Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure patients: outcomes and predictive factors

Surat Tongyoo, Sivit Chanthawatthanarak, Chairat Permpikul, Ranistha Ratanarat, Panuwat Promsin, Suneerat Kongsayreepong, Surat Tongyoo, Sivit Chanthawatthanarak, Chairat Permpikul, Ranistha Ratanarat, Panuwat Promsin, Suneerat Kongsayreepong

Abstract

Background: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an important rescue therapy for patients with refractory respiratory or circulatory failure. High cost and associated complications warrant careful case selection. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes and factors associated with mortality in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure patients who received ECMO support, and to externally validate preexisting ECMO survival prediction scoring systems.

Methods: This retrospective study enrolled acute hypoxemic respiratory failure patients who received veno-venous (VV) or veno-arterial (VA) ECMO support at Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand) from 2010 to 2020. All relevant baseline patient characteristics including ECMO survival prediction scores were recorded. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was employed to identify independent predictors of in-hospital mortality.

Results: Of a total of 65 patients, 34 (52%) were male, the median (IQR) age was 61 years (49-70 years), the median body mass index (BMI) was 22.6 kg/m2 (20.6-28 kg/m2), and the median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was 13 [11-16]. Forty-three patients (66%) received VV-ECMO, and 22 (34%) received VA-ECMO support. In-hospital mortality was 69%. Multivariate analysis identified a SOFA score >14, hospitalized >72 hours before ECMO initiation, PaO2/FiO2 ratio <60, and pH <7.2 as independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. These four parameters were combined to create the SHOP (S: SOFA >14, H: hospitalize >72 hours, O: PF ratio <60, and P: pH <7.2) score. Compared with three different preexisting ECMO survival prediction scoring systems, the SHOP score had the highest area under the curve (AUC) for predicting in-hospital mortality (overall: 0.873, VV-EMCO: 0.866, and VA-EMCO: 0.891).

Conclusions: In-hospital mortality among ECMO-supported patients was high at 69%. SOFA score >14, hospitalized >72 hours, PaO2/FiO2 ratio <60, and pH <7.2 were found to be independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. A SHOP score of 2 or higher significantly predicts in-hospital mortality in EMCO-supported patients.

Trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov (reg. No. NCT04031794).

Keywords: ECMO survival prediction scoring system; Mortality; acute hypoxemic respiratory failure; extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://jtd.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/jtd-21-1460/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

2022 Journal of Thoracic Disease. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram describing the screening, enrollment and patients’ outcome. ECMO, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

References

    1. Makdisi G, Wang IW. Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) review of a lifesaving technology. J Thorac Dis 2015;7:E166-76.
    1. Peek GJ, Mugford M, Tiruvoipati R, et al. Efficacy and economic assessment of conventional ventilatory support versus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe adult respiratory failure (CESAR): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2009;374:1351-63. 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61069-2
    1. Combes A, Hajage D, Capellier G, et al. Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. N Engl J Med 2018;378:1965-75. 10.1056/NEJMoa1800385
    1. Vallabhajosyula S, Prasad A, Bell MR, et al. Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Use in Acute Myocardial Infarction in the United States, 2000 to 2014. Circ Heart Fail 2019;12:e005929. 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.119.005929
    1. Tantibundit P, Mekjarasnapha M, Pulnitiporn A, et al. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a woman with twin pregnancy. Perfusion 2021. [Epub ahead of print]. doi: .10.1177/02676591211003281
    1. Bréchot N, Hajage D, Kimmoun A, et al. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to rescue sepsis-induced cardiogenic shock: a retrospective, multicentre, international cohort study. Lancet 2020;396:545-52. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30733-9
    1. Combes A, Peek GJ, Hajage D, et al. ECMO for severe ARDS: systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 2020;46:2048-57. 10.1007/s00134-020-06248-3
    1. Zangrillo A, Landoni G, Biondi-Zoccai G, et al. A meta-analysis of complications and mortality of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Crit Care Resusc 2013;15:172-8.
    1. Schmidt M, Zogheib E, Rozé H, et al. The PRESERVE mortality risk score and analysis of long-term outcomes after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Intensive Care Med 2013;39:1704-13. 10.1007/s00134-013-3037-2
    1. Schmidt M, Bailey M, Sheldrake J, et al. Predicting survival after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe acute respiratory failure. The Respiratory Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Survival Prediction (RESP) score. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2014;189:1374-82. 10.1164/rccm.201311-2023OC
    1. Hilder M, Herbstreit F, Adamzik M, et al. Comparison of mortality prediction models in acute respiratory distress syndrome undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and development of a novel prediction score: the PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy-Score (PRESET-Score). Crit Care 2017;21:301. 10.1186/s13054-017-1888-6
    1. Perkins NJ, Schisterman EF. The inconsistency of "optimal" cutpoints obtained using two criteria based on the receiver operating characteristic curve. Am J Epidemiol 2006;163:670-5. 10.1093/aje/kwj063
    1. Barbaro RP, Odetola FO, Kidwell KM, et al. Association of hospital-level volume of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cases and mortality. Analysis of the extracorporeal life support organization registry. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2015;191:894-901. 10.1164/rccm.201409-1634OC
    1. Muguruma K, Kunisawa S, Fushimi K, et al. Epidemiology and volume-outcome relationship of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for respiratory failure in Japan: A retrospective observational study using a national administrative database. Acute Med Surg 2020;7:e486. 10.1002/ams2.486
    1. Lescouflair T, Figura R, Tran A, et al. Adult veno-arterial extracorporeal life support. J Thorac Dis 2018;10:S1811-8. 10.21037/jtd.2018.01.25
    1. Rabie AA, Azzam MH, Al-Fares AA, et al. Implementation of new ECMO centers during the COVID-19 pandemic: experience and results from the Middle East and India. Intensive Care Med 2021;47:887-95. 10.1007/s00134-021-06451-w
    1. Tongyoo S, Kongsayreepong S. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for COVID-19 patients: ECMO for COVID-19. Clin Crit Care 2021;29:e0005. 10.54205/ccc.v29i.252413

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbejdspartnere

Medicinske tilstande

Narkotikainterventioner

3
Abonner