Cardiogenic shock (CS) portends an extremely high mortality of nearly 50% during index hospitalization. Prompt diagnoses of CS, its underlying etiology, and efficient implementation of treatment modalities, including mechanical circulatory support (MCS), are critical especially in light of such high predicted mortality. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) provides the most comprehensive cardiopulmonary support in critically ill patients and hence has seen a steady increase in its utilization over the past decade. Hence, a good understanding of VA-ECMO, its role in treatment of CS, especially when compared with other temporary MCS devices, and its complications are vital for any critical care cardiologist. Our review of VA-ECMO aims to provide the same.
MillerL. Cardiogenic shock in acute myocardial infarction: the era of mechanical support. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(16):1881–1884.
2.
MandawatARaoSV. Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices in cardiogenic shock. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10(5):pii: e004337.
3.
GuglinMZuckerMJBazanVM, et al.Venoarterial ECMO for adults: JACC scientific expert panel. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(6):698–716.
4.
MeuweseCLRamjankhanFZBraithwaiteSA, et al.Extracorporeal life support in cardiogenic shock: indications and management in current practice. Neth Heart J. 2018;26(2):58–66.
5.
van DiepenSKatzJNAlbertNM, et al.Contemporary management of cardiogenic shock: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2017;136(16):e232–e268.
6.
BellumkondaLGulBMasriSC. Evolving concepts in diagnosis and management of cardiogenic shock. Am J Cardiol. 2018;122(6):1104–1110.
7.
HajjarLATeboulJL. Mechanical circulatory support devices for cardiogenic shock: state of the art. Crit Care. 2019;23(1):76.
8.
HochmanJSSleeperLAWebbJG, et al.Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2006;295(21):2511–2515.
9.
ThieleHZeymerUNeumannFJ, et al.Intraaortic balloon support for myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(14):1287–1296.
10.
IbanezBJamesSAgewallS, et al.2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2017;70(12):1082.
11.
AtkinsonTMOhmanEMO’NeillWWRabTCigarroaJE. A Practical approach to mechanical circulatory support in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: an interventional perspective. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(9):871–883.
12.
RabTRatanapoSKernKB. Cardiac shock care centers: JACC review topic of the week. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72(16):1972–1980.
13.
BaranDAGrinesCLBaileyS, et al.SCAI clinical expert consensus statement on the classification of cardiogenic shock: This document was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) in April 2019. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;94(1):29–37.
14.
ProndzinskyR. Interleukin-6, -7, -8 and -10 predict outcome in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Clin Res Cardiol. 2012;101(5):375–384.
RabTO’NeillW. Mechanical circulatory support for patients with cardiogenic shock. Trends Cardiovasc Med. 2018;29(7):410–417.
17.
HarjolaVPLassusJSionisA, et al.Clinical picture and risk prediction of short-term mortality in cardiogenic shock. Eur J Heart Fail. 2015;17(5):501–509.
18.
BenjaminEJBlahaMJChiuveSE, et al.Heart disease and stroke statistics-2017 update: a report from the American heart association. Circulation. 2017;135(10):e146–e603.
19.
ScholzKHMaierSKGMaierLS, et al.Impact of treatment delay on mortality in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients presenting with and without haemodynamic instability: results from the German prospective, multicentre FITT-STEMI trial. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(13):1065–1074.
20.
CarrollBJShahRVMurthyV, et al.Clinical features and outcomes in adults with cardiogenic shock supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Am J Cardiol. 2015;116(10):1624–1630.
21.
KawahitoKMurataSYasuT, et al.Usefulness of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for treatment of fulminant myocarditis and circulatory collapse. Am J Cardiol. 1998;82(7):910–911.
22.
PagesONAubertSCombesA, et al.Paracorporeal pulsatile biventricular assist device versus extracorporal membrane oxygenation-extracorporal life support in adult fulminant myocarditis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;137(1):194–197.
23.
KawahitoKMurataSAdachiHInoTFuseK. Resuscitation and circulatory support using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for fulminant pulmonary embolism. Artif Organs. 2000;24(6):427–430.
24.
AkkantiBNathanSCentenoT, et al.Massive pulmonary embolism with hemodynamic compromise successfully treated with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. VAD J. 2015;1(20).
25.
BasirMBSchreiberTLGrinesCL, et al.Effect of early initiation of mechanical circulatory support on survival in cardiogenic shock. Am J Cardiol. 2017;119(6):845–851.
26.
BasirMBKapurNKPatelK, et al.Improved outcomes associated with the use of shock protocols: updates from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;93(7):1173–1183.
27.
KapeliosCJTerrovitisJVNanasJN. Current and future applications of the intra-aortic balloon pump. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2014;29(3):258–265.
28.
