venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

456
(FIVE YEARS 216)

H-INDEX

29
(FIVE YEARS 5)

2022 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Driss Laghlam ◽  
Julien Charpentier ◽  
Zakaria Ait Hamou ◽  
Lee S. Nguyen ◽  
Frédéric Pene ◽  
...  

Background:The effect of prone positioning (PP) on respiratory mechanics remains uncertain in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO).Methods:We prospectively analyzed the effects of PP on respiratory mechanics from continuous data with over a thousand time points during 16-h PP sessions in patients with COVID-19 and ARDS under VV-ECMO conditions. The evolution of respiratory mechanical and oxygenation parameters during the PP sessions was evaluated by dividing each PP session into four time quartiles: first quartile: 0–4 h, second quartile: 4–8 h, third quartile: 8–12 h, and fourth quartile: 12–16 h.Results:Overall, 38 PP sessions were performed in 10 patients, with 3 [2–5] PP sessions per patient. Seven (70%) patients were responders to at least one PP session. PP significantly increased the PaO2/FiO2 ratio by 14 ± 21% and compliance by 8 ± 15%, and significantly decreased the oxygenation index by 13 ± 18% and driving pressure by 8 ± 12%. The effects of PP on respiratory mechanics but not on oxygenation persisted after supine repositioning. PP-induced changes in different respiratory mechanical parameters and oxygenation started as early as the first-time quartile, without any difference in PP-induced changes among the different time quartiles. PP-induced changes in driving pressure (−14 ± 14 vs. −6 ± 10%, p = 0.04) and mechanical power (−11 ± 13 vs. −0.1 ± 12%, p = 0.02) were significantly higher in responders (increase in PaO2/FiO2 ratio > 20%) than in non-responder patients.Conclusions:In patients with COVID-19 and severe ARDS, PP under VV-ECMO conditions improved the respiratory mechanical and oxygenation parameters, and the effects of PP on respiratory mechanics persisted after supine repositioning.


Critical Care ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Giani ◽  
Emanuele Rezoagli ◽  
Christophe Guervilly ◽  
Jonathan Rilinger ◽  
Thibault Duburcq ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Prone positioning (PP) reduces mortality of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The potential benefit of prone positioning maneuvers during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between the use of prone positioning during extracorporeal support and ICU mortality in a pooled population of patients from previous European cohort studies. Methods We performed a pooled individual patient data analysis of European cohort studies which compared patients treated with prone positioning during ECMO (Prone group) to “conventional” ECMO management (Supine group) in patients with severe ARDS. Results 889 patients from five studies were included. Unadjusted ICU mortality was 52.8% in the Supine Group and 40.8% in the Prone group. At a Cox multiple regression analysis PP during ECMO was not significantly associated with a reduction of ICU mortality (HR 0.67 95% CI: 0.42–1.06). Propensity score matching identified 227 patients in each group. ICU mortality of the matched samples was 48.0% and 39.6% for patients in the Supine and Prone group, respectively (p = 0.072). Conclusions In a large population of ARDS patients receiving venovenous extracorporeal support, the use of prone positioning during ECMO was not significantly associated with reduced ICU mortality. The impact of this procedure will have to be definitively assessed by prospective randomized controlled trials.


2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-125
Author(s):  
Kenneth Dodd ◽  
Stephen Crabbe ◽  
Nathan Schoenrade ◽  
Abhinav Birda ◽  
Joseph Adams ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-130
Author(s):  
Nathan Schoenrade ◽  
Abhinav Birda ◽  
Stephen Crabbe ◽  
Khwaila Falaneh ◽  
Joseph Adams ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 202-202
Author(s):  
Payal Gurnani ◽  
Lauren Michalak ◽  
Deborah Tabachnick ◽  
Michael Kotwas ◽  
Antone Tatooles

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document