| Literature DB >> 32401973 |
Marta López-Sánchez1, María Isabel Rubio-López1.
Abstract
In recent years and due, in part, to technological advances, the use of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal systems paired with the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has resurfaced. However, studies are lacking that establish its indications and evidence to support its use. These systems efficiently eliminate carbon dioxide in patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure using small-bore cannula, usually double-lumen cannula with a small membrane lung surface area. Currently, we have several systems with different types of membranes and sizes. Pump-driven veno-venous systems generate fewer complications than do arteriovenous systems. Both require systemic anticoagulation. The "lung-kidney" support system, by combining a removal system with hemofiltration, simultaneously eliminates carbon dioxide and performs continuous extrarenal replacement. We describe our initial experience with a combined system for extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal-continuous extrarenal replacement in a lung transplant patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure, barotrauma and associated acute renal failure. The most important technical aspects, the effectiveness of the system for the elimination of carbon dioxide and a review of the literature are described.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32401973 PMCID: PMC7206950 DOI: 10.5935/0103-507x.20200020
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Rev Bras Ter Intensiva ISSN: 0103-507X
Figure 1Detail of the parameters and pressures for the extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal-continuous extrarenal replacement system with a flow of 350mL/minute and with a flow of 390mL/minute (side panel).
Figure 2pH, PaCO2 and PaO2 curves before and after device implantation. pH - hydrogen potential; PaCO2 - partial pressure of carbon dioxide; PaO2 - partial pressure of oxygen.
Summary of the studies with combined extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal and continuous extrarenal replacement systems
| Author | Population | No. of cases | Configuration | Membrane(m2) | Hemofilter (m2) | Blood flow (mL/min) | Air flow (L/min) | Cannula (Fr) | Anticoagulation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terragni et al.( | Humans | 32 | VV | 0.33 Polystan | Medica D200 | 500 | 8 | 14 DL | aPTT ratio 1.5 |
| Forster et al.( | Humans | 10 | VV | 0.67 | 1.4 polysulfone | 250 - 500 | 6 - 7 | 13 DL | aPTT at 60 sec. ACT: 120 - 200 sec |
| Young et al.( | Animal | 9 | AV | 5 | - | 470 - 600 | 10 | - | ACT 200 - 300 sec |
| Quintard et al.( | Humans | 16 | VV | 0.65 polypropylene | 1.4 polysulfone | 400 - 500 | 10 | DL: 13.5 jugular (15cm) or 13.5 femoral (24cm) or 16 femoral (27cm) DUL 13.5 | aPTT 45 - 50 sec |
| Allardet-Servent et al.( | Humans | 11 | VV | 0.65 polymethylpentene | 1.5 polysulfone | 410 ± 30 | 8 | 15.5 DL (15 and 20cm) | aPTT ratio 1.5 |
VV - veno-venous; DL - double-lumen cannula; aPTT - activated partial thromboplastin time; AV - arteriovenous; ACT - activated clotting time; DUL - two single-lumen cannula.