Gender-Dependent Clinical Outcome and Other Predictors of In-Hospital Mortality Following Out-Of-Center Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Extracorporeal Life Support: A Single Center Experience
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1532/hsf.2987Keywords:
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, out-of-center, outcome assessment, survivalAbstract
Background: Out-of-center extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and extracorporeal life support (ECLS) implantation for the treatment of acute cardiorespiratory failure with subsequent transport to a tertiary care center has been introduced successfully into the medical practice. However, due to the very specific and resource intensive nature of this therapeutic concept, it seems important to generate algorithms for adequate patient selection. The aim of our study was to analyze the impact of patients’ gender on early clinical outcome in this specific therapeutic scenario.
Methods: Ninety-seven consecutive patients treated by out-of-center ECMO/ECLS implantation and subsequent transport and treatment in our tertiary care cardiovascular center within the Hallesche Extracorporeal Life Support Program (HELP) retrospectively were analyzed, regarding the impact of patients’ gender on early clinical outcome.
Results: Mechanical circulatory support successfully was weaned in two-thirds of the male patients. This result was achieved in only one-third of the female patients (59.4% in male vs. 33.3% in female, P = .0267). Overall survival significantly was higher in the male group (62.5% in male versus 30.3% in female, P = .0052). In uni- and multivariate logistic regression analysis, female gender was an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (uni: OR:3.833, CI:1.597-9.745,
P = .0034; multi: OR:3.477, CI:1.146-11.494, P = .0322). Worse outcome also was associated with following independent predictors, age, SOFA score, lactate and ventilation time pre-ECMO/ECLS implantation.
Conclusion: The current study demonstrates a worse early survival for women, following emergent out-of-
center ECMO/ECLS implantation and subsequent transport and treatment in our tertiary care cardiovascular center. Gender should be included in patient selection algorithms while basic research approaches are needed to better understand the mechanisms underlying these gender-
specific outcome disparities.
References
Raspé C, Rückert F, Metz D, et al. Inter-hospital transfer of ECMO-assisted patients with a portable miniaturized ECMO device. Perfusion. 2015 Jan;30(1):52-9.
Rückert F, Steinke T, Flöther L, et al. Predictors for quality of life of patients with a portable out-of-centre-implanted extracorporeal membrane oxygenation device. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2017 Apr 1;24(4):542-548.
Beckmann A, Benk C, Beyersdorf F, et al. 2011. Position article for the use of extracorporeal life support in adult patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. Sep;40(3):676-80.
Blumer V, Mendirichaga R, Hernandez GA, Zablah G, Chaparro SV. 2018. Sex-Specific Outcome Disparities in Patients Receiving Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. ASAIO J. Jul/Aug;64(4):440-449.
Chen YS, Lin JW, Yu HY, et al. 2008. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation with assisted extracorporeal life-support versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults with in-hospital cardiac arrest. Lancet. Aug 16;372(9638):554-61.
Cifkova R, Pitha J, Krajcoviechova A, Kralikova E. 2019. Is the impact of conventional risk factors the same in men and women? Plea for a more gender-specific approach. Int J Cardiol. Jul 1;286:214-219.
Combes A, Pesenti A, Ranieri VM. 2017. Fifty Years of Research in ARDS. Is Extracorporeal Circulation the Future of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Management? Am J Respir Crit Care Med. May 1;195(9):1161-1170.
Khorsandi M, Dougherty S, Bouamra O, et al. 2017. Extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory cardiogenic shock after adult cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Surg. Jul 17;12(1):55.
Magnussen C, Bernhardt AM, Ojeda FM, et al. 2018. Gender differences and outcomes in left ventricular assist device support: The European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support. J Heart Lung Transplant. Jan;37(1):61-70.
Makrygiannis G, Courtois A, Drion P, Defraigne JO, Kuivaniemi H, Sakalihasan N. 2014. Sex differences in abdominal aortic aneurysm: the role of sex hormones. Ann Vasc Surg. Nov;28(8):1946-58.
Noah MA, Peek GJ, Finney SJ, et al. 2011. Referral to an extracorporeal membrane oxygenation center and mortality among patients with severe 2009 influenza A(H1N1). JAMA. Oct 19;306(15):1659-68.
Ouweneel DM, Schotborgh JV, Limpens J, et al. 2016. Extracorporeal life support during cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock. Intensive Care Med. Dec;42(12):1922-1934.
Peek GJ, Elbourne D, Mugford M, et al. 2010. Randomized controlled trial and parallel economic evaluation of conventional ventilatory support versus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe adult respiratory failure (CESAR). Health Technol Assess. Jul;14(35):1-46.
Philipp A, Arlt M, Amann M, et al. 2011. First experience with the ultra compact mobile extracorporeal membrane oxygenation system Cardiohelp in interhospital transport. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. Jun;12(6):978-81.
Sayer GT, Baker JN, Parks KA. 2012. Heart rescue: the role of mechanical circulatory support in the management of severe refractory cardiogenic shock. Curr Opin Crit Care. Oct;18(5):409-16.
Sheu JJ, Tsai TH, Lee FY, et al. 2010. Early extracorporeal membrane oxygenator-assisted primary percutaneous coronary intervention improved 30-day clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction complicated with profound cardiogenic shock. Crit Care Med. Sep;38(9):1810-7.
Thiagarajan RR, Brogan TV, Scheurer MA, Laussen PC, Rycus PT, Bratton SL. 2009. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation to support cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults. Ann Thorac Surg. Mar;87(3):778-85.
