Cargando…
Recirculation in single lumen cannula venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A non-randomized bi-centric trial
BACKGROUND: Recirculation is a common problem in venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The aims of this study were to compare recirculation fraction (Rf) between femoro-jugular and jugulo-femoral VV ECMO configurations, to identify risk factors for recirculation and to assess t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9470851/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36117961 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.973240 |
_version_ | 1784788930649915392 |
---|---|
author | Fisser, Christoph Palmér, Oscar Sallisalmi, Marko Paulus, Michael Foltan, Maik Philipp, Alois Malfertheiner, Maximilian V. Lubnow, Matthias Müller, Thomas Broman, Lars Mikael |
author_facet | Fisser, Christoph Palmér, Oscar Sallisalmi, Marko Paulus, Michael Foltan, Maik Philipp, Alois Malfertheiner, Maximilian V. Lubnow, Matthias Müller, Thomas Broman, Lars Mikael |
author_sort | Fisser, Christoph |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Recirculation is a common problem in venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The aims of this study were to compare recirculation fraction (Rf) between femoro-jugular and jugulo-femoral VV ECMO configurations, to identify risk factors for recirculation and to assess the impact on hemolysis. METHODS: Patients in the medical intensive care unit (ICU) at the University Medical Center Regensburg, Germany receiving VV ECMO with femoro-jugular, and jugulo-femoral configuration at the ECMO Center Karolinska, Sweden, were included in this non-randomized prospective study. Total ECMO flow (Q(EC)), recirculated flow (Q(REC)), and recirculation fraction Rf = Q(REC)/Q(EC) were determined using ultrasound dilution technology. Effective ECMO flow (Q(EFF)) was defined as Q(EFF) = Q(EC) * (1–Rf). Demographics, cannula specifics, and markers of hemolysis were assessed. Survival was evaluated at discharge from ICU. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with femoro-jugular configuration underwent 595 single-point measurements and 18 patients with jugulo-femoral configuration 231 measurements. Rf was lower with femoro-jugular compared to jugulo-femoral configuration [5 (0, 11) vs. 19 (13, 28) %, respectively (p < 0.001)], resulting in similar Q(EFF) [2.80 (2.21, 3.39) vs. 2.79 (2.39, 3.08) L/min (p = 0.225)] despite lower Q(EC) with femoro-jugular configuration compared to jugulo-femoral [3.01 (2.40, 3.70) vs. 3.57 (3.05, 4.06) L/min, respectively (p < 0.001)]. In multivariate regression analysis, the type of configuration, distance between the two cannula tips, ECMO flow, and heart rate were significantly associated with Rf [B (95% CI): 25.8 (17.6, 33.8), p < 0.001; 960.4 (960.7, 960.1), p = 0.009; 4.2 (2.5, 5.9), p < 0.001; 960.1 (960.2, 0.0), p = 0.027]. Hemolysis was similar in subjects with Rf > 8 vs. ≤ 8%. Explorative data on survival showed comparable results in the femoro-jugular and the jugulo-femoral group (81 vs. 72%, p = 0.455). CONCLUSION: VV ECMO with femoro-jugular configuration caused less recirculation. Further risk factors for higher Rf were shorter distance between the two cannula tips, higher ECMO flow, and lower heart rate. Rf did not affect hemolysis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9470851 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94708512022-09-15 Recirculation in single lumen cannula venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A non-randomized bi-centric trial Fisser, Christoph Palmér, Oscar Sallisalmi, Marko Paulus, Michael Foltan, Maik Philipp, Alois Malfertheiner, Maximilian V. Lubnow, Matthias Müller, Thomas Broman, Lars Mikael Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine BACKGROUND: Recirculation is a common problem in venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The aims of this study were to compare recirculation fraction (Rf) between femoro-jugular and jugulo-femoral VV ECMO configurations, to identify risk factors for recirculation and to assess the impact on hemolysis. METHODS: Patients in the medical intensive care unit (ICU) at the University Medical Center Regensburg, Germany receiving VV ECMO with femoro-jugular, and jugulo-femoral configuration at the ECMO Center Karolinska, Sweden, were included in this non-randomized prospective study. Total ECMO flow (Q(EC)), recirculated flow (Q(REC)), and recirculation fraction Rf = Q(REC)/Q(EC) were determined using ultrasound dilution technology. Effective ECMO flow (Q(EFF)) was defined as Q(EFF) = Q(EC) * (1–Rf). Demographics, cannula specifics, and markers of hemolysis were assessed. Survival was evaluated at discharge from ICU. