Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for SARS-CoV-2 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Retrospective Study From Hubei, China

Relationship between the Pre-ECMO and ECMO Time and Survival of Severe COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the etiology of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is used to support gas exchange in patients who have failed conventional mechanical ventilation. However, there is no clear consensus on the timing of ECMO use in severe COVID-19 patients.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the differences in pre-ECMO time and ECMO duration between COVID-19 survivors and non-survivors and to explore the association between them.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and other sources were searched until 21 October 2022. Studies reporting the relationship between ECMO-related time and COVID-19 survival were included. All available data were pooled using random-effects methods. Linear regression analysis was used to determine the correlation between pre-ECMO time and ECMO duration. The meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42023403236.

RESULTS

Out of the initial 2473 citations, we analyzed 318 full-text articles, and 54 studies were included, involving 13,691 patients. There were significant differences between survivors and non-survivors in the time from COVID-19 diagnosis (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): [-0.53, -0.29], p < 0.00001), hospital (SMD = -0.53, 95% CI: [-0.97, -0.09], p = 0.02) and intensive care unit (ICU) admission (SMD = -0.28, 95% CI: [-0.49, -0.08], p = 0.007), intubation or mechanical ventilation to ECMO (SMD = -0.21, 95% CI: [-0.32, -0.09], p = 0.0003) and ECMO duration (SMD = -0.18, 95% CI: [-0.30, -0.06], p = 0.003). There was no statistical association between a longer time from symptom onset to ECMO (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.05, 95% CI: [0.99, 1.12], p = 0.11) or time from intubation or mechanical ventilation (MV) and the risk of mortality (highest vs. lowest time groups odds ratio (OR) = 1.18, 95% CI: [0.78, 1.78], p = 0.42; per one-day increase OR = 1.14, 95% CI: [0.86, 1.52], p = 0.36; HR = 0.99, 95% CI: [0.95, 1.02], p = 0.39). There was no linear relationship between pre-ECMO time and ECMO duration.

CONCLUSION

There are differences in pre-ECMO time between COVID-19 survivors and non-survivors, and there is insufficient evidence to conclude that longer pre-ECMO time is responsible for reduced survival in COVID-19 patients. ECMO duration differed between survivors and non-survivors, and the timing of pre-ECMO does not have an impact on ECMO duration. Further studies are needed to explore the association between pre-ECMO and ECMO time in the survival of COVID-19 patients.

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.

Ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is employed to support critically ill COVD-19 patients. The occurrence of ischemic stroke and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), as well as the implementation of anticoagulation strategies under the dual influence of ECMO and COVID-19 remain unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to describe the ischemic stroke, ICH and overall in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients receiving ECMO and summarize the anticoagulation regimens.

METHODS

EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus were searched for studies examining ischemic stroke, ICH, and mortality in COVID-19 patients supported with ECMO. The outcomes were incidences of ischemic stroke, ICH, overall in-hospital mortality and anticoagulation regimens. We calculated the pooled proportions and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to summarize the results.

RESULTS

We analyzed 12 peer-reviewed studies involving 6039 COVID-19 patients. The incidence of ischemic stroke had a pooled estimate of 2.2% (95% CI: 1.2%-3.2%). The pooled prevalence of ICH was 8.0% (95% CI: 6.3%-9.6%). The pooled estimate of overall in-hospital mortality was 40.3% (95% CI: 33.1%-47.5%). The occurrence of ICH was significantly higher in COVID-19 patients supported with ECMO than in other respiratory ECMO [relative risk=1.75 (95% CI: 1.00-3.07)]. Unfractionated heparin was the most commonly used anticoagulant, and anticoagulation monitoring practice varied among centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Ischemic stroke and ICH were common under the double "hit" of COVID-19 and ECMO. The prevalence of ICH was significantly higher in COVID-19 patients supported with ECMO than non-COVID-19 patients requiring ECMO. Individualized anticoagulation regimens may be a good choice to balance thrombosis and bleeding. More detailed research and further exploration are needed to clarify the underlying mechanism and clinical management decisions.

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for coronavirus disease 2019 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Although the application of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is accumulating, the feasibility and safety of this therapy remain controversial. We aimed to evaluate the effect of VV-ECMO in the treatment of these patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform databases through November 2021. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the included studies were screened, and meta-analysis was performed by R software (version 4.0.2).

