Xu Jing, Gao Min, Wang Luping, Cao Huanxin, Zhang Xingwen, Zhu Yimin, Fan Maiying, Xiao Huiying, Li Suwen, Liu Shaozu, Han Xiaotong
Department of Emergency Medicine, Clinical Research Center for Emergency and Critical Care In Hunan Province, Hunan Provincial Institute of Emergency Medicine, Hunan Provincial Key Laboratory of Emergency and Critical Care Metabonomics, Hunan Provincial People's Hospital (the First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan Normal University), Changsha 410005, Hunan, China.
Hunan Provincial Institute of Emergency Medicine, Changsha 410005, Hunan, China. Corresponding author: Han Xiaotong, Email:
Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue. 2023 May;35(5):498-502. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20221213-01093.
To analyze the predictors of successful weaning off extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) after extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR).
The clinical data of 56 patients with cardiac arrest who underwent ECPR in Hunan Provincial People's Hospital (the First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan Normal University) from July 2018 to September 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. According to whether ECMO was successfully weaning off, patients were divided into the successful weaning off group and the failed weaning off group. The basic data, duration of conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR, the time from cardiopulmonary resuscitation to ECMO), duration of ECMO, pulse pressure loss, complications, and the use of distal perfusion tube and intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) were compared between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the risk factors for weaning failure of ECMO.
Twenty-three patients (41.07%) were successfully weaned from ECMO. Compared with the successful weaning off group, patients in the failed weaning off group were older (years old: 46.7±15.6 vs. 37.8±16.8, P < 0.05), higher incidence of pulse pressure loss and ECMO complications [81.8% (27/33) vs. 21.7% (5/23), 84.8% (28/33) vs. 39.1% (9/23), both P < 0.01], and longer CCPR time (minutes: 72.3±19.5 vs. 54.4±24.6, P < 0.01), shorter duration of ECMO support (hours: 87.3±81.1 vs. 147.7±50.8, P < 0.01), and worse improvement in arterial blood pH and lactic acid (Lac) levels after ECPR support [pH: 7.1±0.1 vs. 7.3±0.1, Lac (mmol/L): 12.6±2.4 vs. 8.9±2.1, both P < 0.01]. There were no significant differences in the utilization rate of distal perfusion tube and IABP between the two groups. Univariate Logistic regression analysis showed that the factors affecting the weaning off ECMO of ECPR patients were pulse pressure loss, ECMO complications, arterial blood pH and Lac after installation [pulse pressure loss: odds ratio (OR) = 3.37, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) was 1.39-8.17, P = 0.007; ECMO complications: OR = 2.88, 95%CI was 1.11-7.45, P = 0.030; pH after installation: OR = 0.01, 95%CI was 0.00-0.16, P = 0.002; Lac after installation: OR = 1.21, 95%CI was 1.06-1.37, P = 0.003]. After adjusting for the effects of age, gender, ECMO complications, arterial blood pH and Lac after installation, and CCPR time, showed that pulse pressure loss was an independent predictor of weaning failure in ECPR patients (OR = 1.27, 95%CI was 1.01-1.61, P = 0.049).
Early loss of pulse pressure after ECPR is an independent predictor of failed weaning off ECMO in ECPR patients. Strengthening hemodynamic monitoring and management after ECPR is very important for the successful weaning off ECMO in ECPR.
分析体外心肺复苏(ECPR)后成功撤离体外膜肺氧合(ECMO)的预测因素。
回顾性分析2018年7月至2022年9月在湖南省人民医院(湖南师范大学第一附属医院)接受ECPR的56例心脏骤停患者的临床资料。根据ECMO是否成功撤离,将患者分为成功撤离组和撤离失败组。比较两组患者的基本资料、传统心肺复苏(CCPR,从心肺复苏至ECMO的时间)时长、ECMO时长、脉压损失、并发症以及远端灌注管和主动脉内球囊反搏(IABP)的使用情况。进行单因素和多因素Logistic回归分析以确定ECMO撤离失败的危险因素。
23例患者(41.07%)成功撤离ECMO。与成功撤离组相比,撤离失败组患者年龄更大(岁:46.7±15.6 vs. 37.8±16.8,P<0.05),脉压损失和ECMO并发症发生率更高[81.8%(27/33)vs. 21.7%(5/23),84.8%(28/33)vs. 39.1%(9/23),均P<0. < 0.01],CCPR时间更长(分钟:72.3±19.5 vs. 54.4±24.6,P<0.01),ECMO支持时长更短(小时:87.3±81.1 vs. 147.7±50.8,P<0.01),且ECPR支持后动脉血pH值和乳酸(Lac)水平改善更差[pH:7.1±0.1 vs. 7.3±0.1,Lac(mmol/L):12.6±2.4 vs. 8.9±2.1,均P<0.01]。两组远端灌注管和IABP的使用率无显著差异。单因素Logistic回归分析显示,影响ECPR患者撤离ECMO的因素为脉压损失、ECMO并发症、置管后动脉血pH值和Lac[脉压损失:比值比(OR)=3.37,95%置信区间(95%CI)为1.39 - 8.17,P = 0.007;ECMO并发症:OR = 2.88,95%CI为1.11 - 7.45,P = 0.030;置管后pH值:OR = 0.01,95%CI为0.00 - 0.16,P = 0.002;置管后Lac:OR = 1.21,95%CI为1.06 - 1.37,P = 0.003]。在调整年龄、性别、ECMO并发症、置管后动脉血pH值和Lac以及CCPR时间的影响后,显示脉压损失是ECPR患者撤离失败的独立预测因素(OR = 1.27,95%CI为1.01 - 1.61,P = 0.049)。
ECPR后早期脉压损失是ECPR患者撤离ECMO失败的独立预测因素。加强ECPR后的血流动力学监测和管理对ECPR患者成功撤离ECMO非常重要。