OBJECTIVE: Although extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an acceptable strategy for children with refractory cardiac dysfunction after cardiac surgery, its role after stage I reconstruction for hypoplastic left heart syndrome and its variants is controversial. Our objective is to describe the outcome of "nonelective" ECMO after stage I reconstruction. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Pediatric cardiac intensive care unit. PATIENTS: Infants placed on ECMO after stage I reconstruction from January 1998 to May 2005. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 382 infants who underwent stage I reconstruction during the study period, 36 (9.4%) required ECMO in the postoperative period. There were 22 infants with hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Indications for ECMO included inability to separate from cardiopulmonary bypass in 14 and cardiac arrest in 22. Fourteen infants (38.8%) survived to hospital discharge. Nonsurvivors had longer cardiopulmonary bypass time (150.1 +/- 70.0 mins vs. 103.9 +/- 30.0 mins, p =. 01). 9/14 infants (64%) supported with ECMO> than 24 hrs after stage I reconstruction survived while only 5/22 infants (22%) requiring ECMO< 24 hrs of stage I reconstruction survived (p =. 02). Of note, all five infants diagnosed with an acute shunt thrombosis were early survivors. Mean duration of ECMO was 50.1 +/- 12.5 hrs for survivors and 125.2 +/- 25.0 for nonsurvivors (p =. 01). 7/14 early survivors are alive at a median follow-up of 20 months (2-78 months). CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, ECMO after stage I reconstruction can be life saving in about a third of infants with otherwise fatal conditions. It is particularly useful in potentially reversible conditions such as acute shunt thrombosis and transient depression of ventricular function.
OBJECTIVE: Although extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an acceptable strategy for children with refractory cardiac dysfunction after cardiac surgery, its role after stage I reconstruction for hypoplastic left heart syndrome and its variants is controversial. Our objective is to describe the outcome of "nonelective" ECMO after stage I reconstruction. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Pediatric cardiac intensive care unit. PATIENTS: Infants placed on ECMO after stage I reconstruction from January 1998 to May 2005. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of the 382 infants who underwent stage I reconstruction during the study period, 36 (9.4%) required ECMO in the postoperative period. There were 22 infants with hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Indications for ECMO included inability to separate from cardiopulmonary bypass in 14 and cardiac arrest in 22. Fourteen infants (38.8%) survived to hospital discharge. Nonsurvivors had longer cardiopulmonary bypass time (150.1 +/- 70.0 mins vs. 103.9 +/- 30.0 mins, p =. 01). 9/14 infants (64%) supported with ECMO> than 24 hrs after stage I reconstruction survived while only 5/22 infants (22%) requiring ECMO< 24 hrs of stage I reconstruction survived (p =. 02). Of note, all five infants diagnosed with an acute shunt thrombosis were early survivors. Mean duration of ECMO was 50.1 +/- 12.5 hrs for survivors and 125.2 +/- 25.0 for nonsurvivors (p =. 01). 7/14 early survivors are alive at a median follow-up of 20 months (2-78 months). CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, ECMO after stage I reconstruction can be life saving in about a third of infants with otherwise fatal conditions. It is particularly useful in potentially reversible conditions such as acute shunt thrombosis and transient depression of ventricular function.
Authors: Monica E Kleinman; Allan R de Caen; Leon Chameides; Dianne L Atkins; Robert A Berg; Marc D Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Dominique Biarent; Robert Bingham; Ashraf H Coovadia; Mary Fran Hazinski; Robert W Hickey; Vinay M Nadkarni; Amelia G Reis; Antonio Rodriguez-Nunez; James Tibballs; Arno L Zaritsky; David Zideman Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-10-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Monica E Kleinman; Allan R de Caen; Leon Chameides; Dianne L Atkins; Robert A Berg; Marc D Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Dominique Biarent; Robert Bingham; Ashraf H Coovadia; Mary Fran Hazinski; Robert W Hickey; Vinay M Nadkarni; Amelia G Reis; Antonio Rodriguez-Nunez; James Tibballs; Arno L Zaritsky; David Zideman Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2010-10-18 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Shahryar M Chowdhury; Eric M Graham; Andrew M Atz; Scott M Bradley; Minoo N Kavarana; Ryan J Butts Journal: Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2016-04-19
Authors: Jaclyn A Gellings; William K Johnson; Nancy S Ghanayem; Michael Mitchell; James Tweddell; George Hoffman; Viktor Hraska; Evelyn M Kuhn; Ronald K Woods Journal: Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2019-08-09
Authors: Sarah Tabbutt; Nancy Ghanayem; Chitra Ravishankar; Lynn A Sleeper; David S Cooper; Deborah U Frank; Minmin Lu; Christian Pizarro; Peter Frommelt; Caren S Goldberg; Eric M Graham; Catherine Dent Krawczeski; Wyman W Lai; Alan Lewis; Joel A Kirsh; Lynn Mahony; Richard G Ohye; Janet Simsic; Andrew J Lodge; Ellen Spurrier; Mario Stylianou; Peter Laussen Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2012-06-15 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: V Ben Sivarajan; Derek Best; Christian P Brizard; Lara S Shekerdemian; Yves d'Udekem; Warwick Butt Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2011-03-03 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Anjali Sadhwani; Henry Cheng; Christian Stopp; Caitlin K Rollins; Matthew A Jolley; Carolyn Dunbar-Masterson; David Wypij; Jane Newburger; Janice Ware; Ravi R Thiagarajan Journal: Pediatr Cardiol Date: 2019-05-11 Impact factor: 1.655
Authors: Mark G Debrunner; Prashob Porayette; John P Breinholt; Mark W Turrentine; Timothy M Cordes Journal: Pediatr Cardiol Date: 2012-09-25 Impact factor: 1.655