RESULTS

Forty-two studies including 2037 COVID-19 patients supported with VV-ECMO due to ARDS were identified. The pooled analysis revealed that 30-, 60-, and 90-day mortality among patients were respectively 46% (95% CI 37%-57%, I2 = 66%), 46% (95% CI 30%-70%, I2 = 93%), and 49% (95% CI 43%-58%, I2 = 52%), and the pooled incidence rate of in-hospital mortality, major bleeding, hemorrhagic stroke, thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, and renal replacement therapy were respectively 35%, 39%, 11%, 40%, 15%, 21%, and 44%.

CONCLUSION

Although COVID-19 patients may have a higher risk of bleeding, hemorrhagic stroke, and acute kidney injury during ECMO therapy, the survival rate was more than half of the cases. Our data may support the application of VV-ECMO in COVID-19 patients.

Management of massive airway hemorrhage associated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A retrospective case series study

Background and Aims

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an important means of treating patients with respiratory failure. Massive airway hemorrhage is a rare complication of ECMO, with high mortality. The aim of this study was to provide a reference for improving the success rate of treatment of this complication by analyzing and summarizing patient clinical data.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE databases for case reports of massive airway bleeding associated with ECMO from January 2000 to January 2022 and included one case treated at our facility. All patients were disconnected from the ventilator, and the endotracheal tube was clamped during treatment, resulting in complete airway packing for hemostasis. The clinical data of these patients were analyzed.

Results

Through searching and further screening, two works of literature reported four cases that met our inclusion criteria. Including our patient's case, five patients were included in this study (four adults and one neonate). The longest ECMO treatment time before bleeding was 14 days, and the shortest was 20 min. In all patients, conservative treatment was ineffective after a major airway hemorrhage. They were disconnected from the ventilator and the tracheal tube was clamped for 13-72 h. The four adult patients underwent bronchial artery embolization in the interventional radiology suite. All patients' bleeding stopped after treatment; they were successfully weaned off ECMO and discharged.

Conclusions

Treatment measures to disconnect the ventilator and clamp the endotracheal tube with full support from ECMO are feasible for massive airway bleeding associated with ECMO. Early bronchial arteriography and embolization can prevent rebleeding.

Impact of prone positioning duration on the outcome of patients receiving venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory distress syndrome: A meta-analysis

Purpose

Research has shown that prone positioning (PP) improves the survival of patients receiving venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the reported impact of PP duration on the outcome of V-V ECMO patients with ARDS varies across studies.

Methods

A meta-analysis approach was used to identify studies that investigated the impact of PP duration on the outcome of ARDS patients who were treated with V-V ECMO; the following databases were used: MEDLINE, Embase, Wanfang, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure. The primary outcome was cumulative survival. Secondary outcomes were length of stay in an intensive care unit, exchange of arterial blood gases, and adverse events.

Results

A total of 8 studies were included in the final meta-analysis. Patients with longer duration of PP (≥12 h) had a longer survival period (risk ratio: 1.24; 95% confidence interval: 1.00, 1.54]) than those with PP < 12 h. There was no evidence of publication bias across the studies.

Conclusion

Our results imply that a longer duration of PP ≥ 12 h might improve the outcome of patients with ARDS who receive V-V ECMO therapy.

Exacerbation of Pre-existing Neurological Symptoms With COVID-19 in Patients With Chronic Neurological Diseases: An Updated Systematic Review

The neurotropism of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can potentially explain the worsening of symptoms in patients with a history of neurological conditions such as stroke, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's, and epilepsy. Several studies have reported that these pre-existing conditions may worsen with a higher frequency of flare-ups, thus resulting in a more significant risk of patient mortality. In this review, we sought to provide an overview of the relationship between pre-existing neurological disorders and COVID-19, focusing on whether the initial infection directly influenced the severity of symptoms. We systematically searched the electronic database PubMed (MEDLINE) and used specific keywords related to our aims from January 2020 to July 2022. All articles published on COVID-19 with keywords pertaining to pre-existing neurological diseases were retrieved and subsequently analyzed. After independent review, the data from 107 articles were selected and evaluated. After analyzing the data from selected articles reviewing the effect of COVID-19 on neurological conditions, we have documented the relationship between said pre-existing neurological diseases, showing an increased risk of hospitalization, admission length, worsening of symptoms, and even mortality in COVID-19 patients.

