Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Adults with Septic Shock

K. Jacoby, Ramiro Saavedra, Matthew Spanier, Joshua S. Huelster, Alex R Campbell, Claire S. Smith, B. Dawud, C. S. St. Hill
{"title":"Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Adults with Septic Shock","authors":"K. Jacoby, Ramiro Saavedra, Matthew Spanier, Joshua S. Huelster, Alex R Campbell, Claire S. Smith, B. Dawud, C. S. St. Hill","doi":"10.18535/ijmsci/v9i01.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Survivors and non-survivors were compared for 20 adults supported with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) for refractory septic shock from 2012-2018. The primary outcome was hospital survival. Secondary outcomes were ECMO associated complications and survival to decannulation. Median age was 53.5 (IQR 42.0-61.3). At ≤ 24 hours prior to cannulation, median SOFA score was 17.5 (IQR 15 - 19) and 17 patients (85%) had new cardiac dysfunction. Median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 20% (IQR 10-38). Thirteen patients had a mixed (cardiogenic and distributive) or cardiogenic shock profile (65%), 7 had a distributive shock profile (35%), and 17 (85%) survived to decannulation. Fourteen (70%) survived to hospital discharge and median cerebral performance category score was 1 (IQR 1-2). No differences were found in age, comorbid conditions, time from shock onset to cannulation, peak flow rate on ECMO, ECMO complications, shock profile, LVEF, or vasoactive-inotrope score (VIS). More patients in the distributive shock profile experienced limb ischemia complications (n=3, 42.9%) compared to the cardiogenic and mixed shock profiles (n=1, 7.7%). Survivors to hospital discharge had a lower SOFA score. VA ECMO support may be a beneficial therapy for refractory septic shock and could be considered in select adult patients.","PeriodicalId":14151,"journal":{"name":"International Journal Of Medical Science And Clinical Invention","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal Of Medical Science And Clinical Invention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18535/ijmsci/v9i01.01","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

Survivors and non-survivors were compared for 20 adults supported with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) for refractory septic shock from 2012-2018. The primary outcome was hospital survival. Secondary outcomes were ECMO associated complications and survival to decannulation. Median age was 53.5 (IQR 42.0-61.3). At ≤ 24 hours prior to cannulation, median SOFA score was 17.5 (IQR 15 - 19) and 17 patients (85%) had new cardiac dysfunction. Median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 20% (IQR 10-38). Thirteen patients had a mixed (cardiogenic and distributive) or cardiogenic shock profile (65%), 7 had a distributive shock profile (35%), and 17 (85%) survived to decannulation. Fourteen (70%) survived to hospital discharge and median cerebral performance category score was 1 (IQR 1-2). No differences were found in age, comorbid conditions, time from shock onset to cannulation, peak flow rate on ECMO, ECMO complications, shock profile, LVEF, or vasoactive-inotrope score (VIS). More patients in the distributive shock profile experienced limb ischemia complications (n=3, 42.9%) compared to the cardiogenic and mixed shock profiles (n=1, 7.7%). Survivors to hospital discharge had a lower SOFA score. VA ECMO support may be a beneficial therapy for refractory septic shock and could be considered in select adult patients.
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
成人感染性休克的静脉-动脉体外膜氧合
对2012年至2018年期间接受静脉-动脉体外膜氧合(VA ECMO)治疗难治性感染性休克的20名成人进行了幸存者和非幸存者的比较。主要观察指标为住院生存率。次要结果是ECMO相关并发症和脱管存活率。中位年龄为53.5岁(IQR 42.0-61.3)。在插管前≤24小时,SOFA评分中位数为17.5 (IQR 15 - 19), 17例(85%)患者出现新的心功能障碍。左室射血分数(LVEF)中位数为20% (IQR 10-38)。13例患者有混合性(心源性和分布性)或心源性休克(65%),7例有分布性休克(35%),17例(85%)存活至脱脉。14例(70%)存活至出院,中位脑功能分类评分为1 (IQR 1-2)。在年龄、合并症、休克发作至插管时间、ECMO峰值流速、ECMO并发症、休克特征、LVEF或血管活性-肌力评分(VIS)方面没有发现差异。与心源性和混合性休克组(n= 1,7.7%)相比,分布性休克组出现肢体缺血并发症的患者较多(n= 3,42.9%)。出院幸存者的SOFA评分较低。VA ECMO支持可能是难治性脓毒性休克的一种有益的治疗方法,可以在特定的成人患者中考虑。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Emerging roles for the RXFP1 in myeloid series leukemia Relationship between Troponin and Red Cell Distribution Width Levels and Mortality in Post-Covid Patients Ultrasound-Guided Off-Plan Lumbar Seated Erector Spinae Plane Blocks : Are There Advantages? Retrospective Study of Various Factors In Pediatric To Severe Dengue Infection The Master Of Medicine (Mmed) Component Of Specialization, Have We Addressed The Challenges?
×
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