Explore the vast range of titles available.

Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is increasingly used in the treatment of infarct-related cardiogenic shock despite a lack of evidence regarding its effect on mortality. In this multicenter trial, patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock for whom early revascularization was planned were randomly assigned to receive early ECLS plus usual medical treatment (ECLS group) or usual medical treatment alone (control group). The primary outcome was death from any cause at 30 days. Safety outcomes included bleeding, stroke, and peripheral vascular complications warranting interventional or surgical therapy. A total of 420 patients underwent randomization, and 417 patients were included in final analyses. At 30 days, death from any cause had occurred in 100 of 209 patients (47.8%) in the ECLS group and in 102 of 208 patients (49.0%) in the control group (relative risk, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.19; P = 0.81). The median duration of mechanical ventilation was 7 days (interquartile range, 4 to 12) in the ECLS group and 5 days (interquartile range, 3 to 9) in the control group (median difference, 1 day; 95% CI, 0 to 2). The safety outcome consisting of moderate or severe bleeding occurred in 23.4% of the patients in the ECLS group and in 9.6% of those in the control group (relative risk, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.50 to 3.95); peripheral vascular complications warranting intervention occurred in 11.0% and 3.8%, respectively (relative risk, 2.86; 95% CI, 1.31 to 6.25). In patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock with planned early revascularization, the risk of death from any cause at the 30-day follow-up was not lower among the patients who received ECLS therapy than among those who received medical therapy alone. (Funded by the Else Kröner Fresenius Foundation and others; ECLS-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03637205.).

In acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock the use of mechanical circulatory support devices remains controversial and data from randomized clinical trials are very limited. Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) - venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation - provides the strongest hemodynamic support in addition to oxygenation. However, despite increasing use it has not yet been properly investigated in randomized trials. Therefore, a prospective randomized adequately powered clinical trial is warranted. The ECLS-SHOCK trial is a 420-patient controlled, international, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial. It is designed to compare whether treatment with ECLS in addition to early revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention or alternatively coronary artery bypass grafting and optimal medical treatment is beneficial in comparison to no-ECLS in patients with severe infarct-related cardiogenic shock. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to one of the two treatment arms. The primary efficacy endpoint of ECLS-SHOCK is 30-day mortality. Secondary outcome measures such as hemodynamic, laboratory, and clinical parameters will serve as surrogate endpoints for prognosis. Furthermore, a longer follow-up at 6 and 12 months will be performed including quality of life assessment. Safety endpoints include peripheral ischemic vascular complications, bleeding and stroke. The ECLS-SHOCK trial will address essential questions of efficacy and safety of ECLS in addition to early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock.

Background The Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) Maastricht Treaty for Nomenclature in Extracorporeal Life Support (ECLS) established consensus nomenclature and abbreviations for ECLS to ensure accurate, concise communication. Methods We build on this consensus nomenclature by layering a framework of precise and efficient abbreviations for cannula configuration that describe flow direction, number of cannulae used, any additional ECLS-related catheters, and cannulation sites. This work is a consensus of international representatives of the ELSO, including those from the North American, Latin American, European, South and West Asian, and Asian-Pacific chapters of ELSO. Results The classification increases in descriptive capability by introducing a third (cannula tip position) and fourth (cannula dimension) level to those provided in the previous consensus on ECLS cannulation configuration nomenclature. This expansion offers the simplest level needed to convey cannulation information yet allows for more details when required. Conclusions A complete nomenclature for ECLS cannulation configurations accommodating future revisions was developed to facilitate ability to compare practices and results, to promote efficient communication, and to improve quality of registry data.

Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, the care of patients with COVID-19 has changed and the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has increased. We aimed to examine patient selection, treatments, outcomes, and ECMO centre characteristics over the course of the pandemic to date. We retrospectively analysed the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry and COVID-19 Addendum to compare three groups of ECMO-supported patients with COVID-19 (aged ≥16 years). At early-adopting centres—ie, those using ECMO support for COVID-19 throughout 2020—we compared patients who started ECMO on or before May 1, 2020 (group A1), and between May 2 and Dec 31, 2020 (group A2). Late-adopting centres were those that provided ECMO for COVID-19 only after May 1, 2020 (group B). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality in a time-to-event analysis assessed 90 days after ECMO initiation. A Cox proportional hazards model was fit to compare the patient and centre-level adjusted relative risk of mortality among the groups. In 2020, 4812 patients with COVID-19 received ECMO across 349 centres within 41 countries. For early-adopting centres, the cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality 90 days after ECMO initiation was 36·9% (95% CI 34·1–39·7) in patients who started ECMO on or before May 1 (group A1) versus 51·9% (50·0–53·8) after May 1 (group A2); at late-adopting centres (group B), it was 58·9% (55·4–62·3). Relative to patients in group A2, group A1 patients had a lower adjusted relative risk of in-hospital mortality 90 days after ECMO (hazard ratio 0·82 [0·70−0·96]), whereas group B patients had a higher adjusted relative risk (1·42 [1·17−1·73]). Mortality after ECMO for patients with COVID-19 worsened during 2020. These findings inform the role of ECMO in COVID-19 for patients, clinicians, and policy makers. None.

This trial compared extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with non-ECMO ventilator care in patients with severe ARDS. There was no significant between-group difference in 60-day mortality. Interpretation was made difficult by crossovers from control to ECMO treatment.

Multiple major health organisations recommend the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support for COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure. However, initial reports of ECMO use in patients with COVID-19 described very high mortality and there have been no large, international cohort studies of ECMO for COVID-19 reported to date. We used data from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) Registry to characterise the epidemiology, hospital course, and outcomes of patients aged 16 years or older with confirmed COVID-19 who had ECMO support initiated between Jan 16 and May 1, 2020, at 213 hospitals in 36 countries. The primary outcome was in-hospital death in a time-to-event analysis assessed at 90 days after ECMO initiation. We applied a multivariable Cox model to examine whether patient and hospital factors were associated with in-hospital mortality. Data for 1035 patients with COVID-19 who received ECMO support were included in this study. Of these, 67 (6%) remained hospitalised, 311 (30%) were discharged home or to an acute rehabilitation centre, 101 (10%) were discharged to a long-term acute care centre or unspecified location, 176 (17%) were discharged to another hospital, and 380 (37%) died. The estimated cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality 90 days after the initiation of ECMO was 37·4% (95% CI 34·4–40·4). Mortality was 39% (380 of 968) in patients with a final disposition of death or hospital discharge. The use of ECMO for circulatory support was independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality (hazard ratio 1·89, 95% CI 1·20–2·97). In the subset of patients with COVID-19 receiving respiratory (venovenous) ECMO and characterised as having acute respiratory distress syndrome, the estimated cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality 90 days after the initiation of ECMO was 38·0% (95% CI 34·6–41·5). In patients with COVID-19 who received ECMO, both estimated mortality 90 days after ECMO and mortality in those with a final disposition of death or discharge were less than 40%. These data from 213 hospitals worldwide provide a generalisable estimate of ECMO mortality in the setting of COVID-19. None.

