Sagar B Dave, Joshua L Chan, Donald R Maberry, David W Boorman, Mark E Caridi-Scheible, Eric R Leiendecker, Christina Creel-Bulos, Michael J Connor, Jeffrey Javidfar, Mani A Daneshmand, Craig S Jabaley
{"title":"强化医师和外科医生的静脉-静脉体外膜氧合插管:2018年至2023年并发症和结果的单中心回顾性非劣效性分析","authors":"Sagar B Dave, Joshua L Chan, Donald R Maberry, David W Boorman, Mark E Caridi-Scheible, Eric R Leiendecker, Christina Creel-Bulos, Michael J Connor, Jeffrey Javidfar, Mani A Daneshmand, Craig S Jabaley","doi":"10.1097/CCM.0000000000006843","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the safety and efficacy of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) cannulation by nonsurgeon intensivists (critical care medicine intensivists [CCM]) compared with cardiothoracic surgeons (CTS).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective, single-center observational study using a noninferiority framework to evaluate outcomes across cannulating physician training backgrounds. The primary outcome was the rate of cannulation-related complications. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and resource utilization. Noninferiority was assessed using a predefined margin corresponding to an odds ratio of 1.55 (15% higher complication rate for CCM vs. CTS).</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Quaternary academic medical center with a multidisciplinary ECMO program serving the southeastern United States, including in-center and remote cannulations.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Adults with refractory respiratory failure who underwent venovenous ECMO cannulation and initiation.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Cannulation and initiation of venovenous ECMO within an established program.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>A total of 533 cannulation events in 231 patients from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2023, were analyzed. Patient characteristics, pre-cannulation factors, predictive scores, hospital courses, cannulation-related complications, and in-hospital mortality were compared between CCM and CTS groups. At the time of cannulation, CCM-initiated cases had lower rates of vasoactive medication use and mechanical circulatory support and were more often performed in remote settings, reflecting differences in practice patterns. In a generalized linear mixed model adjusting for cannulation site, body mass index, and respiratory failure etiology, CCM was noninferior to CTS for cannulation-related complications, with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.47-1.50); the upper confidence limit remained below the predefined noninferiority threshold of 1.55. Complication rates were 12% for CCM and 15% for CTS. In-hospital mortality was 29%, with no significant difference or evidence of noninferiority between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Venovenous ECMO cannulation by nonsurgeon intensivists was noninferior to that by CTS with respect to complication rates. These findings support the safety of intensivist cannulation in multidisciplinary ECMO programs and highlight the feasibility of flexible models for ECMO delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":10765,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Cannulation by Intensivists and Surgeons: A Single-Center Retrospective Noninferiority Analysis of Complications and Outcomes From 2018 to 2023.\",\"authors\":\"Sagar B Dave, Joshua L Chan, Donald R Maberry, David W Boorman, Mark E Caridi-Scheible, Eric R Leiendecker, Christina Creel-Bulos, Michael J Connor, Jeffrey Javidfar, Mani A Daneshmand, Craig S Jabaley\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CCM.0000000000006843\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the safety and efficacy of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) cannulation by nonsurgeon intensivists (critical care medicine intensivists [CCM]) compared with cardiothoracic surgeons (CTS).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective, single-center observational study using a noninferiority framework to evaluate outcomes across cannulating physician training backgrounds. The primary outcome was the rate of cannulation-related complications. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and resource utilization. Noninferiority was assessed using a predefined margin corresponding to an odds ratio of 1.55 (15% higher complication rate for CCM vs. CTS).</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Quaternary academic medical center with a multidisciplinary ECMO program serving the southeastern United States, including in-center and remote cannulations.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Adults with refractory respiratory failure who underwent venovenous ECMO cannulation and initiation.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Cannulation and initiation of venovenous ECMO within an established program.