24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Decompressive laparotomy for a patient on VA-ECMO for massive pulmonary embolism that suffered traumatic liver laceration after mechanical CPR

      case-report

      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

          Massive pulmonary embolism (PE) is an embolus sufficiently obstructing pulmonary blood flow to cause right ventricular (RV) failure and hemodynamic instability. We have utilized veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) for early and aggressive intervention for massive PE patients. We present a case of a 61-year-old female placed on VA-ECMO for a massive PE while presenting in cardiac arrest and receiving mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) via the LUCAS 2.0 device (Physio-Control Inc., Lund, Sweden). The patient suffered a severe liver laceration secondary to mechanical CPR and required a decompressive laparotomy. This case highlights that mechanical CPR during other interventions can lead to malposition of the device and could result in solid organ injury.

          Related collections

          Most cited references8

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

          Management Strategies and Determinants of Outcome in Acute Major Pulmonary Embolism: Results of a Multicenter Registry

          The present study investigated current management strategies as well as the clinical course of acute major pulmonary embolism. The clinical outcome of patients with acute pulmonary embolism who present with overt or impending right heart failure has not yet been adequately elucidated. The 204 participating centers enrolled a total of 1,001 consecutive patients. The inclusion criteria were based on the clinical findings at presentation and the results of electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, nuclear imaging and cardiac catheterization studies. Echocardiography was the most frequently performed diagnostic procedure (74%). Lung scan or pulmonary angiography were performed in 79% of clinically stable patients but much less frequently in those with circulatory collapse at presentation (32%, p < 0.001). Thrombolytic agents were given to 478 patients (48%), often despite the presence of contraindications (193 [40%] of 478). The frequency of initial thrombolysis was significantly higher in clinically unstable than in normotensive patients (57% vs. 22%, p < 0.001). Overall in-hospital mortality rate ranged from 8.1% in the group of stable patients to 25% in those presenting with cardiogenic shock and to 65% in patients necessitating cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Major bleeding was reported in 92 patients (9.2%), but cerebral bleeding was uncommon (0.5%). Finally, recurrent pulmonary embolism occurred in 172 patients (17%). Current management strategies of acute major pulmonary embolism are largely dependent on the degree of hemodynamic instability at presentation. In the presence of severe hemodynamic compromise, physicians often rely on the findings of bedside echocardiography and proceed to thrombolytic treatment without seeking further diagnostic certainty in nuclear imaging or angiographic studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Massive pulmonary embolism.

            Acute massive pulmonary embolism (PE) carries an exceptionally high mortality rate. We explored how often adjunctive therapies, particularly thrombolysis and inferior vena caval (IVC) filter placement, were performed and how these therapies affected the clinical outcome of patients with massive PE. Among 2392 patients with acute PE and known systolic arterial blood pressure at presentation, from the International Cooperative Pulmonary Embolism Registry (ICOPER), 108 (4.5%) had massive PE, defined as a systolic arterial pressure or =90 mm Hg. PE was first diagnosed at autopsy in 16 patients (15%) with massive PE and in 29 patients (1%) with non-massive PE (P<0.001). The 90-day mortality rates were 52.4% (95% CI, 43.3% to 62.1%) and 14.7% (95% CI, 13.3% to 16.2%), respectively. In-hospital bleeding complications occurred in 17.6% versus 9.7% and recurrent PE within 90 days in 12.6% and 7.6%, respectively (P<0.001). In patients with massive PE, thrombolysis, surgical embolectomy, or catheter embolectomy were withheld in 73 (68%). Thrombolysis was performed in 33 patients, surgical embolectomy in 3, and catheter embolectomy in 1. Thrombolytic therapy did not reduce 90-day mortality (thrombolysis, 46.3%; 95% CI, 31.0% to 64.8%; no thrombolysis, 55.1%; 95% CI, 44.3% to 66.7%; hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.43). Recurrent PE rates at 90 days were similar in patients with and without thrombolytic therapy (12% for both; P=0.99). None of the 11 patients who received an IVC filter developed recurrent PE within 90 days, and 10 (90.9%) survived at least 90 days. IVC filters were associated with a reduction in 90-day mortality (hazard ratio, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.85). In ICOPER, two thirds of the patients with massive PE did not receive thrombolysis or embolectomy. Counterintuitively, thrombolysis did not reduce mortality or recurrent PE at 90 days. The observed reduction in mortality from IVC filters requires further investigation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Acute pulmonary embolism.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Surg Case Rep
                J Surg Case Rep
                jscr
                Journal of Surgical Case Reports
                Oxford University Press
                2042-8812
                October 2018
                31 October 2018
                31 October 2018
                : 2018
                : 10
                : rjy292
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Surgery, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, 2211 Lomas Blvd NE, Albuquerque, NM, USA
                [2 ]Division of Vascular, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, 2211 Lomas Blvd NE, Albuquerque, NM, USA
                [3 ]Department of Critical Care, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, 2211 Lomas Blvd NE, Albuquerque, NM, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence address. MSC 10 5610, 1 University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA. Tel: +1-804-252-1012; Fax: +1-505-272-0111; E-mail: SGuliani@ 123456salud.unm.edu
                Article
                rjy292
                10.1093/jscr/rjy292
                6207845
                871f271b-66d9-4d58-b418-f8fad624c48f
                Published by Oxford University Press and JSCR Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2018.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@ 123456oup.com

                History
                : 18 August 2018
                : 22 September 2018
                : 09 October 2018
                Page count
                Pages: 3
                Categories
                Case Report

                Comments

                Comment on this article