Objectives: To assess in-hospital neurologic (CNS) complications in adult patients undergoing veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for respiratory failure.Design: Retrospective analysis of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization’s data registry.Setting: Data reported to Extracorporeal Life Support Organization from 350 international extracorporeal membrane oxygenation centers during 1992–2015.Patients: Adults (≥ 18 yr old) supported with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for respiratory failure.Interventions: None.Measurements and Main Results: We included 4,988 adults supported with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for respiratory failure. Neurologic injury was defined as brain death, seizures, stroke, and intracranial hemorrhage occurring during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. We used multivariable logistic regression to explore patient and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation factors associated with neurologic injury. Median age of the study cohort was 46 (interquartile range, 32–58). Four hundred twenty-six neurologic complications were reported in 356 patients (7.1%), and included 181 intracranial hemorrhage (42.5%), 100 brain deaths (23.5%), 85 stroke (19.9%), and 60 seizure events (14.1%). In-hospital mortality was significantly higher for those with CNS complications (75.8% vs 37.8%;p< 0.001) and varied by type of CNS injury; mortality was 79.6% in patients with intracranial hemorrhage, 68.2% in patients with stroke, and 50% in patients with seizures. Pre-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cardiac arrest, continuous veno-venous hemofiltration, and hyperbilirubinemia during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were associated with increased odds of neurologic injury.Conclusions: Approximately 7% of adults supported with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for respiratory failure had neurologic injury. Intracranial hemorrhage was the most frequent type, and survival for patients with neurologic injury was poor. Future investigations should evaluate anticoagulation management as well as brain/extracorporeal membrane oxygenation interaction to reduce these life-threatening events.

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.

The use of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) devices has significantly increased in the last decades. Despite medical and technological advancements, a main challenge in the ECLS field remains the complex interaction between the human body, blood, and artificial materials. Indeed, blood exposure to artificial surfaces generates an unbalanced activation of the coagulation cascade, leading to hemorrhagic and thrombotic events. Over time, several anticoagulation and coatings methods have been introduced to address this problem. This narrative review summarizes trends, advantages, and disadvantages of anticoagulation and coating methods used in the ECLS field. Evidence was collected through a PubMed search and reference scanning. A group of experts was convened to openly discuss the retrieved references. Clinical practice in ECLS is still based on the large use of unfractionated heparin and, as an alternative in case of contraindications, nafamostat mesilate, bivalirudin, and argatroban. Other anticoagulation methods are under investigation, but none is about to enter the clinical routine. From an engineering point of view, material modifications have focused on commercially available biomimetic and biopassive surfaces and on the development of endothelialized surfaces. Biocompatible and bio-hybrid materials not requiring combined systemic anticoagulation should be the future goal, but intense efforts are still required to fulfill this purpose.

Background: In adults with refractory out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest, when conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) alone does not achieve return of spontaneous circulation, extracorporeal CPR is attempted to restore perfusion and improve outcomes. Considering the contrasting findings of recent studies, we conducted a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials to ascertain the effect of extracorporeal CPR on survival and neurological outcome.Methods: Pubmed via MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to February 3, 2023, for randomized controlled trials comparing extracorporeal CPR versus conventional CPR in adults with refractory out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest. Survival with a favorable neurological outcome at the longest follow‐up available was the primary outcome.Results: Among four randomized controlled trials included, extracorporeal CPR compared with conventional CPR increased survival with favorable neurological outcome at the longest follow‐up available for all rhythms (59/220 [27%] vs. 39/213 [18%]; OR = 1.72; 95% CI, 1.09–2.70; p = 0.02; I² = 26%; number needed to treat of 9), for initial shockable rhythms only (55/164 [34%] vs. 38/165 [23%]; OR = 1.90; 95% CI, 1.16–3.13; p = 0.01; I² = 23%; number needed to treat of 7), and at hospital discharge or 30 days (55/220 [25%] vs. 34/212 [16%]; OR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.13–2.92; p = 0.01; I² = 0.0%). Overall survival at the longest follow‐up available was similar (61/220 [25%] vs. 34/212 [16%]; OR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.13–2.92; p = 0.59; I² = 58%).Conclusions: Extracorporeal CPR compared with conventional CPR increased survival with favorable neurological outcome in adults with refractory out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest, especially when the initial rhythm was shockable.Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42023396482.

Severely hypothermic patients, especially suffering cardiac arrest, require highly specialized treatment. The most common problems affecting the recognition and treatment seem to be awareness, logistics, and proper planning. In severe hypothermia, pathophysiologic changes occur in the cardiovascular system leading to dysrhythmias, decreased cardiac output, decreased central nervous system electrical activity, cold diuresis, and noncardiogenic pulmonary edema. Cardiac arrest, multiple organ dysfunction, and refractory vasoplegia are indicative of profound hypothermia. The aim of these narrative reviews is to describe the peculiar pathophysiology of patients suffering cardiac arrest from accidental hypothermia. We describe the good chances of neurologic recovery in certain circumstances, even in patients presenting with unwitnessed cardiac arrest, asystole, and the absence of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Guidance on patient selection, prognostication, and treatment, including extracorporeal life support, is given.