1. Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Reperfusion Strategies in High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism Hospitalizations.
- Author
-
Farmakis IT, Sagoschen I, Barco S, Keller K, Valerio L, Wild J, Giannakoulas G, Piazza G, Konstantinides SV, and Hobohm L
- Subjects
- Humans, Male, Female, Middle Aged, Aged, Reperfusion methods, Hospitalization statistics & numerical data, Adult, Thrombectomy methods, United States epidemiology, Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation methods, Pulmonary Embolism therapy, Pulmonary Embolism mortality, Hospital Mortality, Thrombolytic Therapy methods
- Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the contemporary use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in conjunction with reperfusion strategies in high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE)., Design: Observational epidemiological analysis., Setting: The U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) (years 2016-2020)., Patients: High-risk PE hospitalizations., Measurements and Main Results: Use of ECMO in conjunction with thrombolysis-based reperfusion (systemic thrombolysis or catheter-directed thrombolysis) or mechanical reperfusion (surgical embolectomy or catheter-based thrombectomy) with regards to in-hospital mortality and major bleeding. We identified high-risk PE hospitalizations in the NIS (years 2016-2020) and investigated the use of ECMO in conjunction with thrombolysis-based (systemic thrombolysis or catheter-directed thrombolysis) and mechanical (surgical embolectomy or catheter-based thrombectomy) reperfusion strategies with regards to in-hospital mortality and major bleeding. Among 122,735 hospitalizations for high-risk PE, ECMO was used in 2,805 (2.3%); stand-alone in 1.4%, thrombolysis-based reperfusion in 0.4%, and mechanical reperfusion in 0.5%. Compared with neither reperfusion nor ECMO, ECMO plus thrombolysis-based reperfusion was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38-0.98), whereas no difference was found with ECMO plus mechanical reperfusion (aOR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.67-1.60), and ECMO stand-alone was associated with increased in-hospital mortality (aOR 1.60; 95% CI, 1.22-2.10). In the cardiac arrest subgroup, ECMO was associated with reduced in-hospital mortality (aOR 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.93). Among all patients on ECMO, thrombolysis-based reperfusion was significantly associated (aOR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33-0.91), and mechanical reperfusion showed a trend (aOR 0.75; 95% CI, 0.47-1.19) toward reduced in-hospital mortality compared with no reperfusion, without increases in major bleeding., Conclusions: In patients with high-risk PE and refractory hemodynamic instability, ECMO may be a valuable supportive treatment in conjunction with reperfusion treatment but not as a stand-alone treatment especially for patients suffering from cardiac arrest., Competing Interests: Dr. Barco received lecture/consultant fees from Bayer HealthCare, Concept Medical, BTG Pharmaceuticals, INARI, Boston Scientific (BSC), and LeoPharma; institutional grants from Boston Scientific, Bentley, Bayer HealthCare, INARI, Medtronic, Concept Medical, Bard, and Sanofi; and economical support for travel/congress costs from Daiichi Sankyo, BTG Pharmaceuticals, and Bayer HealthCare, outside the submitted work. Dr. Giannakoulas reports lecture/consultant fees from Bayer HealthCare, Pfizer, and LeoPharma.Dr. Piazza has received research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer Alliance, Bayer, Janssen, Alexion, Amgen, and Boston Scientific Corporation, and consulting fees from Pfizer, Boston Scientific Corporation, Janssen, Prairie Education and Research Cooperative, North American Science Associates (NAMSA), and Amgen. Dr. Konstantinides reports institutional grants and personal lecture/advisory fees from Bayer AG, Daiichi Sankyo, and BSC; institutional grants from Inari Medical; and personal lecture/advisory fees from Merck Sharp and Dohme (MSD) and Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS)/Pfizer. Dr. Hobohm received lecture/consultant fees from MSD and Actelion, outside the submitted work. Dr. Piazza’s institution received funding from BMS/Pfizer, Janssen, Alexion, Bayer, Amgen, BSC, and Esperion (1R01HL164717-01); he disclosed he has an advisory role in BSC, Amgen, BCRI, Pulmonary Embolism (PERC), NAMSA, BMS, Janssen, and Regeneron. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF