Zangbar Bardiya, Rafieezadeh Aryan, Prabhakaran Kartik, Jose Anna, Shnaydman Ilya, Bronstein Matthew, Klein Joshua, Froula Gabriel, Kirsch Jordan
From the Department of Surgery, Westchester Medical Center, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY.
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2025 Apr 1;98(4):593-599. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000004544. Epub 2025 Jan 20.
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has emerged as a critical intervention in the management of patients with trauma-induced cardiorespiratory failure. This study aims to compare outcomes in patients with severe thoracic injuries with and without venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO).
We performed a retrospective cohort study on Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2017-2021) and included all patients with isolated blunt thoracic injuries with Abbreviated Injury Scale score of ≥4 who required intubation. Patients were divided into two groups based on VV-ECMO and were compared using propensity score matching with the primary outcome of mortality.
A total of 14,106 patients with severe thoracic injuries were identified. Propensity score matching resulted in two groups of 812 VV-ECMO and 812 non-VV-ECMO groups. Venovenous ECMO group had significantly lower in-hospital mortality rates (22.3% vs. 37.3%, p < 0.001). However, VV-ECMO group had significantly higher rates of complications including cardiac arrest (27.7% vs. 10.6%), pulmonary embolism (7.6% vs. 2.1%), ventilator-associated pneumonia (16.7% vs. 4.2%), unplanned intubation (11.9% vs. 8.5%), unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission (8.4% vs. 4.9%), and unplanned return to operation room (10.1% vs. 2.6%) ( p < 0.001, for all). Patients in VV-ECMO group had significantly higher hospital (29.46 ± 26.37 vs. 13.59 ± 13.3 days) and ICU (22.96 ± 19.38 vs. 9.38 ± 9.05 days) length of stay ( p < 0.001, for both). In VV-ECMO group, the mean ± SD time to perform VV-ECMO was 5.54 ± 5.91 days. Each day earlier initiation of VV-ECMO resulted in decreased hospital and ICU length of stay by 67.1% and 59.9%, respectively ( p < 0.001 for both). Among patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome (n = 435 in each group after repeated PS matching), we observed significantly lower mortality rates in VV-ECMO group (26.9% vs. 40%, p < 0.001).
While VV-ECMO in isolated blunt thoracic trauma patients is associated with higher survival rates even in non-acute respiratory distress syndrome cases, it is associated with higher incidence of complications. These findings emphasize earlier consideration of VV-ECMO in severe blunt thoracic trauma.
Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.
体外膜肺氧合(ECMO)已成为创伤性心肺衰竭患者管理中的关键干预措施。本研究旨在比较接受和未接受静脉-静脉体外膜肺氧合(VV-ECMO)的严重胸部损伤患者的结局。
我们对创伤质量改进项目(2017 - 2021年)进行了一项回顾性队列研究,纳入所有需要插管的、简明损伤定级标准(AIS)评分≥4的单纯钝性胸部损伤患者。根据是否接受VV-ECMO将患者分为两组,并采用倾向评分匹配法比较以死亡率为主要结局指标的两组情况。
共识别出14106例严重胸部损伤患者。倾向评分匹配后得到两组,每组812例,分别为VV-ECMO组和非VV-ECMO组。静脉-静脉ECMO组的院内死亡率显著更低(22.3%对37.3%,p<0.001)。然而,VV-ECMO组的并发症发生率显著更高,包括心脏骤停(27.7%对10.6%)、肺栓塞(7.6%对2.1%)、呼吸机相关性肺炎(16.7%对4.2%)、非计划性插管(11.9%对8.5%)、非计划性入住重症监护病房(ICU)(8.4%对4.9%)以及非计划性返回手术室(10.1%对2.6%)(所有p值均<0.001)。VV-ECMO组患者的住院时间(29.46±26.37天对13.59±13.3天)和ICU住院时间(22.96±19.38天对9.38±9.05天)显著更长(两者p值均<0.001)。在VV-ECMO组,进行VV-ECMO的平均±标准差时间为5.54±5.91天。VV-ECMO每提前一天启动,住院时间和ICU住院时间分别缩短67.1%和59.9%(两者p值均<0.001)。在没有急性呼吸窘迫综合征的患者中(重复PS匹配后每组n = 435),我们观察到VV-ECMO组的死亡率显著更低(26.9%对40%,p<0.001)。
虽然在单纯钝性胸部创伤患者中,即使在非急性呼吸窘迫综合征病例中,VV-ECMO也与更高的生存率相关,但它与更高的并发症发生率相关。这些发现强调了在严重钝性胸部创伤中应更早考虑使用VV-ECMO。
治疗/护理管理;三级。