RihalCSNaiduSSGivertzMM, et al.SCAI/ACC/HFSA/STS clinical expert consensus statement on the use of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices in cardiovascular care (endorsed by the American Heart Association, the Cardiological Society of India, and Sociedad Latino Americana de Cardiologia Intervencionista; Affirmation of Value by the Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology-Association Canadienne de Cardiologie d’intervention). Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;85(7):1112–1114.
29.
EspositoMBaderYPediciniRBretonCMullinAKapurNK. The role of acute circulatory support in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Indian Heart J. 2017;69(5):668–674.
30.
RomeoFAcconciaMCSergiD, et al.The outcome of intra-aortic balloon pump support in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock according to the type of revascularization: a comprehensive meta-analysis. Am Heart J. 2013;165(5):679–692.
31.
MillerPESolomonMAMcAreaveyD. Advanced percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices for cardiogenic shock. Crit Care Med. 2017;45(11):1922–1929.
32.
ThieleHSickPBoudriotE, et al.Randomized comparison of intra-aortic balloon support with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients with revascularized acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J. 2005;26(13):1276–1283.
33.
SmithLPetersAMazimbaSRagostaMTaylorAM. Outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock treated with TandemHeart® percutaneous ventricular assist device: importance of support indication and definitive therapies as determinants of prognosis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;92(6):1173–1181.
34.
SeyfarthMSibbingDBauerI, et al.A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a percutaneous left ventricular assist device versus intra-aortic balloon pumping for treatment of cardiogenic shock caused by myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52(19):1584–1588.
35.
OuweneelDMEriksenESjauwKD, et al.Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support versus intra-aortic balloon pump in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69(3):278–287.
36.
ThieleHJobsAOuweneelDM, et al.Percutaneous short-term active mechanical support devices in cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials. Eur Heart J. 2017;38(47):3523–3531.
37.
PeekGJElbourneDMugfordM, et al.Randomised controlled trial and parallel economic evaluation of conventional ventilatory support versus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe adult respiratory failure (CESAR). Health Technol Assess. 2010;14(35):1–46.
38.
RaliAPatelNVuddandaV, et al.Left ventricular support in VA-ECMO: national trends and outcomes (2007-2014). JACC. 2019;73(9).
39.
BoulateDLuytCEPozziM, et al.Acute lung injury after mechanical circulatory support implantation in patients on extracorporeal life support: an unrecognized problem. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2013;44(3):544–549; discussion 549-550.
40.
BurkhoffDSayerGDoshiDUrielN. Hemodynamics of mechanical circulatory support. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66(23):2663–2674.
41.
AriyaratnamPMcLeanLACaleARLoubaniM. Extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation for the post-cardiotomy patient. Heart Fail Rev. 2014;19(6):717–725.
42.
HochmanJSBullerCESleeperLA, et al.Cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction—etiologies, management and outcome: a report from the SHOCK Trial Registry. SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK?J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36(3 suppl A):1063–1070.
43.
ShinTGJoIJSimMS, et al.Two-year survival and neurological outcome of in-hospital cardiac arrest patients rescued by extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Int J Cardiol. 2013;168(4):3424–3430.
44.
MaekawaKTannoKHaseMMoriKAsaiY. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of cardiac origin: a propensity-matched study and predictor analysis. Crit Care Med. 2013;41(5):1186–1196.
45.
WerdanKGielenSEbeltHHochmanJS. Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J. 2014;35(3):156–167.
46.
Le GallAFollinACholleyBMantzJAissaouiNPirracchioR.Veno-arterial-ECMO in the intensive care unit: from technical aspects to clinical practice. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2018;37(3):259–268.
47.
SchmidtMBurrellARobertsL, et al.Predicting survival after ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock: the survival after veno-arterial-ECMO (SAVE)-score. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(33):2246–2256.
48.
WangLYangFWangX, et al.Predicting mortality in patients undergoing VA-ECMO after coronary artery bypass grafting: the REMEMBER score. Crit Care. 2019;23(1):11.
49.
Jaski BE1 OrtizBAllaKR, et al.A 20-year experience with urgent percutaneous cardiopulmonary bypass for salvage of potential survivors of refractory cardiovascular collapse. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010;139(3):753–757.e1–2.
50.
MurashitaTEyaKMiyatakeT, et al.Outcome of the perioperative use of percutaneous cardiopulmonary support for adult cardiac surgery: factors affecting hospital mortality. Artif Organs. 2004;28(2):189–195.
51.
LanCTsaiPRChenYSKoWJ. Prognostic factors for adult patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as mechanical circulatory support--a 14-year experience at a medical center. Artif Organs. 2010;34(2):E59–E64.
52.
CombesALeprincePLuytCE, 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(5):1404–1411.
