Outcomes and risk factors of transported patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: An ECMO center experience

Lingjuan Liu , Dingji Hu , Tong Hao , Shanshan Chen , Lei Chen , Yike Zhu , Chenhui Jin , Jing Wu , Haoya Fu , Haibo Qiu , Yi Yang , Songqiao Liu
{"title":"Outcomes and risk factors of transported patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: An ECMO center experience","authors":"Lingjuan Liu ,&nbsp;Dingji Hu ,&nbsp;Tong Hao ,&nbsp;Shanshan Chen ,&nbsp;Lei Chen ,&nbsp;Yike Zhu ,&nbsp;Chenhui Jin ,&nbsp;Jing Wu ,&nbsp;Haoya Fu ,&nbsp;Haibo Qiu ,&nbsp;Yi Yang ,&nbsp;Songqiao Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.jointm.2024.04.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been proven to be a support method and technology for patients with cardiopulmonary failure. However, the transport of patients under ECMO support is challenging given the high-risk technical maneuvers and patient-care concerns involved. Herein, we examined the safety of ECMO during the transport of critically ill patients and its impact on mortality rates, to provide more secure and effective transport strategies in clinical practice.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>To assess the safety of ECMO patient transport, this study conducted a retrospective analysis on critically ill adults who required ECMO support and transport at the intensive care unit (ICU) center between 2017 and 2023. The study utilized standard ECMO transport protocols and conducted a comprehensive statistical analysis of the collected clinical data and transport processes. The 28-day survival rate for ECMO patients was determined using Kaplan–Meier analysis, while logistic regression identified prognostic factors.</div></div><div><h3>Result</h3><div>Out of 303 patients supported with ECMO, 111 (36.6%) were transported. 69.4% of the transport group were male, mean age was (42.0±17.0) years, mean body mass index was (24.4±4.6) kg/m<sup>2</sup>, and veno-arterial-ECMO accounted for 52.5%. The median transportation distance was 190 (interquartile range [IQR]: 70–260) km, and the longest distance was 8100 km. The median transit time was 180 (IQR: 100–260) min, and the maximum duration was 1720 min. No severe adverse events including death or mechanical failure occurred during transportation. The 28-day survival rate was 64.7% (<em>n</em>=196) and ICU survival rate was 56.1% (<em>n</em>=170) for the entire cohort; whereas, the 28-day survival rate was 72.1% (<em>n</em>=80) and ICU survival rate was 66.7% (<em>n</em>=74) in the transport group. A non-significant difference in 28-day survival was observed between the two groups after propensity score matching (<em>P</em>=0.56). Additionally, we found that acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score (odds ratio [OR]=1.06, <em>P</em> &lt;0.01), lactate levels (&gt;5 mmol/L, OR=2.80, <em>P</em>=0.01), and renal replacement therapy initiation (OR=3.03, <em>P</em> &lt;0.01) were associated with increased mortality risk.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Transporting patients on ECMO between medical facilities is a safe procedure that does not increase patient mortality rates, provided it is orchestrated and executed by proficient transport teams. The prognostic outcome for these patients is predominantly influenced by their pre-existing medical conditions or by complications that may develop during the course of ECMO therapy. These results form the basis for the creation of specialized ECMO network hubs within healthcare regions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73799,"journal":{"name":"Journal of intensive medicine","volume":"5 1","pages":"Pages 35-42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of intensive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667100X24000653","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been proven to be a support method and technology for patients with cardiopulmonary failure. However, the transport of patients under ECMO support is challenging given the high-risk technical maneuvers and patient-care concerns involved. Herein, we examined the safety of ECMO during the transport of critically ill patients and its impact on mortality rates, to provide more secure and effective transport strategies in clinical practice.

Method

To assess the safety of ECMO patient transport, this study conducted a retrospective analysis on critically ill adults who required ECMO support and transport at the intensive care unit (ICU) center between 2017 and 2023. The study utilized standard ECMO transport protocols and conducted a comprehensive statistical analysis of the collected clinical data and transport processes. The 28-day survival rate for ECMO patients was determined using Kaplan–Meier analysis, while logistic regression identified prognostic factors.

Result

Out of 303 patients supported with ECMO, 111 (36.6%) were transported. 69.4% of the transport group were male, mean age was (42.0±17.0) years, mean body mass index was (24.4±4.6) kg/m2, and veno-arterial-ECMO accounted for 52.5%. The median transportation distance was 190 (interquartile range [IQR]: 70–260) km, and the longest distance was 8100 km. The median transit time was 180 (IQR: 100–260) min, and the maximum duration was 1720 min. No severe adverse events including death or mechanical failure occurred during transportation. The 28-day survival rate was 64.7% (n=196) and ICU survival rate was 56.1% (n=170) for the entire cohort; whereas, the 28-day survival rate was 72.1% (n=80) and ICU survival rate was 66.7% (n=74) in the transport group. A non-significant difference in 28-day survival was observed between the two groups after propensity score matching (P=0.56). Additionally, we found that acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score (odds ratio [OR]=1.06, P <0.01), lactate levels (>5 mmol/L, OR=2.80, P=0.01), and renal replacement therapy initiation (OR=3.03, P <0.01) were associated with increased mortality risk.

Conclusion

Transporting patients on ECMO between medical facilities is a safe procedure that does not increase patient mortality rates, provided it is orchestrated and executed by proficient transport teams. The prognostic outcome for these patients is predominantly influenced by their pre-existing medical conditions or by complications that may develop during the course of ECMO therapy. These results form the basis for the creation of specialized ECMO network hubs within healthcare regions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
体外膜氧合转运患者的疗效和风险因素:ECMO 中心的经验
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of intensive medicine
Journal of intensive medicine Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
58 days
期刊最新文献
Outcomes and risk factors of transported patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: An ECMO center experience Critical Care Almanac: Annual Innovations and Achievements. Awake prone positioning and ventilation distribution as assessed by electric impedance tomography in patients with non-COVID-19 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: A prospective physiology study. Nebulized aminoglycosides for ventilator-associated pneumonia: Methodological considerations and lessons from experimental studies. Intestine-derived fibroblast growth factor 19 alleviates lipopolysaccharide-induced liver injury by regulating bile acid homeostasis and directly improving oxidative stress.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1