Despite increasing use and promising outcomes, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) introduces the risk of a number of complications across the spectrum of ECMO care. This narrative review describes the variety of short-and long-term complications that can occur during treatment with ECMO and how patient selection and management decisions may influence the risk of these complications.DATA SOURCES: English language articles were identified in PubMed using phrases related to V-V ECMO, acute respiratory distress syndrome, severe respiratory failure, and complications. STUDY SELECTION:Original research, review articles, commentaries, and published guidelines from the Extracorporeal Life support Organization were considered.DATA EXTRACTION: Data from relevant literature were identified, reviewed, and integrated into a concise narrative review. DATA SYNTHESIS:Selecting patients for V-V ECMO exposes the patient to a number of complications. Adequate knowledge of these risks is needed to weigh them against the anticipated benefit of treatment. Timing of ECMO initiation and transfer to centers capable of providing ECMO affect patient outcomes. Choosing a configuration that insufficiently addresses the patient's physiologic deficit leads to consequences of inadequate physiologic support. Suboptimal mechanical ventilator management during ECMO may lead to worsening lung injury, delayed lung recovery, or ventilator-associated pneumonia. Premature decannulation from ECMO as lungs recover can lead to clinical worsening, and delayed decannulation can prolong exposure to complications unnecessarily. Short-term complications include bleeding, thrombosis, and hemolysis, renal and neurologic injury, concomitant infections, and technical and mechanical problems. Long-term complications reflect the physical, functional, and neurologic sequelae of critical illness. ECMO can introduce ethical and emotional challenges, particularly when bridging strategies fail. CONCLUSIONS:V-V ECMO is associated with a number of complications. ECMO selection, timing of initiation, and management decisions impact the presence and severity of these potential harms.

ARDS is a lethal form of acute respiratory failure, and because no specific treatments exist, supportive care remains the primary management strategy in these patients. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has emerged as an intervention in patients with severe ARDS to facilitate gas exchange and the delivery of more lung protective ventilation. Over the past 20 years, improvements in ECMO technology have increased its safety and transportability, making it far more available to this patient population globally. Deciding which patients with ARDS should be initiated on ECMO remains a challenging question. Numerous clinical and laboratory markers have been investigated, and multiple risk scores developed, to aid physicians in this decision-making process. However, they are still imperfect, and the choice is often based on institutional guidelines and the clinical impression of the treating physician. Given the potential risks and resource implications for this intervention, patient selection is critical and it is important to provide ECMO only to patients who have a reasonable chance for recovery or bridge to transplantation. In patients undergoing ECMO where there is no potential for recovery or transplant, the only option may be withdrawal of ECMO and palliation. These patients may be awake and interactive, which is often a very challenging scenario for patients, families, and the clinical team. In this article, we present a more controversial case and a review of the literature regarding the selection of patients with ARDS who should receive ECMO.

No abstract

No abstract