Journal of Chest Surgery

  • 제57권3호
  • /
  • Pages.281-288
  • /
  • 2024
  • /
  • 2765-1606(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2765-1614(eISSN)
대한심장혈관흉부외과학회 (The Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Differences in Treatment Outcomes According to the Insertion Method Used in Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Single-Center Experience

  • Han Sol Lee (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Daegu Catholic University School of Medicine) ;
  • Chul Ho Lee (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Daegu Catholic University School of Medicine) ;
  • Jae Seok Jang (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Daegu Catholic University School of Medicine) ;
  • Jun Woo Cho (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Daegu Catholic University School of Medicine) ;
  • Yun-Ho Jeon (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Daegu Catholic University School of Medicine)
  • 투고 : 2023.08.22
  • 심사 : 2024.01.18
  • 발행 : 2024.05.05
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Background: Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a key treatment method used with patients in cardiac arrest who do not respond to medical treatment. A critical step in initiating therapy is the insertion of ECMO cannulas. Peripheral ECMO cannulation methods have been preferred for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). Methods: Patients who underwent ECPR at Daegu Catholic University Medical Center between January 2017 and May 2023 were included in this study. We analyzed the impact of 2 different peripheral cannulation strategies (surgical cutdown vs. percutaneous cannulation) on various factors, including survival rate. Results: Among the 99 patients included in this study, 66 underwent surgical cutdown, and 33 underwent percutaneous insertion. The survival to discharge rates were 36.4% for the surgical cutdown group and 30.3% for the percutaneous group (p=0.708). The ECMO insertion times were 21.3 minutes for the surgical cutdown group and 10.3 minutes for the percutaneous group (p<0.001). The factors associated with overall mortality included a shorter low-flow time (hazard ratio [HR], 1.045; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.019-1.071; p=0.001) and whether return of spontaneous circulation was achieved (HR, 0.317; 95% CI, 0.127-0.787; p=0.013). Low-flow time was defined as the time from the start of cardiopulmonary resuscitation to the completion of ECMO cannula insertion. Conclusion: No statistically significant difference in in-hospital mortality was observed between the surgical and percutaneous groups. However, regardless of the chosen cannulation strategy, reducing ECMO cannulation time was beneficial, as a shorter low-flow time was associated with significant benefits in terms of survival.

키워드

과제정보

This work was supported by grant from the Korean Association of Mechanical Life Support (KAMEL 2024-002).

참고문헌

  1. Jayaraman AL, Cormican D, Shah P, Ramakrishna H. Cannulation strategies in adult veno-arterial and veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: techniques, limitations, and special considerations. Ann Card Anaesth 2017;20(Supplement):S11-8. https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-9784.197791 
  2. Rao P, Khalpey Z, Smith R, Burkhoff D, Kociol RD. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest. Circ Heart Fail 2018;11:e004905. https://doi.org/10.1161/circheartfailure.118.004905 
  3. Mandigers L, Boersma E, den Uil CA, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing low-flow duration of extracorporeal and conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2022;35:ivac219. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivac219 
  4. Combes A, Price S, Slutsky AS, Brodie D. Temporary circulatory support for cardiogenic shock. Lancet 2020;396:199-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)31047-3 
  5. Eckman PM, Katz JN, El Banayosy A, Bohula EA, Sun B, van Diepen S. Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for cardiogenic shock: an introduction for the busy clinician. Circulation 2019;140:2019-37. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.119.034512 
  6. Conrad SA, Grier LR, Scott LK, Green R, Jordan M. Percutaneous cannulation for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation by intensivists: a retrospective single-institution case series. Crit Care Med 2015;43:1010-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0000000000000883 
  7. Wang L, Yang F, Zhang S, et al. Percutaneous versus surgical cannulation for femoro-femoral VA-ECMO in patients with cardiogenic shock: results from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry. J Heart Lung Transplant 2022;41:470-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healun.2022.01.009 
  8. Cairo SB, Arbuthnot M, Boomer L, et al. Comparing percutaneous to open access for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in pediatric respiratory failure. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2018;19:981-91. https://doi.org/10.1097/pcc.0000000000001691 
  9. Pavlushkov E, Berman M, Valchanov K. Cannulation techniques for extracorporeal life support. Ann Transl Med 2017;5:70. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2016.11.47 
  10. Bonicolini E, Martucci G, Simons J, et al. Limb ischemia in peripheral veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a narrative review of incidence, prevention, monitoring, and treatment. Crit Care 2019;23:266. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-019-2541-3 
  11. Aiyagari RM, Rocchini AP, Remenapp RT, Graziano JN. Decompression of the left atrium during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation using a transseptal cannula incorporated into the circuit. Crit Care Med 2006;34:2603-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ccm.0000239113.02836.f1 
  12. Hlavacek AM, Atz AM, Bradley SM, Bandisode VM. Left atrial decompression by percutaneous cannula placement while on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005;130:595-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2004.12.029 
  13. Weber C, Deppe AC, Sabashnikov A, et al. Left ventricular thrombus formation in patients undergoing femoral veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Perfusion 2018;33:283-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267659117745369 
  14. Murphy DA, Hockings LE, Andrews RK, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-hemostatic complications. Transfus Med Rev 2015;29:90-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmrv.2014.12.001 
  15. Nunez JI, Gosling AF, O'Gara B, et al. Bleeding and thrombotic events in adults supported with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: an ELSO registry analysis. Intensive Care Med 2022;48:213-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-021-06593-x 
  16. Treml B, Breitkopf R, Bukumiric Z, Bachler M, Boesch J, Rajsic S. ECMO predictors of mortality: a 10-year referral centre experience. J Clin Med 2022;11:1224. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11051224 
  17. Son AY, Khanh LN, Joung HS, et al. Limb ischemia and bleeding in patients requiring venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. J Vasc Surg 2021;73:593-600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2020.05.071 
  18. Rastan AJ, Dege A, Mohr M, et al. Early and late outcomes of 517 consecutive adult patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010;139:302-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.10.043 
  19. Cheng R, Hachamovitch R, Kittleson M, et al. Complications of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for treatment of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest: a meta-analysis of 1,866 adult patients. Ann Thorac Surg 2014;97:610-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.09.008 
  20. Nagao K, Nonogi H, Yonemoto N, et al. Duration of prehospital resuscitation efforts after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Circulation 2016;133:1386-96. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.115.018788 
  21. Low CJ, Ramanathan K, Ling RR, et al. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults with cardiac arrest: a comparative meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Lancet Respir Med 2023;11:883-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-2600(23)00137-6