53.
JayaramanALCormicanDShahPRamakrishnaH. Cannulation strategies in adult veno-arterial and veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: techniques, limitations, and special considerations. Ann Card Anaesth. 2017;20(supplement):S11–s18.
54.
BacchettaMJavidfarJSonettJKimHZwischenbergerJWangD. Ease of conversion from venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to cardiopulmonary bypass and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with a bicaval dual lumen catheter. Asaio J;2011;57(4):283–285.
55.
TrubyLMundyLKalesanB, et al.Contemporary outcomes of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory cardiogenic shock at a large tertiary care center. ASAIO J. 2015;61(4):403–409.
56.
KimJChoYHSungK, et al.Impact of cannula size on clinical outcomes in peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. ASAIO J. 2019;65(6):573–579.
57.
PhilipASchmidCLoforteA. Double, triple and quadruple cannulation for veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support: is there a limit?Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;8(1):151–159.
ConradSAGrierLRScottLKGreenRJordanM. Percutaneous cannulation for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation by intensivists: a retrospective single-institution case series. Crit Care Med. 2015;43(5):1010–1015.
60.
AbramsDJavidfarJFarrandE, et al.Early mobilization of patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a retrospective cohort study. Crit Care. 2014;18(1):R38.
61.
ChengRHachamovitchRKittlesonM, et al.Complications of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for treatment of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest: a meta-analysis of 1,866 adult patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014;97(2):610–616.
62.
WangCHChouNKBeckerLB, et al.Improved outcome of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest—a comparison with that for extracorporeal rescue for in-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2014;85(9):1219–1224.
63.
BiscottiMLeeABasnerRC, et al.Hybrid configurations via percutaneous access for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a single-center experience. ASAIO J. 2014;60(6):635–642.
64.
BisdasTBeutelGWarneckeG, et al.Vascular complications in patients undergoing femoral cannulation for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;92(2):626–631.
65.
FoleyPJMorrisRJWooEY, et al.Limb ischemia during femoral cannulation for cardiopulmonary support. J Vasc Surg. 2010;52(4):850–853.
66.
KanjiHDSchulzeCJOreopoulosALehrEJWangWMacArthurRM. Peripheral versus central cannulation for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a comparison of limb ischemia and transfusion requirements. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010;58(8):459–462.
67.
VanzettoGAkretCBachV, et al.Percutaneous extracorporeal life support in acute severe hemodynamic collapses: single centre experience in 100 consecutive patients [in French]. Can J Cardiol. 2009;25(6):e179–e186.
68.
RupprechtLFlörchingerBSchopkaS, et al.Cardiac decompression on extracorporeal life support: a review and discussion of the literature. ASAIO J. 2013;59(6):547–553.
69.
MikusETripodiACalviSGiglioMDCavallucciALamarraM. CentriMag venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support as treatment for patients with refractory postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock. ASAIO J. 2013;59(1):18–23.
70.
SangalliFPatronitiNPesentiA, eds. ECMO-Extracorporeal Life Support in Adults. Milan, Italy: Springer-Verlag Mailand; 2014.
71.
SaeedDStosikHIslamovicM, et al.Femoro-femoral versus atrio-aortic extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: selecting the ideal cannulation technique. Artif Organs. 2014;38(7):549–555.
72.
RaffaGMKowalewskiMBrodieD, et al.Meta-analysis of peripheral or central extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in postcardiotomy and non-postcardiotomy shock. Ann Thorac Surg. 2019;107(1):311–321.
73.
ChungYSChoDYSohnDS, et al.Is Stopping heparin safe in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation treatment?ASAIO J. 2017;63(1):32–36.
74.
VentetuoloCEMuratoreCS. Extracorporeal life support in critically ill adults. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2014;190(5):497–508.
75.
GuglinMBurchettATribbleTCharnigoR. Pulmonary congestion (white lungs) on VA ECMO. VAD J. 2016;2. doi:10.13023/VAD. 2016.04
76.
AntonucciELamannaIFagnoulDVincentJLDe BackerDSilvio TacconeF. The impact of renal failure and renal replacement therapy on outcome during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy. Artif Organs. 2016;40(8):746–754.
77.
ThiagarajanRRBarbaroRPRycusPT, et al.Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry international report 2016. ASAIO J. 2017;63(1):60–67.
78.
ThajudeenBKamelMArumugamC, et al.Outcome of patients on combined extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and continuous renal replacement therapy: a retrospective study. Int J Artif Organs. 2015;38(3):133–137.
79.
CooperEBurnsJRetterA, et al.Prevalence of venous thrombosis following venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with severe respiratory failure. Crit Care Med. 2015;43(12):e581–e584.
