Impact of age on outcomes of patients assisted by veno-arterial or veno-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation: 403 patients between 2005 and 2015

Abstract

Introduction:

To assess the impact of age on early outcomes and mortality in veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation and veno-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation recipients, and to investigate predictors of mortality.

Methods:

Single-center retrospective study on prospectively collected data including all patients treated by veno-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation and veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (January 2005-July 2015). Outcomes were compared among two subgroups: aged less than 65 years (Group 1) versus more than 65 years (Group 2) and by type of support (veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation or veno-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation).

Results:

Among 403 patients, 20.3% were treated by veno-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation and 79.7% by veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation. Veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation group: 76.6% were included in Group 1 and were more severe (pH 7.30 ± 0.19 vs. 7.35 ± 0.13 in Group 2, p = 0.003; lactates 7.5 ± 5.6 mmol/L vs. 5.8 ± 4.5 mmol/L in Group 2, p = 0.003). Weaning rate was higher in Group 1 (63.8% vs. 45.3%, p = 0.0043). The 30-day survival was higher in Group 1 (52.0% vs. 25.3%, p < 0.001). Univariate analysis identified higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (p = 0.02) and noradrenaline (p = 0.04) to be associated with mortality. Veno-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation group: 80.5% were in Group 1. Mean PaO₂ was 73.5 ± 42.9 mm Hg versus 100.8 ± 80.3 mm Hg (p = 0.24); FiO₂ 90.1% ± 18% versus 89.4% ± 16.4% (p = 0.89); and 30-day survival 56.1% versus 25.0% (p = 0.048).

Conclusion:

Patients older than 65 years have higher mortality after veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation or veno-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation. This therapeutic strategy is feasible in the elderly, but comorbidities and clinical presentation have a major impact on prognosis and need to be seriously considered to avoid futile treatment.

Keywords

veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation veno-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation elderly outcomes survival

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Karagiannidis

Brodie

Strassmann

, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: evolving epidemiology and mortality. Intensive Care Med 2016; 42: 889–896.

Sauer

Yuh

Bonde

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use has increased by 433% in adults in the United States from 2006 to 2011. ASAIO J 2015; 61: 31–36.

Flécher

Anselmi

Corbineau

, et al. Current aspects of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in a tertiary referral centre: determinants of survival at follow-up. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2014; 46: 665–671; discussion 671.

Johnson

Acker

Hsu

, et al. Extracorporeal life support as rescue strategy for out-of-hospital and emergency department cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 2014; 85: 1527–1532.

Combes

Leprince

Luyt

C-E

, et al. Outcomes and long-term quality-of-life of patients supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory cardiogenic shock. Crit Care Med 2008; 36: 1404–1411.

Mendiratta

Wei

Gomez

, et al. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the elderly: a review of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry. ASAIO J 2013; 59: 211–215.

World Health Organization (WHO). Definition of an older or elderly person, 2015, http://www.who.int/healthinfo/survey/ageingdefnolder/en/

Beckmann

Benk

Beyersdorf

, et al. Position article for the use of extracorporeal life support in adult patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2011; 40: 676–680.

Société Française d’Anesthésie et Réanimation. Recommandation sur les indications de l’assistance circulatoire dans le traitement des arrets cardiaques refractaires. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 2009; 28: 182–186.

10.

Reed

Netzer

Hunsicker

, et al. Cardiac size and sex-matching in heart transplantation : size matters in matters of sex and the heart. JACC Heart Fail 2014; 2: 73–83.

11.

Batra

Toyoda

Goldstone

, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in New York State: trends, outcomes, and implications for patient selection. Circ Heart Fail 2016; 9: e003179.

12.

Narotsky

Mosca

Mochari-Greenberger

, et al. Short-term and longer-term survival after veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in an adult patient population: does older age matter? Perfusion 2016; 31: 366–375.

13.

Saxena

Neal

Joyce

, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support in postcardiotomy elderly patients: the Mayo Clinic experience. Ann Thorac Surg 2015; 99: 2053–2060.

14.

Lee

Yoo

KD.

Impact of age on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation survival of patients with cardiac failure. Clin Interv Aging 2017; 12: 1347–1353.

15.

Volpi

Sertic

Valchanov

, et al. Use veno-venous extra corporeal membrane oxygenation in elderly patients with post-cardiotomy hypoxia: the changing paradigm of respiratory support in adult respiratory distress syndrome. J Cardiothorac Surg 2019; 14: 10.

16.

Saito

Nakatani

Kobayashi

, et al. Is extracorporeal life support contraindicated in elderly patients? Ann Thorac Surg 2007; 83: 140–145.

17.

Lorusso

Gelsomino

Parise

, et al. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory cardiogenic shock in elderly patients: trends in application and outcome from the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry. Ann Thorac Surg 2017; 104: 62–69.

18.

Truby

Mundy

Kalesan

, et al. Contemporary outcomes of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory cardiogenic shock at a large tertiary care center. ASAIO J 2015; 61: 403–409.

19.

Bailey

Downey

Sanaiha

, et al. National trends in volume-outcome relationships for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. J Surg Res 2018; 231: 421–427.

20.

Ouweneel

Schotborgh

Limpens

, et al. Extracorporeal life support during cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 2016; 42: 1922–1934.

21.

Wang

Chi

, et al. Effect of interplay between age and low-flow duration on neurologic outcomes of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Intensive Care Med 2019; 45: 44–54.

22.

Combes

Hajage

Capellier

, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 2018; 378: 1965–1975.

23.

Pozzi

Alvau

Armoiry

, et al. Outcomes after extracorporeal life support for postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock. J Card Surg 2019; 34: 74–81.

24.

Schmidt

Burrell

Roberts

, et al. Predicting survival after ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock: the survival after veno-arterial-ECMO (SAVE)-score. Eur Heart J 2015; 36: 2246–2256.

25.

Muller

Flecher

Lebreton

, et al. The ENCOURAGE mortality risk score and analysis of long-term outcomes after VA-ECMO for acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. Intensive Care Med 2016; 42: 370–378.