluation as well as to describe the outcomes of accepted patients.

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective analysis of V-V ECMO transfer requests for adult patients with known or suspected COVID-19 and respiratory failure from March 2020 until March 2021. Data were collected prospectively during the triage process for transfer requests as part of clinical patient care at our institution.

RESULTS

Of 341 referred patients, 112 (33%) were accepted for transfer to our facility, whereas 229 (67%) patients were declined for transfer. The Classification and Regression Tree analysis showed that patients' high pressure during airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) and age were the variables most significantly associated with the decision to accept or decline patients for transfer.

CONCLUSIONS

Our triage process enabled one-third of referred patients to be transferred for evaluation, with nearly 70% of those patients ultimately receiving ECMO support. High ventilator settings on APRV and young age were associated with acceptance for transfer. Accepted patients also had a higher incidence of adjunctive therapies (proning and paralysis) prior to transfer request, less cardiac or renal dysfunction, and a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation. Further research is warranted to investigate the outcomes of nontransferred patients.

External Validation of the PREdiction of Survival on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Therapy (PRESET) Score: A Single Center Cohort Experience

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening condition affecting >10% of intensive care unit (ICU) patients worldwide with a mortality of up to 59% depending on severity. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a potentially life-saving procedure in severe ARDS but is technically and financially challenging. In recent years, various scoring systems have been proposed to select patients most likely to benefit from ECMO, with the PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy (PRESET) score being one of the most used. We collected data from 283 patients with ARDS of various etiology who underwent veno-venous (V-V) ECMO therapy at a German tertiary care ICU from January 2012 to December 2022. Median age in the cohort was 56 years, and 64.31% were males. The in-hospital mortality rate was 50.88% (n = 144). The median (25%; 75% quartile) severity scores were 38 (31; 49) for Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, 12 (10; 13) for Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and 7 (5; 8) for PRESET. Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II displayed the best prognostic value (area under the receiver operating characteristic [AUROC]: 0.665 [confidence interval (CI): 0.574-0.756; p = 0.046]). Prediction performance was weak in all analyzed scores despite good calibration. Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II had the best discrimination after adjustment of our original cohort. The use of scores explored in this study for patient selection for eligibility for V-V ECMO is not recommendable.

Cannulate, extubate, ambulate approach for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

We compared outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) managed using a dynamic, goal-driven approach to venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective, single-center analysis of our institutional ECMO registry using data from 2017 to 2021. We used Kaplan-Meier plots, Cox proportional hazard models, and propensity score analyses to evaluate the association of COVID-19 status (COVID-19-related ARDS vs non-COVID-19 ARDS) and survival to decannulation, discharge, tracheostomy, and extubation. We also conducted subgroup analyses to compare outcomes with the use of extracorporeal cytoreductive techniques (CytoSorb [CytoSorbents Corp] and plasmapheresis).

RESULTS

The sample comprised 128 patients, 50 with COVID-19 and 78 with non-COVID-19 ARDS. Advancing age was associated with decreased probability of survival to decannulation (P = .04). Compared with the non-COVID-19 ARDS group, patients with COVID-19 had a greater probability of survival to extubation (P < .01) and comparable survival to discharge (P = .14).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with COVID-19 managed with ECMO had comparable outcomes as patients with non-COVID ARDS. A strategy of early extubation and ambulation might be a safe and effective strategy to improve outcomes and survival, even for patients with severe COVID-19.

Validation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation mortality prediction and severity of illness scores in an international COVID-19 cohort

BACKGROUND

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) is a lifesaving support modality for severe respiratory failure, but its resource-intensive nature led to significant controversy surrounding its use during the COVID-19 pandemic. We report the performance of several ECMO mortality prediction and severity of illness scores at discriminating survival in a large COVID-19 V-V ECMO cohort.

METHODS

We validated ECMOnet, PRESET (PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy-Score), Roch, SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment), APACHE II (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation), 4C (Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium), and CURB-65 (Confusion, Urea nitrogen, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure, age >65 years) scores on the ISARIC (International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium) database. We report discrimination via Area Under the Receiver Operative Curve (AUROC) and Area under the Precision Recall Curve (AURPC) and calibration via Brier score.

RESULTS

We included 1147 patients and scores were calculated on patients with sufficient variables. ECMO mortality scores had AUROC (0.58-0.62), AUPRC (0.62-0.74), and Brier score (0.286-0.303). Roch score had the highest accuracy (AUROC 0.62), precision (AUPRC 0.74) yet worst calibration (Brier score of 0.3) despite being calculated on the fewest patients (144). Severity of illness scores had AUROC (0.52-0.57), AURPC (0.59-0.64), and Brier Score (0.265-0.471). APACHE II had the highest accuracy (AUROC 0.58), precision (AUPRC 0.64), and best calibration (Brier score 0.26).

CONCLUSION

Within a large international multicenter COVID-19 cohort, the evaluated ECMO mortality prediction and severity of illness scores demonstrated inconsistent discrimination and calibration highlighting the need for better clinically applicable decision support tools.

