The Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) maintains the world’s largest extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) registry by volume, center participation, and international scope. This 2022 ELSO Registry Report describes the program characteristics of ECMO centers, processes of ECMO care, and reported outcomes. Neonates (0–28 days), children (29 days–17 years), and adults (≥18 years) supported with ECMO from 2009 through 2022 and reported to the ELSO Registry were included. This report describes adjunctive therapies, support modes, treatments, complications, and survival outcomes. Data are presented descriptively as counts and percent or median and interquartile range (IQR) by year, group, or level. Missing values were excluded before calculating descriptive statistics. Complications are reported per 1,000 ECMO hours. From 2009 to 2022, 154,568 ECMO runs were entered into the ELSO Registry. Seven hundred and eighty centers submitted data during this time (557 in 2022). Since 2009, the median annual number of adult ECMO runs per center per year increased from 4 to 15, whereas for pediatric and neonatal runs, the rate decreased from 12 to 7. Over 50% of patients were transferred to the reporting ECMO center; 20% of these patients were transported with ECMO. The use of prone positioning before respiratory ECMO increased from 15% (2019) to 44% (2021) for adults during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Survival to hospital discharge was greatest at 68.5% for neonatal respiratory support and lowest at 29.5% for ECPR delivered to adults. By 2022, the Registry had enrolled its 200,000th ECMO patient and 100,000th patient discharged alive. Since its inception, the ELSO Registry has helped centers measure and compare outcomes across its member centers and strategies of care. Continued growth and development of the Registry will aim to bolster its utility to patients and centers.

Background: There are several reports of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who develop severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to guide clinical decision-making and future research. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and Scopus databases from 1 December 2019 to 10 January 2021 for observational studies or randomised clinical trials examining ECMO in adults with COVID-19 ARDS. We performed random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression, assessed risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist and rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Survival outcomes were presented as pooled proportions while continuous outcomes were presented as pooled means, both with corresponding 95% confidence intervals [CIs]. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were duration of ECMO therapy and mechanical ventilation, weaning rate from ECMO and complications during ECMO. Results: We included twenty-two observational studies with 1896 patients in the meta-analysis. Venovenous ECMO was the predominant mode used (98.6%). The pooled in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients (22 studies, 1896 patients) supported with ECMO was 37.1% (95% CI 32.3–42.0%, high certainty). Pooled mortality in the venovenous ECMO group was 35.7% (95% CI 30.7–40.7%, high certainty). Meta-regression found that age and ECMO duration were associated with increased mortality. Duration of ECMO support (18 studies, 1844 patients) was 15.1 days (95% CI 13.4–18.7). Weaning from ECMO (17 studies, 1412 patients) was accomplished in 67.6% (95% CI 50.5–82.7%) of patients. There were a total of 1583 ECMO complications reported (18 studies, 1721 patients) and renal complications were the most common. Conclusion: The majority of patients received venovenous ECMO support for COVID-19-related ARDS. In-hospital mortality in patients receiving ECMO support for COVID-19 was 37.1% during the first year of the pandemic, similar to those with non-COVID-19-related ARDS. Increasing age was a risk factor for death. Venovenous ECMO appears to be an effective intervention in selected patients with COVID-19-related ARDS. PROSPERO CRD42020192627.

Background: While recommended by international societal guidelines in the paediatric population, the use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) as mechanical circulatory support for refractory septic shock in adults is controversial. We aimed to characterise the outcomes of adults with septic shock requiring VA ECMO, and identify factors associated with survival. Methods: We searched Pubmed, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane databases from inception until 1st June 2021, and included all relevant publications reporting on > 5 adult patients requiring VA ECMO for septic shock. Study quality and certainty in evidence were assessed using the appropriate Joanna Briggs Institute checklist, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach, respectively. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge, and secondary outcomes included intensive care unit length of stay, duration of ECMO support, complications while on ECMO, and sources of sepsis. Random-effects meta-analysis (DerSimonian and Laird) were conducted. Data synthesis: We included 14 observational studies with 468 patients in the meta-analysis. Pooled survival was 36.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 23.6%–50.1%). Survival among patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 20% (62.0%, 95%-CI: 51.6%–72.0%) was significantly higher than those with LVEF > 35% (32.1%, 95%-CI: 8.69%–60.7%, p = 0.05). Survival reported in studies from Asia (19.5%, 95%-CI: 13.0%–26.8%) was notably lower than those from Europe (61.0%, 95%-CI: 48.4%–73.0%) and North America (45.5%, 95%-CI: 16.7%–75.8%). GRADE assessment indicated high certainty of evidence for pooled survival. Conclusions: When treated with VA ECMO, the majority of patients with septic shock and severe sepsis-induced myocardial depression survive. However, VA ECMO has poor outcomes in adults with septic shock without severe left ventricular depression. VA ECMO may be a viable treatment option in carefully selected adult patients with refractory septic shock.

Objectives: We examined data from the International Registry of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization to identify risk factors for mortality in pregnant and peripartum patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Design: Retrospective analysis. Setting: International Registry of Extracorporeal Life Support Organization. Patients: We collected de-identified data on all peripartum patients who needed extracorporeal membrane oxygenation between 1997 and 2017 using International Classification of Diseases, 9th and 10th Edition criteria. Interventions: Our primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. We also collected data on demographics, preextracorporeal membrane oxygenation ventilator, hemodynamic and biochemical parameters, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation mode, duration, and complications. Initial bivariate analysis assessed potential associations between survival and various preextracorporeal membrane oxygenation as well as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-related factors. Variables with p values of less than 0.1 were considered for logistic regression analysis which identified predictors of mortality. Measurements and Main Results: There were 280 peripartum patients who received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Overall maternal survival was 70%, with observed mortality for these patients decreasing over the 21-year time period. Multivariate regression identified extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (odds ratio, 3.674; 95% CI, 1.425–9.473; overall p = 0.025), duration of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (< 66 hr: odds ratio, 1; 66–128 hr: odds ratio, 0.281; 95% CI, 0.101–0.777; p = 0.014; 128–232 hr: odds ratio, 0.474; 95% CI, 0.191–1.174; p = 0.107; and > 232 hr: odds ratio, 1.084; 95% CI, 0.429–2.737; p = 0.864; overall p = 0.017), and renal complications on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (odds ratio, 2.346; 95% CI, 1.203–4.572; p = 0.012) as significant risk factors for mortality. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between venovenous versus venoarterial versus mixed group extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (23.9 vs 34.4 vs 29.4%; p = 0.2) or between pulmonary versus cardiac indications (1.634; 95% CI, 0.797–3.352; p = 0.18) for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Conclusions: On analysis of this multicenter database, pregnant and peripartum patients with refractory cardiac or respiratory failure supported on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation had survival rates of 70%. We identified preextracorporeal membrane oxygenation as well as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-related factors that are associated with mortality.