T Müller1, M Lubnow, A Philipp, M Pfeifer, L S Maier. 1. Klinik und Poliklinik für Innere Medizin II, Universitätsklinikum Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Deutschland, thomas.mueller@ukr.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In recent years a rapid expansion of extracorporeal devices for support of severe lung failure has been witnessed. Systems for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) or for extracorporeal carbon dioxide elimination are distinguished depending on the indications. OBJECTIVES: The state of the art of extracorporeal lung support is presented with an overview of the different systems, the indications, efficiency and potential side effects. METHODS: By means of a selective literature research and based on personal experience, the principles and techniques, efficiency and potential side-effects of the new modalities are described. RESULTS: The VV-ECMO systems may be indicated in severe, refractory and predominantly hypoxemic lung failure (pAO2/FIO2 <80 mmHg). Both life-saving gas exchange and a reduction of ventilator-induced lung injury by means of a more protective ventilation can be achieved. Experienced centers can obtain survival rates of more than 60%. Either pumpless arterio-venous devices, also called interventional lung assist (ILA) or low-flow ECMO devices can be used for extracorporeal carbon dioxide elimination in refractory respiratory acidosis. Severe complications can occur with all modalities of extracorporeal support and have to be rapidly recognized and controlled. It must be pointed out that secure evidence based on prospective randomized studies is currently limited for all modalities. CONCLUSION: Modern extracorporeal lung support devices allow an effective extracorporeal gas exchange and have become an inherent component of intensive care treatment of critically ill patients. Due to potentially severe complications the use should be restricted to specialized centers with experience in the treatment of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
BACKGROUND: In recent years a rapid expansion of extracorporeal devices for support of severe lung failure has been witnessed. Systems for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) or for extracorporeal carbon dioxide elimination are distinguished depending on the indications. OBJECTIVES: The state of the art of extracorporeal lung support is presented with an overview of the different systems, the indications, efficiency and potential side effects. METHODS: By means of a selective literature research and based on personal experience, the principles and techniques, efficiency and potential side-effects of the new modalities are described. RESULTS: The VV-ECMO systems may be indicated in severe, refractory and predominantly hypoxemic lung failure (pAO2/FIO2 <80 mmHg). Both life-saving gas exchange and a reduction of ventilator-induced lung injury by means of a more protective ventilation can be achieved. Experienced centers can obtain survival rates of more than 60%. Either pumpless arterio-venous devices, also called interventional lung assist (ILA) or low-flow ECMO devices can be used for extracorporeal carbon dioxide elimination in refractory respiratory acidosis. Severe complications can occur with all modalities of extracorporeal support and have to be rapidly recognized and controlled. It must be pointed out that secure evidence based on prospective randomized studies is currently limited for all modalities. CONCLUSION: Modern extracorporeal lung support devices allow an effective extracorporeal gas exchange and have become an inherent component of intensive care treatment of critically illpatients. Due to potentially severe complications the use should be restricted to specialized centers with experience in the treatment of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
Authors: A J Rastan; N Lachmann; T Walther; N Doll; T Gradistanac; J F Gommert; S Lehmann; C Wittekind; F W Mohr Journal: Int J Artif Organs Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 1.595
Authors: Moronke A Noah; Giles J Peek; Simon J Finney; Mark J Griffiths; David A Harrison; Richard Grieve; M Zia Sadique; Jasjeet S Sekhon; Daniel F McAuley; Richard K Firmin; Christopher Harvey; Jeremy J Cordingley; Susanna Price; Alain Vuylsteke; David P Jenkins; David W Noble; Roxanna Bloomfield; Timothy S Walsh; Gavin D Perkins; David Menon; Bruce L Taylor; Kathryn M Rowan Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-10-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: A H Morris; C J Wallace; R L Menlove; T P Clemmer; J F Orme; L K Weaver; N C Dean; F Thomas; T D East; N L Pace; M R Suchyta; E Beck; M Bombino; D F Sittig; S Böhm; B Hoffmann; H Becks; S Butler; J Pearl; B Rasmusson Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 1994-02 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Andrew Davies; Daryl Jones; Michael Bailey; John Beca; Rinaldo Bellomo; Nikki Blackwell; Paul Forrest; David Gattas; Emily Granger; Robert Herkes; Andrew Jackson; Shay McGuinness; Priya Nair; Vincent Pellegrino; Ville Pettilä; Brian Plunkett; Roger Pye; Paul Torzillo; Steve Webb; Michael Wilson; Marc Ziegenfuss Journal: JAMA Date: 2009-10-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Niall D Ferguson; Eddy Fan; Luigi Camporota; Massimo Antonelli; Antonio Anzueto; Richard Beale; Laurent Brochard; Roy Brower; Andrés Esteban; Luciano Gattinoni; Andrew Rhodes; Arthur S Slutsky; Jean-Louis Vincent; Gordon D Rubenfeld; B Taylor Thompson; V Marco Ranieri Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2012-08-25 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Pier Paolo Terragni; Lorenzo Del Sorbo; Luciana Mascia; Rosario Urbino; Erica L Martin; Alberto Birocco; Chiara Faggiano; Michael Quintel; Luciano Gattinoni; V Marco Ranieri Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: Thomas Müller; Alois Philipp; Andreas Luchner; Christian Karagiannidis; Thomas Bein; Michael Hilker; Leopold Rupprecht; Julia Langgartner; Markus Zimmermann; Matthias Arlt; Jan Wenger; Christof Schmid; Günter Aj Riegger; Michael Pfeifer; Matthias Lubnow Journal: Crit Care Date: 2009-12-17 Impact factor: 9.097