RastanAJLachmannNWaltherT, et al.Autopsy findings in patients on postcardiotomy extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Int J Artif Organs. 2006;29(12):1121–1131.
82.
SutterRTisljarKMarschS. Acute neurologic complications during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a systematic review. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(9):1506–1513.
83.
Di GennaroJFarrisRMcMullanD. Risk of stroke by location of arterial cannulation and age in veno-arterial ECMO. Crit Care Med. 2013;41:A168–A169.
84.
LambKMDiMuzioPJJohnsonA, et al.Arterial protocol including prophylactic distal perfusion catheter decreases limb ischemia complications in patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. J Vasc Surg. 2017;65(4):1074–1079.
85.
JuoYYSkanckeMSanaihaYManthaAJimenezJCBenharashP. Efficacy of distal perfusion cannulae in preventing limb ischemia during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Artif Organs. 2017;41(11):E263–E273.
86.
Extracorporeal Life Support Organization. ELSO Guidelines for Adult Cardic Failure v1.3. 2013. http://www.elso.org/resources/guidlines.aspx. Updated May, 2015. Accessed October, 2019.
87.
XieAForrestPLoforteA. Left ventricular decompression in veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;8(1):9–18.
88.
PatelSMLipinskiJAl-KindiSG, et al.Simultaneous venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and percutaneous left ventricular decompression therapy with impella is associated with improved outcomes in refractory cardiogenic shock. ASAIO J. 2019;65(1):21–28.
89.
PetroniTHarroisAAmourJ, et al.Intra-aortic balloon pump effects on macrocirculation and microcirculation in cardiogenic shock patients supported by venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation*. Crit Care Med. 2014;42(9):2075–2082.
90.
AkanniOJTakedaKTrubyLK, et al.EC-VAD: combined use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and percutaneous microaxial pump left ventricular assist device. ASAIO J. 2019;65(3):219–226.
91.
AsoSMatsuiHFushimiKYasunagaH. The effect of intraaortic balloon pumping under venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation on mortality of cardiogenic patients: an analysis using a nationwide inpatient database. Crit Care Med. 2016;44(11):1974–1979.
92.
FiedlerAGDaliaAAxtellAL, et al.Impella placement guided by echocardiography can be used as a strategy to unload the left ventricle during peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2018;32(6):2585–2591.
93.
WangLXingZ. Short-term outcomes of intra-aortic balloon pump combined with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Artif Organs. 2019;43(6):561–568.
94.
LiYYanSGaoS, et al.Effect of an intra-aortic balloon pump with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation on mortality of patients with cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;55(3):395–404.
95.
ElietJGaudardPZeroualN, et al.Effect of impella during veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation on pulmonary artery flow as assessed by end-tidal carbon dioxide. Asaio J. 2018;64(4):502–507.
96.
BělohlávekJMlčekMHuptychM, et al.Coronary versus carotid blood flow and coronary perfusion pressure in a pig model of prolonged cardiac arrest treated by different modes of venoarterial ECMO and intraaortic balloon counterpulsation. Crit Care. 2012;16(2):R50.
97.
SchmackBSeppeltPWeymannA, et al.Extracorporeal life support with left ventricular decompression-improved survival in severe cardiogenic shock: results from a retrospective study. PeerJ. 2017;5:e3813.
98.
TepperSMasoodMFBaltazar GarciaM, et al.Left ventricular unloading by impella device versus surgical vent during extracorporeal life support. Ann Thorac Surg. 2017;104(3):861–867.
99.
RussoJJAleksovaNPitcherI, et al.Left ventricular unloading during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with cardiogenic shock. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(6):654–662.
100.
AissaouiNLuytCELeprinceP, et al.Predictors of successful extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) weaning after assistance for refractory cardiogenic shock. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37(11):1738–1745.
101.
StubDBernardSPellegrinoV, et al.Refractory cardiac arrest treated with mechanical CPR, hypothermia, ECMO and early reperfusion (the CHEER trial). Resuscitation. 2015;86:88–94.
102.
SugiuraAAbeRNakayamaT, et al.Predictors of successful weaning from veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation after coronary revascularization for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiac arrest: a retrospective multicenter study. Shock. 2019;51(6):690–697.
103.
OuweneelDMSchotborghJVLimpensJ, et al.Extracorporeal life support during cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(12):1922–1934.
104.
MarascoSFLukasGMcDonaldMMcMillanJIhleB, et al.Review of ECMO (extra corporeal membrane oxygenation) support in critically ill adult patients. Heart Lung Circ. 2008; 17(suppl 4):S41–S47.
105.
Wilson-SmithARBogdanovaYRoydhouseS, et al.Outcomes of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory cardiogenic shock: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;8(1):1–8.