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.

Ischemic Stroke and SARS-CoV-2 Infection: The Bidirectional Pathology and Risk Morbidities

Stroke is a fatal morbidity that needs emergency medical admission and immediate medical attention. COVID-19 ischemic brain damage is closely associated with common neurological symptoms, which are extremely difficult to treat medically, and risk factors. We performed literature research about COVID-19 and ischemia in PubMed, MEDLINE, and Scopus for this current narrative review. We discovered parallel manifestations of SARS-CoV-19 infection and brain ischemia risk factors. In published papers, we discovered a similar but complex pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection and stroke pathology. A patient with other systemic co-morbidities, such as diabetes, hypertension, or any respiratory disease, has a fatal combination in intensive care management when infected with SARS-CoV-19. Furthermore, due to their shared risk factors, COVID-19 and stroke are a lethal combination for medical management to treat. In this review, we discuss shared pathophysiology, adjuvant risk factors, challenges, and advancements in stroke-associated COVID-19 therapeutics.

Coagulation abnormalities in patients with COVID-19 on venovenous ECLS increased risk for technical complications and support times but had no impact on survival

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19)-associated acute respiratory distress on venovenous extracorporeal lung support (V-V ECLS) showed high incidence of vascular as well as ECLS-related thrombotic complications. The latter may influence the outcome of the patients.

METHODS

This is a retrospective monocentric study on prospectively collected data of technical complications including 69 adult COVID-19 patients on V-V ECLS (ECLS Registry, March 2020 until April 2021) without and with system exchanges. Alterations in ECLS-specific data, hemolysis, coagulation and hemostasis parameters were analyzed.

RESULTS

Every second COVID-19 patient on V-V ECLS developed technical complications. Optimized ECLS management at our ECLS center reduced cases of acute clot formation (pump head thrombosis, acute oxygenator thrombosis) (17%), and allowed early identification of progressive clotting processes (worsened gas transfer, coagulation disorder) (14%, 54%) with a significant overhang of hyperfibrinolysis (37%). Although COVID-19 disease and technical complications caused prolonged length of stay at the intensive care unit and ECLS support times, the proportion of successful weaning and survival rates were comparable with patients without system exchange.

CONCLUSION

The survival of ECLS patients with COVID-19 was independent of the requirement for system exchange due to technical-induced coagulation disorders. Close monitoring for circuit clotting is mandatory in COVID-19 patients and is one prerequisite for successful organ support in these difficult patients.

Mortality Trends after Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support: A Korean Nationwide Cohort

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of 7-, 30-, 60-, and 365-day overall and cause-specific mortality following extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support.

METHODS

The National Health Insurance claims database in South Korea was the data source for this population-based cohort study. We enrolled all adult patients aged ≥18 years receiving intensive care unit ECMO support from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2018. The study population was divided into three groups based on the main diagnoses during ECMO support: 1) cardiovascular, 2) respiratory, and 3) other diagnoses group (all other main diagnoses rather than cardiovascular or respiratory diseases).

RESULTS

A total of 18,697 patients were included in the final analysis (64.5%, 10.9%, and 24.6% in the cardiovascular, respiratory, and other groups, respectively). The corresponding 7-, 30-, 60-, and 365-day mortality rates in these groups were 33.1%, 56.1%, 62.4%, and 67.7%. Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated that the median survival time was shortest in the cardiovascular group (12.0 days, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.3-12.7), with 31.0 (95% CI: 28.5-33.6) and 49.0 (95% CI: 44.4-57.6) day survival in the respiratory and other diagnoses groups (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one-third of patients died within 7 days, half of the patients died within 30 days, and two-thirds died within 365 days of ECMO support. Overall survival time was shortest in the cardiovascular group, followed by that of the respiratory group.

Effect of prone positioning on survival in adult patients receiving venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Previous studies support the potential efficacy of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vvECMO) for improving survival in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) cases. Prone positioning (PP) has been shown to improve the outcomes of moderate-to-severe ARDS patients. Few studies and no randomized controlled trials have evaluated the effect of PP performed in ECMO patients.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effect of prone positioning for ARDS patients receiving vvECMO on survival. All authors were contacted to obtain complementary information not mentioned in the original articles. The main objective was to compare 28-day survival in vvECMO patients with PP to vvECMO patients without PP (controls).

