We have located links that may give you full text access.
Outcome analysis of neonates with congenital diaphragmatic hernia treated with venovenous vs venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.
Journal of Pediatric Surgery 2009 September
PURPOSE: Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (VA) is used more commonly in neonates with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) than venovenous ECMO (VV). We hypothesized that VV may result in comparable outcomes in infants with CDH requiring ECMO.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) database (1991-2006). Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to compare VV- and VA-associated mortality.
RESULTS: Four thousand one hundred fifteen neonates required ECMO, with an overall mortality rate of 49.6%. Venoarterial ECMO was used in 82% and VV in 18% of neonates. Pre-ECMO inotrope use and complications were equivalent between VA and VV. The mortality rate for VA and VV was 50% and 46%, respectively. After adjusting for birth weight, gestational age, prenatal diagnosis, ethnicity, Apgar scores, pH less than 7.20, Paco(2) greater than 50, requiring high-frequency ventilation, and year of ECMO, there was no difference in mortality between VV vs VA. Renal complications and on-ECMO inotrope use were more common with VV, whereas neurologic complications were more common with VA. The conversion rate from VV to VA was 18%; conversion was associated with a 56% mortality rate.
CONCLUSION: The short-term outcomes of VV and VA are comparable. Patients with CDH who fail VV may be predisposed to a worse outcome. Nevertheless, VV offers equal benefit to patients with CDH requiring ECMO while preserving the native carotid.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) database (1991-2006). Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to compare VV- and VA-associated mortality.
RESULTS: Four thousand one hundred fifteen neonates required ECMO, with an overall mortality rate of 49.6%. Venoarterial ECMO was used in 82% and VV in 18% of neonates. Pre-ECMO inotrope use and complications were equivalent between VA and VV. The mortality rate for VA and VV was 50% and 46%, respectively. After adjusting for birth weight, gestational age, prenatal diagnosis, ethnicity, Apgar scores, pH less than 7.20, Paco(2) greater than 50, requiring high-frequency ventilation, and year of ECMO, there was no difference in mortality between VV vs VA. Renal complications and on-ECMO inotrope use were more common with VV, whereas neurologic complications were more common with VA. The conversion rate from VV to VA was 18%; conversion was associated with a 56% mortality rate.
CONCLUSION: The short-term outcomes of VV and VA are comparable. Patients with CDH who fail VV may be predisposed to a worse outcome. Nevertheless, VV offers equal benefit to patients with CDH requiring ECMO while preserving the native carotid.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app