OBJECTIVES: A large number of transplantation centres consider extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as an inappropriate option for bridging critical patients to lung transplantation. Technical improvements such as the introduction of a polymethylpentene membrane, new centrifugal pumps and heparin-coated circuits have led to a safer application of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and an increasing number of centres are reporting their positive experiences. The aim of this study was to review our practice in bridging critical candidates to lung transplantation with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, by comparing patients with invasive mechanical ventilation with patients with spontaneous breathing. METHODS: The records of candidates for lung transplantation treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation have been revised. RESULTS: From February 2008 to 2012, 11 patients who experienced an abrupt worsening of their respiratory conditions were treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; mean age: 33.9 ± 13.2 years, male/female ratio: 5/6, 6 patients were affected by cystic fibrosis, 2 had chronic rejection after transplantation, 2 had pulmonary fibrosis and 1 had systemic sclerosis. Seven patients were awake, while 4 patients received invasive mechanical ventilation. The sequential organ failure assessment score significantly increased during bridging time and this increase was significantly higher in the intubated patients. All the patients had bilateral lung transplantation. Spontaneously breathing patients showed a tendency to require a shorter duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stay and hospital stay after transplantation. One-year survival rate was 85.7% in patients with spontaneous breathing vs 50% in patients with invasive mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in spontaneously breathing patients is a feasible, effective and safe bridge to lung transplantation.
OBJECTIVES: A large number of transplantation centres consider extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as an inappropriate option for bridging critical patients to lung transplantation. Technical improvements such as the introduction of a polymethylpentene membrane, new centrifugal pumps and heparin-coated circuits have led to a safer application of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and an increasing number of centres are reporting their positive experiences. The aim of this study was to review our practice in bridging critical candidates to lung transplantation with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, by comparing patients with invasive mechanical ventilation with patients with spontaneous breathing. METHODS: The records of candidates for lung transplantation treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation have been revised. RESULTS: From February 2008 to 2012, 11 patients who experienced an abrupt worsening of their respiratory conditions were treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; mean age: 33.9 ± 13.2 years, male/female ratio: 5/6, 6 patients were affected by cystic fibrosis, 2 had chronic rejection after transplantation, 2 had pulmonary fibrosis and 1 had systemic sclerosis. Seven patients were awake, while 4 patients received invasive mechanical ventilation. The sequential organ failure assessment score significantly increased during bridging time and this increase was significantly higher in the intubated patients. All the patients had bilateral lung transplantation. Spontaneously breathing patients showed a tendency to require a shorter duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stay and hospital stay after transplantation. One-year survival rate was 85.7% in patients with spontaneous breathing vs 50% in patients with invasive mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in spontaneously breathing patients is a feasible, effective and safe bridge to lung transplantation.
Authors: M Nosotti; L Rosso; A Palleschi; A Lissoni; S Crotti; C Marenghi; C Colombo; D Costantini; L Santambrogio Journal: Transplant Proc Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 1.066
Authors: Abeel A Mangi; David P Mason; James J Yun; Sudish C Murthy; Gosta B Pettersson Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2010-04-09 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Marcelo Cypel; Jonathan C Yeung; Mingyao Liu; Masaki Anraku; Fengshi Chen; Wojtek Karolak; Masaaki Sato; Jane Laratta; Sassan Azad; Mindy Madonik; Chung-Wai Chow; Cecilia Chaparro; Michael Hutcheon; Lianne G Singer; Arthur S Slutsky; Kazuhiro Yasufuku; Marc de Perrot; Andrew F Pierre; Thomas K Waddell; Shaf Keshavjee Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-04-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Assad Haneya; Alois Philipp; Thomas Mueller; Matthias Lubnow; Michael Pfeifer; Wolfgang Zink; Michael Hilker; Christof Schmid; Stephan Hirt Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Pekka Hämmäinen; Henrik Schersten; Karl Lemström; Gerdt C Riise; Sinikka Kukkonen; Kristina Swärd; Jorma Sipponen; Martin Silverborn; Göran Dellgren Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2010-10-08 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: David P Mason; Lucy Thuita; Edward R Nowicki; Sudish C Murthy; Gösta B Pettersson; Eugene H Blackstone Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Sophia F Tam; Anahita Mobargha; Joseph Tobias; Christine A Schad; Shunpei Okochi; William Middlesworth; Vincent Duron Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2018-12-02 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: Matthew Adam Schechter; Asvin M Ganapathi; Brian R Englum; Paul J Speicher; Mani A Daneshmand; R Duane Davis; Matthew G Hartwig Journal: Transplantation Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Brian W Gray; Jonathan W Haft; Jennifer C Hirsch; Gail M Annich; Ronald B Hirschl; Robert H Bartlett Journal: ASAIO J Date: 2015 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: J A Duru; T Menges; J Bodner; M E Degen; D Greifenberg; J Gehron; M A Weigand; M Henrich Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2014-03-02 Impact factor: 1.041