Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is used as a lifesaving rescue treatment in refractory respiratory or cardiac failure. During venovenous (VV) ECMO, the presence of recirculation is known, but quantification and actions to minimize recirculation after measurement are to date not routinely practiced. In the current study, we investigated the effect of draining cannula design on recirculation fraction (Rf) during VV ECMO; conventional mesh cannula was compared with a multistage cannula. The effect of adjusting cannula position was also studied. Recirculation was measured with ultrasound dilution technique at different ECMO flows and after cannula repositioning. All patients who were admitted to our unit between October 2014 and July 2015 catheterized by the atrio-femoral single lumen method were included. A total of 108 measurements were conducted in 14 patients. The multistage cannula showed significantly less recirculation (19.0 ± 12.2%) compared with the conventional design (38.0 ± 13.7). Pooled data in cases improved from adjustment showing reduced Rf by 7%. In conclusion, the choice of cannula matters, as does adjustment of the draining cannula position during atrio-femoral VV ECMO. By utilizing the ultrasound dilution technique to measure Rf before and after repositioning, effective ECMO flow can be improved for a more effective ECMO treatment.
BackgroundRecirculation is a common problem in venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The aims of this study were to compare recirculation fraction (Rf) between femoro-jugular and jugulo-femoral VV ECMO configurations, to identify risk factors for recirculation and to assess the impact on hemolysis.MethodsPatients in the medical intensive care unit (ICU) at the University Medical Center Regensburg, Germany receiving VV ECMO with femoro-jugular, and jugulo-femoral configuration at the ECMO Center Karolinska, Sweden, were included in this non-randomized prospective study. Total ECMO flow (QEC), recirculated flow (QREC), and recirculation fraction Rf = QREC/QEC were determined using ultrasound dilution technology. Effective ECMO flow (QEFF) was defined as QEFF = QEC * (1–Rf). Demographics, cannula specifics, and markers of hemolysis were assessed. Survival was evaluated at discharge from ICU.ResultsThirty-seven patients with femoro-jugular configuration underwent 595 single-point measurements and 18 patients with jugulo-femoral configuration 231 measurements. Rf was lower with femoro-jugular compared to jugulo-femoral configuration [5 (0, 11) vs. 19 (13, 28) %, respectively (p < 0.001)], resulting in similar QEFF [2.80 (2.21, 3.39) vs. 2.79 (2.39, 3.08) L/min (p = 0.225)] despite lower QEC with femoro-jugular configuration compared to jugulo-femoral [3.01 (2.40, 3.70) vs. 3.57 (3.05, 4.06) L/min, respectively (p < 0.001)]. In multivariate regression analysis, the type of configuration, distance between the two cannula tips, ECMO flow, and heart rate were significantly associated with Rf [B (95% CI): 25.8 (17.6, 33.8), p < 0.001; 960.4 (960.7, 960.1), p = 0.009; 4.2 (2.5, 5.9), p < 0.001; 960.1 (960.2, 0.0), p = 0.027]. Hemolysis was similar in subjects with Rf > 8 vs. ≤ 8%. Explorative data on survival showed comparable results in the femoro-jugular and the jugulo-femoral group (81 vs. 72%, p = 0.455).ConclusionVV ECMO with femoro-jugular configuration caused less recirculation. Further risk factors for higher Rf were shorter distance between the two cannula tips, higher ECMO flow, and lower heart rate. Rf did not affect hemolysis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.