Results

Thirteen studies with a combined population of 1836 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. PP was associated with a significant improvement in 28-day survival (503 survivors among 681 patients in the PP group [74%; 95% CI 71–77] vs. 450 survivors among 770 patients in the control group [58%, 95% CI 55–62]; RR 1.31 [95% CI 1.21–1.41]; I² 22% [95% CI 0–62%]; P < 0.0001). Survival was also improved in terms of other endpoints (60-day survival, 90-day survival, ICU survival, and hospital survival). In contrast, the duration of mechanical ventilation was increased in vvECMO patients with PP (mean difference 11.4 days [95% CI 9.2–13.5]; 0.64 [95% CI 0.50–0.78]; I² 8%; P < 0.0001).

Conclusion

According to this meta-analysis, survival was improved when prone positioning was used in ARDS patients receiving vvECMO. The impact of this combination on survival should be investigated in prospective randomized controlled trials.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-021-06604-x.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the management of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019: A narrative review

What started with 41 hospitalized patients identified as having laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China, by January 2, 2020, turned into an unprecedented pandemic with more than 113 million confirmed cases and a mortality exceeding 2.5 million deaths worldwide by the beginning of March 2021. Although the course of the disease is uneventful in most cases, there is a percentage of patients who become critically ill and need admission in the intensive care unit for severe respiratory failure. Numerous of these patients undergo invasive mechanical ventilation and have an extremely high mortality rate. For these patients, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has emerged as a last standing resource. In the present study, the literature was reviewed to evaluate the worldwide data regarding the use of ECMO in the management of critically ill COVID-19 patients. ISI Thomson Web of Science was searched for articles with English language abstracts from inception to March 1, 2021, with ‘ECMO in COVID-19’ as key words. A total of 214 abstracts were screened (case reports, guidelines, reviews) and the most relevant articles were included in the present review. The use of ECMO in the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome refractory to conventional mechanical invasive ventilation is increasing. By increasing the survival rate from less than 20% to more than 50%, ECMO proved to be a valuable resource in the management of the most challenging critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Secondary Organizing Pneumonia after Severe SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Case Report

(Background) COVID-19 is caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection and may result in unfavorable outcomes. A recent large-scale study showed that treatment with dexamethasone leads to favorable outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19, and the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has also been shown to improve outcomes. Recently, secondary organizing pneumonia (SOP) has been reported after SARS-CoV-2 infection, but the diagnostic and treatment strategies are still unclear. (Case presentation) Here, we report a patient with severe COVID-19 who developed SOP even after the use of dexamethasone, for whom the introduction of ECMO on the 19th day after hospitalization led to a favorable outcome. (Conclusions) Life-threatening SOP may evolve even after the use of dexamethasone, and the late-phase introduction of ECMO may save such patients with COVID-19.

Prone positioning during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prone positioning (PP) improves oxygenation and respiratory mechanics and is associated with lower mortality in patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Despite this, some patients develop refractory hypoxemia and hypercapnia requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) support and are usually cared for in supine position. The physiologic and outcome benefits of routine PP of patients during VV ECMO remains unclear. Hence, we conducted the systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the outcome benefits of PP for patients with ARDS being treated with VV ECMO.

METHODS

After registration with PROSPERO (CRD42020199723), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant studies that reported PP in more than 10 adult patients supported with VV ECMO from origin to 1 March 2021. Studies were reviewed for quality using appropriate Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. The random-effects model (DerSimonian and Laird) was used. The primary outcome of interest was cumulative survival. Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit length of stay (ICU LOS) and ECMO duration. Changes in arterial blood gas (ABG) values, ventilator mechanics and complication rates were also studied.

