2nd Light Forums |
Topic Title: ECMO Saving Lives of COVID-19 Patients Topic Summary: Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Created On: 04/15/2020 01:57 PM |
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch |
Topic Tools
|
04/15/2020 01:57 PM
|
|
1 in Phoenix:
https://www.azcentral.com/stor...-treatment/2991613001/ 2 in Seattle: https://news.yahoo.com/emergen...r-death-054816082.html I was thinking last week it would be nice if something like that existed. Obviously it has already been invented and tested. Glad to see docs trying more out-of-the-box stuff. Sounds a bit complicated and risky, as well as the machines and expertise being few and far between. I wonder if a dialysis machine could be modified to do something similar (oxygenation, pH compensation, etc.) Edit: Added diagram Edited: 04/16/2020 at 06:08 PM by RegularJoe |
|
|
|
04/15/2020 03:59 PM
|
|
NPR did a story on the doctor that survived due to the machine. He said he was 100% sure that it was the machine that saved his life. Unfortunately, the machines are rare.
I agree, out of the box is good. ------------------------- I was right. Edited: 04/15/2020 at 04:01 PM by Cole |
|
|
|
04/16/2020 11:52 AM
|
|
Just a clarification here. ECMO is neither experimental nor rare. In fact, your town likely has ECMO capabilities at one of the larger hospitals.
Also, ECMO does not save a life. It is known as a bridging treatment. The simple explanation is that it is a way to take blood and bypass the heart and/or the lungs. A machine outside the body (that's the extra-corporeal part) will do the gas exchange and pumping that your lungs and heart do, respectively.
For otherwise healthy people with a bad COVID infection, it is not a bad last ditch effort as you can remain on ECMO until your immune system gets the virus under control and your lungs improve.
Very cool stuff.
------------------------- we are they, they are us -- Thich Nhat Hanh |
|
|
|
04/16/2020 12:16 PM
|
|
Yeah ECMO has been around a long time. It's typically a last resort.
------------------------- Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system. In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer". |
|
|
|
04/16/2020 05:57 PM
|
|
Another success story on 29-week pregnant Ohio woman
SharkTower, I appreciate the time you've taken to inject doses of reality here. I know a few local ER people, and I wouldn't trade jobs with them in the best of times! Thank you, and best of luck to you in dealing with this pandemic. My basis for the "few and far between" comment was from the Phoenix article: ECMO has been used for H1N1, flu and lung injury patients for many years, Ovil said. But it's a resource- and labor-intensive treatment and also a scarce resource. For approximately every 50 to 100 ventilators, there is just one ECMO machine available, Riley said. HonorHealth has five in its system. If the treatment continues to prove successful for other critical COVID-19 patients, there may not be enough devices to help all the patients in need. Most patients with COVID-19 can be supported with a ventilator, but a subset of them get so ill that a ventilator no longer helps. ECMO could be most useful for that type of patient, Ovil said. The Food and Drug Administration last week issued guidance to expand the availability of ECMO devices to help address COVID-19. Link to FDA 1-page letter Link to FDA's 13-page PDF I later saw these: Article from Ireland: A life-saving oxygen machine will be available for British PM Boris Johnson if he becomes critically ill from coronavirus but the same ECMO machine is not an option for anyone in Belfast. That's the shock claim by a South Belfast doctor Micheal Donnelly who has called for life-saving ECMO machines to be bought for local hospitals on the coronavirus frontline. <...> "Health Minister Robin Swann has refused to purchase an extracorporeal membrane oxygenation machine (ECMO) for use here, suggesting critically-ill patients will be flown to Newcastle, England, to access equipment there," says Dr Donnelly. "But that's just not going to happen. It would be reckless in the extreme for nursing staff to take a highly-infectious patient on an airplane and fly them an hour to Newcastle. And, by the time they got there, the patient would be dead." A BBC article included this about the hospital where Boris Johnson was treated: There are only a handful of these machines around the country. Is that (50:1 or 100:1) number realistic, outdated, or more likely in rural/suburban areas? Surprising for an area like Belfast? Is the ECMO use simpler and less risky if the heart is healthy and only the lungs need to be bypassed? According to UCSF The VV ECMO is connected to one or more veins, usually near the heart, and is used when the problem is only in the lungs. USCF is also now using a smaller portable ECMO device that is light enough to be carried by one person and can be transported in an ambulance or helicopter, making it possible to provide ECMO relief in emergency cases. Are VV ECMO and VA ECMO typically done with the same machine in different modes, or are they typically distinctly separate machines? Is there any way a dialysis machine could be modified to do the oxygenation function, in the absence of a real ECMO, and might that buy patients time until a true ECMO machine becomes available? |
|
|
|
04/17/2020 07:29 AM
|
|
Dude, really good questions. Excuse my laziness, but I didn't read the articles. But let me give some answers.
Not sure where the 50:1 comes from, but ECMO is definitely a very limited resource, enough that many hospitals have to transport patients out for it. Some areas just don't have it at all. Because patients who need it are so sick, sometimes it's just not even feasible to transport them to an ECMO center.
And yes, ECMO is much safer and effective in patients who don't have lots of underlying health problems. Picking the right candidate is what makes ECMO so tricky. The 80yr old nursing home patient with every chronic problem currently undergoing CPR is unlikely to benefit. On the other hand, the young healthy woman with a big blood clot in the heart might be a good candidate for ECMO while they fish out the goober in her lungs.
Not to go off on a tangent, but the above points to the reality of "healthcare rationing" that is a hot-button term in the media. The truth is that things like ECMO require a specialized team, lots of equipment, big catheters shoved in big blood vessels---all this means risk to the team and the patient, occupying precious equipment and highly trained personnel. It's a super delicate balance that is much more complex than the "picking who lives and who dies" version we hear about in the media.
Regarding your question about VA and VV ECMO, the equipment is getting better all the time and it is my understanding that standard setups can do both. It's really just about where you place the catheters.
Lastly, another great question about the use of a hemodialysis machine to oxygenate the blood. Coincidentally, a nephrologist mentioned something like this the other day, but I have not heard of anything like that before.
It's easy to nerd out on this stuff because it is the latest and greatest in high tech CPR and a relatively new frontier even for people in medicine.
EDIT: tried multiple times to make paragraphs but it won't let me. sorry
------------------------- we are they, they are us -- Thich Nhat Hanh Edited: 04/17/2020 at 07:31 AM by Sharktower |
|
|
FORUMS
:
NPNR
:
ECMO Saving Lives of COVID-19 Patients
|
Topic Tools
|
FuseTalk Basic Edition - © 1999-2024 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.
First there was Air Jordan .