Objectives Central or peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (va ECMO) is widely used in postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock (PCS). Available data suggest controversial results for both types. Our aim was to investigate PCS patients treated with either peripheral (pECMO) or central ECMO (cECMO) concerning their outcome. Methods Between April 2006 and October 2016, 156 consecutive patients with va ECMO therapy due to PCS were identified and included in this retrospective analysis. Patients were divided into cECMO and pECMO groups. Statistical analysis of risk factors concerning 30‐day mortality of the mentioned patient cohort was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics. Results Fifty‐six patients received cECMO and 100 patients were treated with pECMO due to PCS. In the group of cECMO peripheral vascular disease was significantly more present (cECMO 19 [34%] vs pECMO 14 [14%]; P < .01). On‐site ECMO complications occurred significantly more frequent in patients treated with cECMO (cECMO 44 [79%] vs pECMO 54 [54%] g/dL; P < 0.01). More often cECMO patients required a second look operation due to mediastinal bleeding (cECMO 52 [93%] vs pECMO 61 [61%] g/dL; P < .01). Thirty‐day mortality was comparable with nearly 70% in both cohorts (cECMO 39 [70%] vs pECMO 69 [69%]; P = .93). Conclusion Patients supported by cECMO or pECMO due to refractory PCS did not show significant differences in 30‐day mortality, despite a lower incidence of on‐site ECMO complications and re‐exploration in pECMO patients. PCS itself is associated with high mortality and peripheral cannulation might help to save resources compared with central cannulation.

Background There has been conflicting evidence concerning the effect of levosimendan on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and conducted this meta-analysis to provide evidence for/against the administration of levosimendan in cardiac surgery patients. Methods We performed a meta-analysis from literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Only randomized controlled trials comparing the administration of levosimendan in cardiac surgery patients with a control group (other inotrope, standard therapy/placebo, or an intra-aortic balloon pump) were included. In addition, at least one clinical outcome had to be mentioned: mortality, myocardial infarction, low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS), acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy, atrial fibrillation, prolonged inotropic support, length of intensive care unit, and hospital stay. The pooled treatment effects (odds ratio [OR], 95% confidence intervals [CI]) were assessed using a fixed or random effects model. Results The literature search retrieved 27 randomized, controlled trials involving a total of 3,198 patients. Levosimendan led to a significant reduction in mortality (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.49–0.91; p = 0.0087). Furthermore, the incidence of LCOS (OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.42–0.75; p < 0.0001), acute kidney injury (OR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.46–0.86; p = 0.0039), and renal replacement therapy (OR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.50–0.98; p = 0.0332) was significantly decreased in the levosimendan group. Conclusion Our meta-analysis suggests beneficial effects for the prophylactic use of levosimendan in patients with severely impaired left ventricular function undergoing cardiac surgery. The administration of levosimendan was associated with a reduced mortality, less LCOS, and restored adequate organ perfusion reflected in less acute kidney injury. ^* Both senior authors contributed equally to the study.

Background: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (eCPR) is a rapidly growing treatment strategy due to increasing survival rates in selected patients. Additional left ventricular mechanical unloading, using a transfemoral micro‐axial blood pump (Impella® Denver, Massachusetts, USA), might improve patients’ outcomes. In this regard, we sought to investigate patients who suffered OHCA (out‐of hospital cardiac arrest) or IHCA (in‐hospital cardiac arrest) with subsequent eCPR via VA‐ECMO (veno‐arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) and concomitant Impella® implantation based on survival and feasibility of ECMO weaning.Methods: From January 2016 until December 2020, 108 patients underwent eCPR at our institution. Data prior to eCPR and early outcome parameters were analyzed comparing patients who were supported with an additional Impella® (2.5 or CP) (ECMO+Impella®, n = 18) and patients without additional (ECMO, n = 90) support during V‐A ECMO therapy. The primary endpoint was in‐hospital mortality; secondary endpoints were, among others: ECMO explantation, need for hemodialysis, stroke, and need for blood transfusions.Results: Low‐flow time was significantly lower in the ECMO+Impella group (60 min vs. 55 min, p = .01). All‐cause mortality was significantly lower in the ECMO+Impella® group (82% vs. 56%, p = .01). The time of circulatory support was shorter in the ECMO cohort (2.0 ± 1.73 vs. 4.76 ± 2.88 p = .05). ECMO decannulation was significantly more feasible in patients with ECMO+Impella® (72% vs. 32%, p = .01). Patients treated with additional Impella® showed significantly more acute kidney injury with the need for dialysis (72% vs. 18%, p ≤ .01).Conclusion: Concomitant Impella® support might positively influence survival and ECMO weaning in eCPR patients. Treatment‐associated complications such as the need for dialysis were more common in this highly selected patient group. Further studies with larger numbers are necessary to evaluate the clinical relevance of concomitant LV‐unloading in eCPR patients using an Impella® device.

Background: It is unclear whether peripheral arterial cannulation is superior to central arterial cannulation for postcardiotomy veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). Methods: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar to identify studies on postcardiotomy VA-ECMO for the present individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. Analysis was performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Results: The investigators of 10 studies agreed to participate in the present IPD meta-analysis. Overall, 1269 patients were included in the analysis. Crude rates of in-hospital mortality after central versus peripheral arterial cannulation for VA-ECMO were 70.7% vs. 63.7%, respectively (adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.08–1.75). Propensity score matching yielded 538 pairs of patients with balanced baseline characteristics and operative variables. Among these matched cohorts, central arterial cannulation VA-ECMO was associated with significantly higher in-hospital mortality compared to peripheral arterial cannulation VA-ECMO (64.5% vs. 70.8%, p = 0.027). These findings were confirmed by aggregate data meta-analysis, which showed that central arterial cannulation was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality compared to peripheral arterial cannulation (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.04–1.76, I² 21%). Conclusions: Among patients requiring postcardiotomy VA-ECMO, central arterial cannulation was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality compared to peripheral arterial cannulation. This increased risk is of limited magnitude, and further studies are needed to confirm the present findings and to identify the mechanisms underlying the potential beneficial effects of peripheral VA-ECMO.

Background and Objectives: Pediatric extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support is often the ultimate therapy for neonatal and pediatric patients with congenital heart defects after cardiac surgery. The impact of lactate clearance in pediatric patients during ECMO therapy on outcomes has been analyzed. Materials andMethods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 41 pediatric vaECMO patients between January 2006 and December 2016. Blood lactate and lactate clearance have been recorded prior to ECMO implantation and 3, 6, 9 and 12 h after ECMO start. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to identify cut-off levels for lactate clearance. Results: Lactate levels prior to ECMO therapy (9.8 mmol/L vs. 13.5 mmol/L; p = 0.07) and peak lactate levels during ECMO support (10.4 mmol/L vs. 14.7 mmol/L; p = 0.07) were similar between survivors and nonsurvivors. Areas under the curve (AUC) of lactate clearance at 3, 9 h and 12 h after ECMO start were significantly predictive for mortality (p = 0.017, p = 0.049 and p = 0.006, respectively). Cut-off values of lactate clearance were 3.8%, 51% and 56%. Duration of ECMO support and respiratory ventilation was significantly longer in survivors than in nonsurvivors (p = 0.01 and p < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions: Dynamic recording of lactate clearance after ECMO start is a valuable tool to assess outcomes and effectiveness of ECMO application. Poor lactate clearance during ECMO therapy in pediatric patients is a significant marker for higher mortality.