BackgroundRecent trends on outcomes in cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI) suggest improvements in early survival. However, with the ever-changing landscape in management of CS, we sought to identify age-based trends in these outcomes and mechanical circulatory support (MCS) use among patients with both AMI and non-AMI associated shock.MethodsWe queried the 2005–2014 Nationwide Inpatient Sample databases to identify patients with a diagnosis of cardiogenic shock. Trends in the incidence of hospital-mortality, and use of MCS such as intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), Impella/TandemHeart (IMP), and extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were analyzed within the overall population and among different age-categories (50 and under, 51–65, 66–80 and 81–99 years). We also made comparisons between patient groups admitted with CS complicating AMI and those with non-AMI associated CS.ResultsWe studied 144,254 cases of CS, of which 55.4% cases were associated with an AMI. Between 2005 and 2014, an overall decline in IABP use (29.8–17.7%; ptrend < 0.01), and an uptrend in IMP use (0.1–2.6%; ptrend < 0.01), ECMO use (0.3–1.8%; ptrend < 0.01) and in-hospital mortality (44.1–52.5% AMI related, 49.6–53.5% non-AMI related; ptrend < 0.01) was seen. Patients aged 81–99 years had the lowest rate of MCS use (14.8%), whereas those aged 51–65 years had highest rate of MCS use (32.3%). Multivariable analysis revealed that patients aged 51-65 years (aOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.40–1.52; p<0.001), 66–80 years (aOR 2.51, 95% CI 2.39–2.63; p<0.01) and 81–99 years (aOR 5.04, 95% CI 4.78–5.32; p<0.01) had significantly higher hospital mortality compared to patients aged ≤ 50 years. Patients admitted with CS complicating AMI were older and had more comorbidities, but lower hospital mortality (45.0 vs. 48.2%; p < 0.001) when compared to non-AMI related CS. We also noted that the proportion of patients admitted with CS complicating AMI significantly decreased from 2005 to 2014 (65.3–45.6%; ptrend < 0.01) whereas those admitted without an associated AMI increased.ConclusionsIABP use has declined whereas IMP and ECMO use has increased over time among CS admissions. Older age was associated with an incrementally higher independent risk for hospital mortality. Recent trends indicate an increase in both proportion of patients admitted with CS without associated AMI and in-hospital mortality across all CS admissions irrespective of AMI status.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a technology capable of providing short-term mechanical support to the heart, lungs or both. Over the last decade, the number of centres offering ECMO has grown rapidly. At the same time, the indications for its use have also been broadened. In part, this trend has been supported by advances in circuit design and in cannulation techniques. Despite the widespread adoption of extracorporeal life support techniques, the use of ECMO remains associated with significant morbidity and mortality. A complication witnessed during ECMO is the inflammatory response to extracorporeal circulation. This reaction shares similarities with the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and has been well-documented in relation to cardiopulmonary bypass. The exposure of a patient’s blood to the non-endothelialised surface of the ECMO circuit results in the widespread activation of the innate immune system; if unchecked this may result in inflammation and organ injury. Here, we review the pathophysiology of the inflammatory response to ECMO, highlighting the complex interactions between arms of the innate immune response, the endothelium and coagulation. An understanding of the processes involved may guide the design of therapies and strategies aimed at ameliorating inflammation during ECMO. Likewise, an appreciation of the potentially deleterious inflammatory effects of ECMO may assist those weighing the risks and benefits of therapy.

Background Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) support under extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) is the last option and may be offered to selected patients. Several factors predict outcome in these patients, including initial heart rhythm, comorbidities, and bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). We evaluated outcomes of all VA-ECMO patients treated within the last 5 years at our center in respect to low-flow duration during CPR. Methods We report retrospective registry data on all patients with eCPR treated at a university hospital between October 2010 and May 2016. Results A total of 133 patients (mean age 58.7 ± 2.6 years, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II score at admission 48.1 ± 3.4) were included in the analysis. The indication for eCPR was either in-hospital or out-of-hospital cardiac arrest without return of spontaneous circulation ( n  = 74 and 59, respectively). There was a significant difference in survival rates between groups (eCPR in-hospital cardiac arrest [IHCA] 18.9%, eCPR out-of-hospital cardiac arrest [OHCA] 8.5%; p  < 0.042). Mean low-flow duration (i.e., duration of mechanical CPR until VA-ECMO support) was 59.6 ± 5.0 minutes in all patients and significantly shorter in IHCA patients than in OHCA patients (49.6 ± 5.9 vs. 72.2 ± 7.4 minutes, p  = 0.001). Low-flow time strongly correlated with survival ( p  < 0.001) and was an independent predictor of mortality. Conclusions Time to full support is an important and alterable predictor of patient survival in eCPR, suggesting that VA-ECMO therapy should be established as fast as possible in the selected patients destined for eCPR.

Discoveries have emerged highlighting the complex nature of the interorgan cross-talk between the kidney and the lung. Vascular rigidity, neurohormonal activation, tissue hypoxia, and abnormal immune cell signaling have been identified as common pathways leading to the development and progression of chronic kidney disease. However, our understanding of the causal relationships between lung injury and kidney injury is not precise. This review discusses a number of features and mechanisms of renal dysfunction in pulmonary disorders in relation to respiratory acidosis, impaired gas exchange, systemic congestion, respiratory support/replacement therapies, and other issues relevant to the clinical care of these patients. Biotrauma due to injurious ventilatory strategies can lead to the release of mediators into the lung, which may then translocate into the systemic circulation and cause end-organ dysfunction, including renal dysfunction. Right ventricular dysfunction and congestive states may contribute to alterations of renal perfusion and oxygenation, leading to diuretic resistance and recurrent hospitalization. In patients with concomitant respiratory failure, noninvasive ventilation represents a promising treatment option for the correction of impaired renal microcirculation and endothelial dysfunction. In patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, short- and long-term monitoring of kidney function is warranted, as they are at highest risk of developing acute kidney injury and fluid overload.