高风险肺栓塞住院患者的体外膜氧合和再灌注策略。

IF 7.7 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Critical Care Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-21 DOI:10.1097/CCM.0000000000006361
Ioannis T Farmakis, Ingo Sagoschen, Stefano Barco, Karsten Keller, Luca Valerio, Johannes Wild, George Giannakoulas, Gregory Piazza, Stavros V Konstantinides, Lukas Hobohm
{"title":"高风险肺栓塞住院患者的体外膜氧合和再灌注策略。","authors":"Ioannis T Farmakis, Ingo Sagoschen, Stefano Barco, Karsten Keller, Luca Valerio, Johannes Wild, George Giannakoulas, Gregory Piazza, Stavros V Konstantinides, Lukas Hobohm","doi":"10.1097/CCM.0000000000006361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the contemporary use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in conjunction with reperfusion strategies in high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Observational epidemiological analysis.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) (years 2016-2020).</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>High-risk PE hospitalizations.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":10765,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"e512-e521"},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Reperfusion Strategies in High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism Hospitalizations.\",\"authors\":\"Ioannis T Farmakis, Ingo Sagoschen, Stefano Barco, Karsten Keller, Luca Valerio, Johannes Wild, George Giannakoulas, Gregory Piazza, Stavros V Konstantinides, Lukas Hobohm\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CCM.0000000000006361\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the contemporary use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in conjunction with reperfusion strategies in high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Observational epidemiological analysis.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) (years 2016-2020).</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>High-risk PE hospitalizations.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10765,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Care Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e512-e521\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Care Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000006361\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000006361","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:研究体外膜肺氧合(ECMO)与高危肺栓塞(PE)再灌注策略的结合使用:调查体外膜肺氧合(ECMO)结合再灌注策略在高危肺栓塞(PE)中的当代使用情况:观察性流行病学分析:美国全国住院患者样本(NIS)(2016-2020年):患者:高危 PE 住院患者:ECMO与溶栓再灌注(全身溶栓或导管引导溶栓)或机械再灌注(外科栓子切除术或导管血栓切除术)结合使用对院内死亡率和大出血的影响。我们确定了新独立国家(NIS)的高风险 PE 住院病例(2016-2020 年),并调查了 ECMO 与溶栓(全身溶栓或导管引导溶栓)和机械再灌注(外科栓子切除术或导管血栓切除术)策略结合使用对院内死亡率和大出血的影响。在 122,735 例因高危 PE 住院的患者中,2,805 例(2.3%)使用了 ECMO;1.4% 使用了独立 ECMO;0.4% 使用了溶栓再灌注;0.5% 使用了机械再灌注。与既不进行再灌注也不进行 ECMO 相比,ECMO 加溶栓再灌注可降低院内死亡率(调整赔率 [aOR] 0.61;95% CI,0.38-0.98),而 ECMO 加机械再灌注则无差异(aOR 1.03;95% CI,0.67-1.60),ECMO 单机可增加院内死亡率(aOR 1.60;95% CI,1.22-2.10)。在心脏骤停亚组中,ECMO 与院内死亡率降低相关(aOR 0.71;95% CI,0.53-0.93)。在所有接受 ECMO 的患者中,溶栓再灌注与大出血率显著相关(aOR 0.55;95% CI,0.33-0.91),机械再灌注与无再灌注相比,有降低院内死亡率的趋势(aOR 0.75;95% CI,0.47-1.19):结论:对于高危 PE 和难治性血流动力学不稳定的患者,ECMO 可能是与再灌注治疗相结合的一种有价值的支持性治疗方法,但不能作为一种独立的治疗方法,尤其是对于心脏骤停患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Reperfusion Strategies in High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism Hospitalizations.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Care Medicine
Critical Care Medicine 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
5.70%
发文量
728
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Critical Care Medicine is the premier peer-reviewed, scientific publication in critical care medicine. Directed to those specialists who treat patients in the ICU and CCU, including chest physicians, surgeons, pediatricians, pharmacists/pharmacologists, anesthesiologists, critical care nurses, and other healthcare professionals, Critical Care Medicine covers all aspects of acute and emergency care for the critically ill or injured patient. Each issue presents critical care practitioners with clinical breakthroughs that lead to better patient care, the latest news on promising research, and advances in equipment and techniques.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信