Prone positioning in severe ARDS requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Prone positioning (PP) has shown to improve survival in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). To this point, it is unclear if PP is also beneficial for ARDS patients treated with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) support. We report retrospective dat...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Critical care (London, England) England), 2020-07, Vol.24 (1), p.397-397, Article 397
Hauptverfasser: Rilinger, Jonathan, Zotzmann, Viviane, Bemtgen, Xavier, Schumacher, Carin, Biever, Paul M, Duerschmied, Daniel, Kaier, Klaus, Stachon, Peter, von Zur Mühlen, Constantin, Zehender, Manfred, Bode, Christoph, Staudacher, Dawid L, Wengenmayer, Tobias
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Prone positioning (PP) has shown to improve survival in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). To this point, it is unclear if PP is also beneficial for ARDS patients treated with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) support. We report retrospective data of a single-centre registry of patients with severe ARDS requiring VV ECMO support between October 2010 and May 2018. Patients were allocated to the PP group if PP was performed during VV ECMO treatment or the supine positioning group. VV ECMO weaning success and hospital survival were analysed before and after propensity score matching. A total of 158 patients could be analysed, and 38 patients (24.1%) received PP. There were no significant differences in VV ECMO weaning rate (47.4% vs. 46.7%, p = 0.94) and hospital survival (36.8% vs. 36.7%, p = 0.98) between the prone and supine groups, respectively. The analysis of 38 propensity score matched pairs also showed no difference in hospital survival (36.8% vs. 36.8%, p = 1.0) or VV ECMO weaning rate (47.4% vs. 44.7%, p = 0.82). Hospital survival was superior in the subgroup of patients treated with early PP (cutoff
ISSN:1364-8535
1466-609X
1364-8535
1366-609X
DOI:10.1186/s13054-020-03110-2