</p><p><strong>Measurements and main results: </strong>A total of 533 cannulation events in 231 patients from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2023, were analyzed. Patient characteristics, pre-cannulation factors, predictive scores, hospital courses, cannulation-related complications, and in-hospital mortality were compared between CCM and CTS groups. At the time of cannulation, CCM-initiated cases had lower rates of vasoactive medication use and mechanical circulatory support and were more often performed in remote settings, reflecting differences in practice patterns. In a generalized linear mixed model adjusting for cannulation site, body mass index, and respiratory failure etiology, CCM was noninferior to CTS for cannulation-related complications, with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.47-1.50); the upper confidence limit remained below the predefined noninferiority threshold of 1.55. Complication rates were 12% for CCM and 15% for CTS. In-hospital mortality was 29%, with no significant difference or evidence of noninferiority between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Venovenous ECMO cannulation by nonsurgeon intensivists was noninferior to that by CTS with respect to complication rates. These findings support the safety of intensivist cannulation in multidisciplinary ECMO programs and highlight the feasibility of flexible models for ECMO delivery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10765,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Care Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-21\",\"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.0000000000006843\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"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.0000000000006843","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:比较非外科重症监护医师(critical care medicine intensists [CCM])与心胸外科医师(cardithoracic surgeons, CTS)进行静脉-静脉体外膜氧合(ECMO)插管的安全性和有效性。设计:回顾性、单中心观察性研究,采用非劣效性框架评估插管医师培训背景的结果。主要结果是插管相关并发症的发生率。次要结局包括住院死亡率和资源利用率。非劣效性评估使用预先定义的优势比1.55 (CCM比CTS的并发症发生率高15%)。环境:拥有多学科ECMO项目的第四纪学术医疗中心,服务于美国东南部,包括中心内和远程插管。患者:接受静脉-静脉ECMO插管和启动的难治性呼吸衰竭成人。干预措施:在既定方案内插管并启动静脉-静脉ECMO。测量方法及主要结果:对2018年1月1日至2023年12月31日231例患者的533例插管事件进行分析。比较CCM组和CTS组的患者特征、插管前因素、预测评分、住院疗程、插管相关并发症和住院死亡率。在插管时,ccm启动的病例使用血管活性药物和机械循环支持的比例较低,并且更经常在远程环境中进行,反映了实践模式的差异。在调整导管位置、体重指数和呼吸衰竭病因的广义线性混合模型中,CCM在导管相关并发症方面不低于CTS,调整后的优势比为0.84 (95% CI, 0.47-1.50);置信上限仍然低于预定义的非劣效性阈值1.55。CCM和CTS的并发症发生率分别为12%和15%。住院死亡率为29%,组间无显著差异或非劣效性证据。结论:在并发症发生率方面,非外科强化医师的静脉-静脉ECMO插管不低于CTS。这些发现支持了在多学科ECMO项目中强化插管的安全性,并强调了灵活的ECMO交付模式的可行性。
Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Cannulation by Intensivists and Surgeons: A Single-Center Retrospective Noninferiority Analysis of Complications and Outcomes From 2018 to 2023.
Objectives: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) cannulation by nonsurgeon intensivists (critical care medicine intensivists [CCM]) compared with cardiothoracic surgeons (CTS).
Design: Retrospective, single-center observational study using a noninferiority framework to evaluate outcomes across cannulating physician training backgrounds. The primary outcome was the rate of cannulation-related complications. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and resource utilization. Noninferiority was assessed using a predefined margin corresponding to an odds ratio of 1.55 (15% higher complication rate for CCM vs. CTS).
Setting: Quaternary academic medical center with a multidisciplinary ECMO program serving the southeastern United States, including in-center and remote cannulations.
Patients: Adults with refractory respiratory failure who underwent venovenous ECMO cannulation and initiation.
Interventions: Cannulation and initiation of venovenous ECMO within an established program.
Measurements and main results: A total of 533 cannulation events in 231 patients from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2023, were analyzed. Patient characteristics, pre-cannulation factors, predictive scores, hospital courses, cannulation-related complications, and in-hospital mortality were compared between CCM and CTS groups. At the time of cannulation, CCM-initiated cases had lower rates of vasoactive medication use and mechanical circulatory support and were more often performed in remote settings, reflecting differences in practice patterns. In a generalized linear mixed model adjusting for cannulation site, body mass index, and respiratory failure etiology, CCM was noninferior to CTS for cannulation-related complications, with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.47-1.50); the upper confidence limit remained below the predefined noninferiority threshold of 1.55. Complication rates were 12% for CCM and 15% for CTS. In-hospital mortality was 29%, with no significant difference or evidence of noninferiority between groups.
Conclusions: Venovenous ECMO cannulation by nonsurgeon intensivists was noninferior to that by CTS with respect to complication rates. These findings support the safety of intensivist cannulation in multidisciplinary ECMO programs and highlight the feasibility of flexible models for ECMO delivery.
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.