Cargando…
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 summariz...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9325561/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35490367 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aor.14261 |
_version_ | 1784757082204930048 |
---|---|
author | Mariani, Silvia De Piero, Maria Elena Ravaux, Justine M. Saelmans, Alexander Kawczynski, Michal J. van Bussel, Bas C. T. Di Mauro, Michele Willers, Anne Swol, Justyna Kowalewski, Mariusz Li, Tong Delnoij, Thijs S. R. van der Horst, Iwan C. C. Maessen, Jos Lorusso, Roberto |
author_facet | Mariani, Silvia De Piero, Maria Elena Ravaux, Justine M. Saelmans, Alexander Kawczynski, Michal J. van Bussel, Bas C. T. Di Mauro, Michele Willers, Anne Swol, Justyna Kowalewski, Mariusz Li, Tong Delnoij, Thijs S. R. van der Horst, Iwan C. C. Maessen, Jos Lorusso, Roberto |
author_sort | Mariani, Silvia |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9325561 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93255612022-07-30 Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID‐19 patients: A systematic review of literature Mariani, Silvia De Piero, Maria Elena Ravaux, Justine M. Saelmans, Alexander Kawczynski, Michal J. van Bussel, Bas C. T. Di Mauro, Michele Willers, Anne Swol, Justyna Kowalewski, Mariusz Li, Tong Delnoij, Thijs S. R. van der Horst, Iwan C. C. Maessen, Jos Lorusso, Roberto Artif Organs Systematic Review 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. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-05-01 2022-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9325561/ /pubmed/35490367 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aor.14261 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Artificial Organs published by International Center for Artificial Organ and Transplantation (ICAOT) and Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Mariani, Silvia De Piero, Maria Elena Ravaux, Justine M. Saelmans, Alexander Kawczynski, Michal J. van Bussel, Bas C. T. Di Mauro, Michele Willers, Anne Swol, Justyna Kowalewski, Mariusz Li, Tong Delnoij, Thijs S. R. van der Horst, Iwan C. C. Maessen, Jos Lorusso, Roberto Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID‐19 patients: A systematic review of literature |
title | Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID‐19 patients: A systematic review of literature |
title_full | Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID‐19 patients: A systematic review of literature |
title_fullStr | Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID‐19 patients: A systematic review of literature |
title_full_unstemmed | Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID‐19 patients: A systematic review of literature |
title_short | Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID‐19 patients: A systematic review of literature |
title_sort | temporary mechanical circulatory support for covid‐19 patients: a systematic review of literature |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9325561/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35490367 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aor.14261 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT marianisilvia temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT depieromariaelena temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT ravauxjustinem temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT saelmansalexander temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT kawczynskimichalj temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT vanbusselbasct temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT dimauromichele temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT willersanne temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT swoljustyna temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT kowalewskimariusz temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT litong temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT delnoijthijssr temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT vanderhorstiwancc temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT maessenjos temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature AT lorussoroberto temporarymechanicalcirculatorysupportforcovid19patientsasystematicreviewofliterature |