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with femoro-jugular configuration underwent 595 single-point measurements and 18 patients with jugulo-femoral configuration 231 measurements. Rf was lower with femoro-jugular compared to jugulo-femoral configuration [5 (0, 11) vs. 19 (13, 28) %, respectively (p < 0.001)], resulting in similar Q(EFF) [2.80 (2.21, 3.39) vs. 2.79 (2.39, 3.08) L/min (p = 0.225)] despite lower Q(EC) with femoro-jugular configuration compared to jugulo-femoral [3.01 (2.40, 3.70) vs. 3.57 (3.05, 4.06) L/min, respectively (p < 0.001)]. In multivariate regression analysis, the type of configuration, distance between the two cannula tips, ECMO flow, and heart rate were significantly associated with Rf [B (95% CI): 25.8 (17.6, 33.8), p < 0.001; 960.4 (960.7, 960.1), p = 0.009; 4.2 (2.5, 5.9), p < 0.001; 960.1 (960.2, 0.0), p = 0.027]. Hemolysis was similar in subjects with Rf > 8 vs. ≤ 8%. Explorative data on survival showed comparable results in the femoro-jugular and the jugulo-femoral group (81 vs. 72%, p = 0.455). CONCLUSION: VV ECMO with femoro-jugular configuration caused less recirculation. Further risk factors for higher Rf were shorter distance between the two cannula tips, higher ECMO flow, and lower heart rate. Rf did not affect hemolysis. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-08-31 /pmc/articles/PMC9470851/ /pubmed/36117961 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.973240 Text en Copyright © 2022 Fisser, Palmér, Sallisalmi, Paulus, Foltan, Philipp, Malfertheiner, Lubnow, Müller and Broman. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Medicine Fisser, Christoph Palmér, Oscar Sallisalmi, Marko Paulus, Michael Foltan, Maik Philipp, Alois Malfertheiner, Maximilian V. Lubnow, Matthias Müller, Thomas Broman, Lars Mikael Recirculation in single lumen cannula venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A non-randomized bi-centric trial |
title | Recirculation in single lumen cannula venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A non-randomized bi-centric trial |
title_full | Recirculation in single lumen cannula venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A non-randomized bi-centric trial |
title_fullStr | Recirculation in single lumen cannula venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A non-randomized bi-centric trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Recirculation in single lumen cannula venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A non-randomized bi-centric trial |
title_short | Recirculation in single lumen cannula venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A non-randomized bi-centric trial |
title_sort | recirculation in single lumen cannula venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a non-randomized bi-centric trial |
topic | Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9470851/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36117961 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.973240 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fisserchristoph recirculationinsinglelumencannulavenovenousextracorporealmembraneoxygenationanonrandomizedbicentrictrial AT palmeroscar recirculationinsinglelumencannulavenovenousextracorporealmembraneoxygenationanonrandomizedbicentrictrial AT sallisalmimarko recirculationinsinglelumencannulavenovenousextracorporealmembraneoxygenationanonrandomizedbicentrictrial AT paulusmichael recirculationinsinglelumencannulavenovenousextracorporealmembraneoxygenationanonrandomizedbicentrictrial AT foltanmaik recirculationinsinglelumencannulavenovenousextracorporealmembraneoxygenationanonrandomizedbicentrictrial AT philippalois recirculationinsinglelumencannulavenovenousextracorporealmembraneoxygenationanonrandomizedbicentrictrial AT malfertheinermaximilianv recirculationinsinglelumencannulavenovenousextracorporealmembraneoxygenationanonrandomizedbicentrictrial AT lubnowmatthias recirculationinsinglelumencannulavenovenousextracorporealmembraneoxygenationanonrandomizedbicentrictrial AT mullerthomas recirculationinsinglelumencannulavenovenousextracorporealmembraneoxygenationanonrandomizedbicentrictrial AT bromanlarsmikael recirculationinsinglelumencannulavenovenousextracorporealmembraneoxygenationanonrandomizedbicentrictrial |