27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in patients with H1N1 influenza infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis including 8 studies and 266 patients receiving ECMO

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          H1N1 influenza can cause severe acute lung injury (ALI). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) can support gas exchange in patients failing conventional mechanical ventilation, but its role is still controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on ECMO for H1N1-associated ALI.

          Methods

          CENTRAL, Google Scholar, MEDLINE/PubMed and Scopus (updated 2 January 2012) were systematically searched. Studies reporting on 10 or more patients with H1N1 infection treated with ECMO were included. Baseline, procedural, outcome and validity data were systematically appraised and pooled, when appropriate, with random-effect methods.

          Results

          From 1,196 initial citations, 8 studies were selected, including 1,357 patients with confirmed/suspected H1N1 infection requiring intensive care unit admission, 266 (20%) of whom were treated with ECMO. Patients had a median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score of 9, and had received mechanical ventilation before ECMO implementation for a median of two days. ECMO was implanted before inter-hospital patient transfer in 72% of cases and in most patients (94%) the veno-venous configuration was used. ECMO was maintained for a median of 10 days. Outcomes were highly variable among the included studies, with in-hospital or short-term mortality ranging between 8% and 65%, mainly depending on baseline patient features. Random-effect pooled estimates suggested an overall in-hospital mortality of 28% (95% confidence interval 18% to 37%; I 2 = 64%).

          Conclusions

          ECMO is feasible and effective in patients with ALI due to H1N1 infection. Despite this, prolonged support (more than one week) is required in most cases, and subjects with severe comorbidities or multiorgan failure remain at high risk of in-hospital death.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in adults with severe respiratory failure: a multi-center database.

          To evaluate clinical and treatment factors for patients recorded in the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry and survival of adult extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) respiratory failure patients. Retrospective case review of the ELSO registry from 1986-2006. Data were analyzed separately for the entire time period and the most recent years (2002-2006). Of 1,473 patients, 50% survived to discharge. Median age was 34 years. Most patients (78%) were supported with venovenous ECMO. In a multi-variate logistic regression model, pre-ECMO factors including increasing age, decreased weight, days on mechanical ventilation before ECMO, arterial blood pH or= 70 compared to PaCO(2) 7.6 were associated with increased odds of death. Survival among this cohort of adults with severe respiratory failure supported with ECMO was 50%. Advanced patient age, increased pre-ECMO ventilation duration, diagnosis category and complications while on ECMO were associated with mortality. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate the role of this complex support mode.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Italian ECMO network experience during the 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic: preparation for severe respiratory emergency outbreaks

            Purpose In view of the expected 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic, the Italian Health Authorities set up a national referral network of selected intensive care units (ICU) able to provide advanced respiratory care up to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We describe the organization and results of the network, known as ECMOnet. Methods The network consisted of 14 ICUs with ECMO capability and a national call center. The network was set up to centralize all severe patients to the ECMOnet centers assuring safe transfer. An ad hoc committee defined criteria for both patient transfer and ECMO institutions. Results Between August 2009 and March 2010, 153 critically ill patients (53% referred from other hospitals) were admitted to the ECMOnet ICU with suspected H1N1. Sixty patients (48 of the referred patients, 49 with confirmed H1N1 diagnosis) received ECMO according to ECMOnet criteria. All referred patients were successfully transferred to the ECMOnet centers; 28 were transferred while on ECMO. Survival to hospital discharge in patients receiving ECMO was 68%. Survival of patients receiving ECMO within 7 days from the onset of mechanical ventilation was 77%. The length of mechanical ventilation prior to ECMO was an independent predictor of mortality. Conclusions A network organization based on preemptive patient centralization allowed a high survival rate and provided effective and safe referral of patients with severe H1N1-suspected ARDS. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00134-011-2301-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Are propensity scores really superior to standard multivariable analysis?

              Clinicians often face difficult decisions despite the lack of evidence from randomized trials. Thus, clinical evidence is often shaped by non-randomized studies exploiting multivariable approaches to limit the extent of confounding. Since their introduction, propensity scores have been used more and more frequently to estimate relevant clinical effects adjusting for established confounders, especially in small datasets. However, debate persists on their real usefulness in comparison to standard multivariable approaches such as logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard analysis. This holds even truer in light of key quantitative developments such as bootstrap and Bayesian methods. This qualitative review aims to provide a concise and practical guide to choose between propensity scores and standard multivariable analysis, emphasizing strengths and weaknesses of both approaches. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Crit Care
                Crit Care
                Critical Care
                BioMed Central
                1364-8535
                1466-609X
                2013
                13 February 2013
                : 17
                : 1
                : R30
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, via Olgettina 60, Milan, 20132, Italy
                [2 ]Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Corso della Repubblica 79, Latina, 04100, Italy
                [3 ]Outcomes Research Consortium, Cleveland, 9500 Euclid Avenue, KK31, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA
                [4 ]Department of Angiocardioneurology, IRCCS Neuromed, Via Atinense 18, Pozzilli, 86077, Italy
                [5 ]Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Milan-Bicocca, Via Cadore 48, Monza, 20052, Italy
                Article
                cc12512
                10.1186/cc12512
                4057025
                23406535
                4b1faa14-8c06-4af6-bc39-649297f1c52f
                Copyright © 2013 Zangrillo et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 2 May 2012
                : 23 October 2012
                : 29 November 2012
                Categories
                Research

                Emergency medicine & Trauma
                Emergency medicine & Trauma

                Comments

                Comment on this article