Loading…

Peripheral Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation System as Salvage Treatment of Patients With Refractory Cardiogenic Shock: Preliminary Outcome Evaluation

The novel Permanent Life Support (PLS; Maquet, Jostra Medizintechnik AG, Hirrlingen, Germany) as peripheral veno‐arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support system has been investigated as treatment for patients with refractory cardiogenic shock (CS). Between January 2007 and July 20...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Artificial organs 2012-03, Vol.36 (3), p.E53-E61
Main Authors: Loforte, Antonio, Montalto, Andrea, Ranocchi, Federico, Della Monica, Paola Lilla, Casali, Giovanni, Lappa, Angela, Menichetti, Antonio, Contento, Carlo, Musumeci, Francesco
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The novel Permanent Life Support (PLS; Maquet, Jostra Medizintechnik AG, Hirrlingen, Germany) as peripheral veno‐arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support system has been investigated as treatment for patients with refractory cardiogenic shock (CS). Between January 2007 and July 2011, 73 consecutive adult patients were supported on peripheral PLS ECMO system at our institution (55 men; age 60.3 ± 11.6 years, range: 23–84 years). Indications for support were failure to wean from cardiopulmonary bypass in the setting of postcardiotomy (n = 50) and primary donor graft failure (n = 8), post‐acute myocardial infarction CS (n = 12), and CS on chronic heart failure (n = 3). Mean support time was 10.9 ± 7.6 days (range: 2–34 days). Overall, 26 (35.6%) patients died on ECMO. Among survivors on ECMO, 44 (60.2%) patients were successfully weaned from support, and three (4.1%) were switched to a mid–long‐term ventricular assist device. Thirty‐three (45.2%) were successfully discharged. The following variables were significantly different if survivors and nonsurvivors on ECMO were compared: age (P = 0.04), female gender (P 
ISSN:0160-564X
1525-1594
DOI:10.1111/j.1525-1594.2011.01423.x