Justyna Swol1, Daniel Brodie, Lena Napolitano, Pauline K Park, Ravi Thiagarajan, Ryan P Barbaro, Roberto Lorusso, David McMullan, Nicholas Cavarocchi, Ali Ait Hssain, Peter Rycus, David Zonies. 1. From the Department of General, Visceral, Vascular, and Pediatric Surgery (J.S.), University Hospital Würzburg, Germany; Department of Medicine, Columbia College of Physicians & Surgeons (D.B.), New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York; Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Health System (L.N., P.K.P.), University Hospital, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Department of Surgery, Harvard Medical School (R.T.), Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Pediatrics (R.P.B.), C.S. Mott Children's Hospital, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Cardio-Thoracic Surgery Department (R.L.), Heart and Vascular Centre, Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+), Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Seattle Children's Hospital (D.M.), Seattle, Washington; Department of Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University (N.C.), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Medical Intensive Care Unit (A.A.H.), Hamad General Hospital, Doha, Qatar; Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (P.R.), Ann Arbor, Michigan; and Division of Trauma, Critical Care & Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University (D.Z.), Portland,.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in the trauma population remains controversial and has been reported only in small cohort studies. Recent ECLS technical advances have increased its use as an advanced critical care option in trauma. Given the degree of resource utilization, costs, and expertise required to provide ECLS support in trauma patients, we sought to perform a multi-institutional study to assess the indications and outcomes of ECLS in trauma. METHODS: A retrospective review of adult (≥16 years) trauma patients receiving ECLS support in the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry (1989-2016) was performed. Standardized data from the contributing ELSO centers includes patient demographics, diagnoses, and ECLS technique and procedures. Additionally, baseline characteristics, precannulation and postcannulation physiologic data, complications, and outcomes were recorded. Survival was categorized both by transition off ECLS support and survival to hospital discharge. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-nine trauma patients were identified (0.92% of 30,273 adult ECLS patients). Extracorporeal life support increased significantly in the last 5 years (173 in 2011-2016, 62%) compared with 106 in the prior 18 years. Trauma patients were predominantly male (78%), with a mean age of 34.8 ± 15.4 years (range, 16-88 years). Thoracic injury was the most common diagnosis; acute respiratory distress syndrome was the most common indication. Extracorporeal life support was venovenous for respiratory failure (89%), VA for cardiac failure (7%), and VA for ECLS-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (E-CPR) (4%). Extracorporeal life support duration was 8.8 ± 9.5 days (longest 83 days), and was longer for respiratory support (9.3 ± 9.3 days) vs. cardiac support (4.1 ± 4.5 days) and E-CPR (6.5 ± 16.8 days). Overall survival from ECLS was 70% and survival to hospital discharge was 61% in the total cohort (63% respiratory, 50% cardiac, 25% E-CPR), similar to survival rates in other ELSO registry cohorts. More than 80% of patients had a reported complication during ECLS support. The most common complication was cardiovascular (51%) followed by a bleeding complication (29%). Multiple organ failure was the most common cause of death (15.4%). CONCLUSION: Data from the largest registry of critically ill trauma patients receiving ECLS support demonstrates reasonable survival. With growing experience and improved safety profile, trauma should not be considered a contraindication for ECLS. Further analysis of the ELSO registry regarding trauma-specific risk factors and ECLS-specific practices may identify best candidates and improve trauma ECLS outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level III.
BACKGROUND: The use of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in the trauma population remains controversial and has been reported only in small cohort studies. Recent ECLS technical advances have increased its use as an advanced critical care option in trauma. Given the degree of resource utilization, costs, and expertise required to provide ECLS support in traumapatients, we sought to perform a multi-institutional study to assess the indications and outcomes of ECLS in trauma. METHODS: A retrospective review of adult (≥16 years) traumapatients receiving ECLS support in the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry (1989-2016) was performed. Standardized data from the contributing ELSO centers includes patient demographics, diagnoses, and ECLS technique and procedures. Additionally, baseline characteristics, precannulation and postcannulation physiologic data, complications, and outcomes were recorded. Survival was categorized both by transition off ECLS support and survival to hospital discharge. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-nine traumapatients were identified (0.92% of 30,273 adult ECLS patients). Extracorporeal life support increased significantly in the last 5 years (173 in 2011-2016, 62%) compared with 106 in the prior 18 years. Traumapatients were predominantly male (78%), with a mean age of 34.8 ± 15.4 years (range, 16-88 years). Thoracic injury was the most common diagnosis; acute respiratory distress syndrome was the most common indication. Extracorporeal life support was venovenous for respiratory failure (89%), VA for cardiac failure (7%), and VA for ECLS-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (E-CPR) (4%). Extracorporeal life support duration was 8.8 ± 9.5 days (longest 83 days), and was longer for respiratory support (9.3 ± 9.3 days) vs. cardiac support (4.1 ± 4.5 days) and E-CPR (6.5 ± 16.8 days). Overall survival from ECLS was 70% and survival to hospital discharge was 61% in the total cohort (63% respiratory, 50% cardiac, 25% E-CPR), similar to survival rates in other ELSO registry cohorts. More than 80% of patients had a reported complication during ECLS support. The most common complication was cardiovascular (51%) followed by a bleeding complication (29%). Multiple organ failure was the most common cause of death (15.4%). CONCLUSION: Data from the largest registry of critically ill traumapatients receiving ECLS support demonstrates reasonable survival. With growing experience and improved safety profile, trauma should not be considered a contraindication for ECLS. Further analysis of the ELSO registry regarding trauma-specific risk factors and ECLS-specific practices may identify best candidates and improve trauma ECLS outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level III.
Authors: Thaddeus Puzio; Patrick Murphy; Josh Gazzetta; Michael Phillips; Bryan A Cotton; Jennifer L Hartwell Journal: Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Date: 2019-09-13
Authors: Emily E Naoum; Andrew Chalupka; Jonathan Haft; Mark MacEachern; Cosmas J M Vandeven; Sarah Rae Easter; Michael Maile; Brian T Bateman; Melissa E Bauer Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2020-06-24 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Jesús Abelardo Barea-Mendoza; Mario Chico-Fernández; Manuel Quintana-Díaz; Jon Pérez-Bárcena; Luís Serviá-Goixart; Ismael Molina-Díaz; María Bringas-Bollada; Antonio Luis Ruiz-Aguilar; María Ángeles Ballesteros-Sanz; Juan Antonio Llompart-Pou Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-01-05 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Lilian Jo Engelhardt; Claudio Olbricht; Marcel Niemann; Jan Adriaan Graw; Oliver Hunsicker; Björn Weiss; Victoria Bünger; Steffen Weber-Carstens; Sebastian Daniel Boie; Sophie K Piper; Felix Balzer; Mario Menk Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-09-28 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: David Zonies; Panna Codner; Pauline Park; Niels D Martin; Matthew Lissauer; Susan Evans; Christine Cocanour; Karen Brasel Journal: Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Date: 2019-04-03