Elizabeth K Powell, Richard Betzold, Daniel T Lammers, Jamie Podell, Ryan Wan, William Teeter, Ronald D Hardin, Thomas M Scalea, Samuel M Galvagno
{"title":"VENO-VENOUS EXTRACORPOREAL MEMBRANE OXYGENATION IMPROVES OUTCOMES IN TRAUMA PATIENTS SUFFERING RESPIRATORY FAILURE.","authors":"Elizabeth K Powell, Richard Betzold, Daniel T Lammers, Jamie Podell, Ryan Wan, William Teeter, Ronald D Hardin, Thomas M Scalea, Samuel M Galvagno","doi":"10.1097/SHK.0000000000002491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) improves hypoxemia and carbon dioxide clearance in patients with severe respiratory derangements. A greater understanding of the potential benefits of VV ECMO in trauma patients could lead to broader adoption. We hypothesize that trauma patients who receive VV ECMO have improved mortality outcomes when compared to those receiving conventional ventilator management given the rapid stabilization VV ECMO promotes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a single center, propensity score matched cohort study. All trauma patients from January 1, 2014, to October 30, 2023, who were placed on VV ECMO or who would have met institutional guidelines for VV ECMO but were managed with conventional ventilator strategies were matched 1:1. The primary outcome analysis was survival at hospital discharge. Significance was defined as p < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-one trauma VV ECMO patients and 128 patients who received conventional management met criteria for inclusion. After matching, VV ECMO and conventional treatment cohort characteristics were similar in age and MOI. Matched ISS, SI, lactate levels, and frequency of TBI were also similar. Finally, respiratory parameters including pre-intervention, pH, partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), lactate levels, and oxygen saturation were similar between matched groups. VV ECMO patients had higher survival rates at discharge when compared to the matched conventional treatment group (70% v 41%, p < 0.001). Corresponding hazard ratio for VV ECMO use was 0.31 (95%CI 0.18-0.52; p < 0.001). The odds ratio of mortality in matched trauma patients who receive VV ECMO versus conventional treatment was 0.29 (95%CI 0.14-0.58; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>VV ECMO may represent a safe, alternative treatment approach for appropriately screened trauma patients with acute respiratory failure, however further studies are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":21667,"journal":{"name":"SHOCK","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SHOCK","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SHK.0000000000002491","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) improves hypoxemia and carbon dioxide clearance in patients with severe respiratory derangements. A greater understanding of the potential benefits of VV ECMO in trauma patients could lead to broader adoption. We hypothesize that trauma patients who receive VV ECMO have improved mortality outcomes when compared to those receiving conventional ventilator management given the rapid stabilization VV ECMO promotes.
Methods: We performed a single center, propensity score matched cohort study. All trauma patients from January 1, 2014, to October 30, 2023, who were placed on VV ECMO or who would have met institutional guidelines for VV ECMO but were managed with conventional ventilator strategies were matched 1:1. The primary outcome analysis was survival at hospital discharge. Significance was defined as p < 0.05.
Results: Eighty-one trauma VV ECMO patients and 128 patients who received conventional management met criteria for inclusion. After matching, VV ECMO and conventional treatment cohort characteristics were similar in age and MOI. Matched ISS, SI, lactate levels, and frequency of TBI were also similar. Finally, respiratory parameters including pre-intervention, pH, partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), lactate levels, and oxygen saturation were similar between matched groups. VV ECMO patients had higher survival rates at discharge when compared to the matched conventional treatment group (70% v 41%, p < 0.001). Corresponding hazard ratio for VV ECMO use was 0.31 (95%CI 0.18-0.52; p < 0.001). The odds ratio of mortality in matched trauma patients who receive VV ECMO versus conventional treatment was 0.29 (95%CI 0.14-0.58; p < 0.001).
Conclusion: VV ECMO may represent a safe, alternative treatment approach for appropriately screened trauma patients with acute respiratory failure, however further studies are warranted.
期刊介绍:
SHOCK®: Injury, Inflammation, and Sepsis: Laboratory and Clinical Approaches includes studies of novel therapeutic approaches, such as immunomodulation, gene therapy, nutrition, and others. The mission of the Journal is to foster and promote multidisciplinary studies, both experimental and clinical in nature, that critically examine the etiology, mechanisms and novel therapeutics of shock-related pathophysiological conditions. Its purpose is to excel as a vehicle for timely publication in the areas of basic and clinical studies of shock, trauma, sepsis, inflammation, ischemia, and related pathobiological states, with particular emphasis on the biologic mechanisms that determine the response to such injury. Making such information available will ultimately facilitate improved care of the traumatized or septic individual.