Search

Patients with cardiogenic shock refractory to conventional management require advanced mechanical circulatory support such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). In hospitals lacking ECMO facilities, interhospital transportation is necessary for further patient management. Thirty-one adult cardiac patients, who were transported to our hospital by our ECMO transport team between January 1998 and July 2004, were enrolled in this study. The median transportation distance was 200 km (range: 3–300 km). During transportation, the ECMO circuit per se and the patients did not have complications. Of the 31 patients, 20 (64.2%) were weaned off ECMO or bridged to ventricular assist devices and 10 patients (32.1%) survived to discharge. Delayed transfer (>2 days) and high organ dysfunction score were associated with poor outcomes. The survival rate was similar to that of our in-hospital group (survival rate: 32.8%, n = 64). In conclusion, adult cardiogenic shock patients requiring interhospital ECMO transport had a reasonable chance of survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Aim: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) has been shown to have survival benefit over conventional CPR (CCPR) in patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest of cardiac origin. We compared the survival of patients who had return of spontaneous beating (ROSB) after ECPR with the survival of those who had return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after conventional CPR. Methods: Propensity score-matched cohort of adults with in-hospital prolonged CPR (>10min) of cardiac origin in a university-affiliated tertiary extracorporeal resuscitation center were included in this study. Fifty-nine patients with ROSB after ECPR and 63 patients with sustained ROSC by CCPR were analyzed. Main outcome measures were survival at hospital discharge, 30 days, 6 months, and one year, and neurological outcome. Results: There was no statistical difference in survival to discharge (29.1% of ECPR responders vs. 22.2% of CCPR responders, p =0.394) and neurological outcome at discharge and one year later. In the propensity score-matched groups, 9 out of 27 ECPR patients survived to one month (33.3%) and 7 out of 27 CCPR patients survived (25.9%). Survival analysis showed no survival difference (HR: 0.856, p =0.634, 95% CI: 0.453–1.620) between the groups, either at 30 days or at the end of one year (HR: 0.602, p =0.093, 95% CI: 0.333–1.088). Conclusions: This study failed to demonstrate a survival difference between patients who had ROSB after institution of ECMO and those who had ROSC after conventional CPR. Further studies evaluating the role of ECMO in conventional CPR rescued patients are warranted. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article reports on the results of a study of factors associated with survival among pediatric patients following extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for in-hospital cardiac arrest. A description of the experimental set-up and measurement methods is presented. The study concluded that ECPR successfully rescued some pediatric patients who failed rescue with conventional in-hospital CPR.