Multi-horizon predictive models for guiding extracorporeal resource allocation in critically ill COVID-19 patients

OBJECTIVE

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) resource allocation tools are currently lacking. We developed machine learning (ML) models for predicting COVID-19 patients at risk of receiving ECMO to guide patient triage and resource allocation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We included COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units for >24 h from March 2020 to October 2021, divided into training and testing development and testing-only holdout cohorts. We developed ECMO deployment timely prediction model ForecastECMO using Gradient Boosting Tree (GBT), with pre-ECMO prediction horizons from 0 to 48 h, compared to PaO2/FiO2 ratio, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy score, logistic regression, and 30 pre-selected clinical variables GBT Clinical GBT models, with area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) and precision recall curve (AUPRC) metrics.

RESULTS

ECMO prevalence was 2.89% and 1.73% in development and holdout cohorts. ForecastECMO had the best performance in both cohorts. At the 18-h prediction horizon, a potentially clinically actionable pre-ECMO window, ForecastECMO, had the highest AUROC (0.94 and 0.95) and AUPRC (0.54 and 0.37) in development and holdout cohorts in identifying ECMO patients without data 18 h prior to ECMO.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

We developed a multi-horizon model, ForecastECMO, with high performance in identifying patients receiving ECMO at various prediction horizons. This model has potential to be used as early alert tool to guide ECMO resource allocation for COVID-19 patients. Future prospective multicenter validation would provide evidence for generalizability and real-world application of such models to improve patient outcomes.

Predictive models in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO): a systematic review

PURPOSE

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been increasingly used in the last years to provide hemodynamic and respiratory support in critically ill patients. In this scenario, prognostic scores remain essential to choose which patients should initiate ECMO. This systematic review aims to assess the current landscape and inform subsequent efforts in the development of risk prediction tools for ECMO.

METHODS

PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE and Scopus were consulted. Articles between Jan 2011 and Feb 2022, including adults undergoing ECMO reporting a newly developed and validated predictive model for mortality, were included. Studies based on animal models, systematic reviews, case reports and conference abstracts were excluded. Data extraction aimed to capture study characteristics, risk model characteristics and model performance. The risk of bias was evaluated through the prediction model risk-of-bias assessment tool (PROBAST). The protocol has been registered in Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/fevw5 ).

RESULTS

Twenty-six prognostic scores for in-hospital mortality were identified, with a study size ranging from 60 to 4557 patients. The most common candidate variables were age, lactate concentration, creatinine concentration, bilirubin concentration and days in mechanical ventilation prior to ECMO. Five out of 16 venous-arterial (VA)-ECMO scores and 3 out of 9 veno-venous (VV)-ECMO scores had been validated externally. Additionally, one score was developed for both VA and VV populations. No score was judged at low risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

Most models have not been validated externally and apply after ECMO initiation; thus, some uncertainty whether ECMO should be initiated still remains. It has yet to be determined whether and to what extent a new methodological perspective may enhance the performance of predictive models for ECMO, with the ultimate goal to implement a model that positively influences patient outcomes.

Contraindications to the Initiation of Veno-Venous ECMO for Severe Acute Respiratory Failure in Adults: A Systematic Review and Practical Approach Based on the Current Literature

(1) Background: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly used for acute respiratory failure with few absolute but many relative contraindications. The provider in charge often has a difficult time weighing indications and contraindications to anticipate if the patient will benefit from this treatment, a decision that often decides life and death for the patient. To assist in this process in coming to a good evidence-based decision, we reviewed the available literature. (2) Methods: We performed a systematic review through a literature search of the MEDLINE database of former and current absolute and relative contraindications to the initiation of ECMO treatment. (3) Results: The following relative and absolute contraindications were identified in the literature: absolute-refusal of the use of extracorporeal techniques by the patient, advanced stage of cancer, fatal intracerebral hemorrhage/cerebral herniation/intractable intracranial hypertension, irreversible destruction of the lung parenchyma without the possibility of transplantation, and contraindications to lung transplantation; relative-advanced age, immunosuppressed patients/pharmacological immunosuppression, injurious ventilator settings > 7 days, right-heart failure, hematologic malignancies, especially bone marrow transplantation and graft-versus-host disease, SAPS II score ≥ 60 points, SOFA score > 12 points, PRESERVE score ≥ 5 points, RESP score ≤ -2 points, PRESET score ≥ 6 points, and "do not attempt resuscitation" order (DN(A)R status). (4) Conclusions: We provide a simple-to-follow algorithm that incorporates absolute and relative contraindications to the initiation of ECMO treatment. This algorithm attempts to weigh pros and cons regarding the benefit for an individual patient and hopefully assists caregivers to make better, informed decisions.

Extracorporeal Support Prognostication-Time to Move the Goal Posts?

Advances in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) technology are associated with expanded indications, increased utilization and improved outcome. There is growing interest in developing ECMO prognostication scores to aid in bedside decision making. To date, the majority of available scores have been limited to mostly registry-based data and with mortality as the main outcome of interest. There continues to be a gap in clinically applicable decision support tools to aid in the timing of ECMO cannulation to improve patients' long-term outcomes. We present a brief review of the commonly available adult and pediatric ECMO prognostication tools, their limitations, and future directions.