RESULTS

Of 812 potentially relevant publications, 12 studies (640 patients) met our inclusion criteria. Due to overlapping study populations, 11 studies were included in the final meta-analysis. Cumulative survival in patients that underwent PP was 57% (95% CI 41.9-71.4, high certainty). Patients that underwent PP had longer ICU LOS (+ 14.5 days, 95% CI 3.4-25.7, p = 0.01) and ECMO duration (+ 9.6 days, 95% CI 5.5-13.7, p < 0.0001). After PP, patients had significantly higher PaO2/FiO2 ratio, lower PaCO2 and reduced ventilator driving pressure, and no major complications were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

PP during VV ECMO appears safe with a cumulative survival of 57% and may result in longer ECMO runs and ICU LOS. However, evidence from appropriately designed randomized trials is needed prior to widespread adoption of PP on VV ECMO.

A rational approach on the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in severe hypoxemia: advanced technology is not a panacea

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a helpful intervention in patients with severe refractory hypoxemia either because mechanical ventilation cannot ensure adequate oxygenation or because lung protective ventilation is not feasible. Since ECMO is a highly invasive procedure with several, potentially devastating complications and its implementation is complex and expensive, simpler and less invasive therapeutic options should be first exploited. Low tidal volume and driving pressure ventilation, prone position, neuromuscular blocking agents and individualized ventilation based on transpulmonary pressure measurements have been demonstrated to successfully treat the vast majority of mechanically ventilated patients with severe hypoxemia. Veno-venous ECMO has a place in the small portion of severely hypoxemic patients in whom these strategies fail. A combined analysis of recent ARDS trials revealed that ECMO was used in only 2.15% of patients (n = 145/6736). Nevertheless, ECMO use has sharply increased in the last decade, raising questions regarding its thoughtful use. Such a policy could be harmful both for patients as well as for the ECMO technique itself. This narrative review attempts to describe together the practical approaches that can be offered to the sickest patients before going to ECMO, as well as the rationale and the limitations of ECMO. The benefit and the drawbacks associated with ECMO use along with a direct comparison with less invasive therapeutic strategies will be analyzed.

Transition from Simple V-V to V-A and Hybrid ECMO Configurations in COVID-19 ARDS

In SARS-CoV-2 patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (V-V ECMO) was shown to provide valuable treatment with reasonable survival in large multi-centre investigations. However, in some patients, conversion to modified ECMO support forms may be needed. In this single-centre retrospective registry, all consecutive patients receiving V-V ECMO between 1 March 2020 to 1 May 2021 were included and analysed. The patient cohort was divided into two groups: those who remained on V-V ECMO and those who required conversion to other modalities. Seventy-eight patients were included, with fourteen cases (18%) requiring conversions to veno-arterial (V-A) or hybrid ECMO. The reasons for the ECMO mode configuration change were inadequate drainage (35.7%), inadequate perfusion (14.3%), myocardial infarction (7.1%), hypovolemic shock (14.3%), cardiogenic shock (14.3%) and septic shock (7.1%). In multivariable analysis, the use of dobutamine (p = 0.007) and a shorter ICU duration (p = 0.047) predicted the conversion. The 30-day mortality was higher in converted patients (log-rank p = 0.029). Overall, only 19 patients (24.4%) survived to discharge or lung transplantation. Adverse events were more common after conversion and included renal, cardiovascular and ECMO-circuit complications. Conversion itself was not associated with mortality in the multivariable analysis. In conclusion, as many as 18% of patients undergoing V-V ECMO for COVID-19 ARDS may require conversion to advanced ECMO support.

The role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in critically ill patients with COVID-19: a narrative review

Extracorporeal life support treatments such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) have been recommended for the treatment of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To date, many countries, including China, have adopted ECMO as a treatment for severe COVID-19. However, marked differences in patient survival rates have been reported, and the underlying reasons are unclear. This study aimed to summarize the experience of using ECMO to treat severe COVID-19 and provide suggestions for improving ECMO management. The effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on the pathophysiology of COVID-19 and the effects of ECMO on the clinical outcomes in patients with severe cases of COVID-19 were reviewed. Recent data from frontline workers involved in the use of ECMO in Wuhan, China, and those experienced in the implementation of artificial heart and lung support strategies were analysed. There is evidence that ECMO may complicate the pathophysiological state in COVID-19 patients. However, many studies have shown that the appropriate application of ECMO improves the prognosis of such patients. To expand our understanding of the benefits of ECMO for critically ill patients with COVID-19, further prospective, multicentre clinical trials are needed.