Published online Apr 26, 2023. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v15.i4.165
Peer-review started: November 19, 2022
First decision: December 13, 2022
Revised: December 15, 2022
Accepted: March 17, 2023
Article in press: March 17, 2023
Published online: April 26, 2023
Processing time: 151 Days and 16.4 Hours
The prognostic role of right ventricle dilatation and dysfunction (RVDD) has not been elucidated in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID)-related respiratory failure refractory to standard treatment needing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support.
To assess whether pre veno-venous (VV) ECMO RVDD were related to in-intensive care unit (ICU) mortality.
We enrolled 61 patients with COVID-related acute respiratory distress syndrome refractory to conventional treatment submitted to VV ECMO and consecutively admitted to our ICU (an ECMO referral center) from 31th March 2020 to 31th August 2021. An echocardiographic exam was performed immediately before VV ECMO implantation.
Males were prevalent (73.8%) and patients with a body mass index > 30 kg/m2 were the majority (46/61, 75%). The overall in-ICU mortality rate was 54.1% (33/61). RVDD was detectable in more than half of the population (34/61, 55.7%) and associated with higher simplified organ functional assessment (SOFA) values (P = 0.029) and a longer mechanical ventilation duration prior to ECMO support (P = 0.046). Renal replacement therapy was more frequently needed in RVDD patients (P = 0.002). A higher in-ICU mortality (P = 0.024) was observed in RVDD patients. No echo variables were independent predictors of in-ICU death.
In patients with COVID-related respiratory failure on ECMO support, RVDD (dilatation and dysfunction) is a common finding and identifies a subset of patients characterized by a more severe disease (as indicated by higher SOFA values and need of renal replacement therapy) and by a higher in-ICU mortality. RVDD (also when considered separately) did not result independently associated with in-ICU mortality in these patients.
Core Tip: In coronavirus disease-related respiratory failure on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support right ventricle dilatation and dysfunction (defined as the coexistence of dilatation and dysfunction) is a common finding and identifies a subset of patients characterized by a more severe disease (as indicated by higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment values and need of renal replacement therapy) and by a higher in-intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. However, at logistic regression analysis, right ventricle dilatation and dysfunction (even when considered separately) did not result independently associated with in-ICU mortality in these patients.
- Citation: Lazzeri C, Bonizzoli M, Batacchi S, Cianchi G, Franci A, Socci F, Chiostri M, Peris A. Right ventricle dysfunction does not predict mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2-related acute respiratory distress syndrome on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. World J Cardiol 2023; 15(4): 165-173
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1949-8462/full/v15/i4/165.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4330/wjc.v15.i4.165
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) disease can evolve in some cases in severe respiratory failure, refractory to conventional therapies, which requires veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) support, possibly in experienced centers[1-3]. In coronavirus disease (COVID) respiratory disease, right ventricular (RV) dilatation is frequently encountered especially in severe disease[4,5], but, to date, the prognostic role of RV dilatation has not completed elucidated. In acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) from different etiologies on ECMO support[3] RV dilatation and dysfunction (RVDD) were negatively associated with early outcome, while the prognostic role of RVDD has not been elucidated in patients with COVID-related respiratory failure refractory to standard treatment needing ECMO. We hypothesize that pre ECMO RVDD is related to in-intensive care unit (ICU) mortality, and we tested this hypothesis in 61 consecutive patients with COVID-related ARDS on ECMO support.
In our prospective observational study, we enrolled 61 patients with COVID-related ARDS refractory to conventional treatment submitted to VV ECMO and consecutively admitted to our ICU (an ECMO referral center) from 31th March 2020 to 31th August 2021. No exclusion criteria. The study protocol was approved by our Ethical Committee (“Comitato Etico Area Vasta Centro” n.17024, approved on March 31th 2020) (“Florence COVID ICU Registry”). The written inform consent for each patient was waived for emerging infectious disease. The need for ECMO support was communicated to the patient’s relatives by phone before implantation.
On ICU admission we measured: Troponin (pg/mL), N-terminal-pro brain natriuretic peptide (NT-BNP, pg/mL), C-reactive protein (mg/dL) creatinine (mg/dL), lactose dehydrogenase (UI/L), D-dimer (ng/mL), and interleukin 6 (pg/mL). According to our echocardiography protocol[3,5], an echocardiographic exam was performed immediately before ECMO implantation. Systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP) is obtained using the simplified Bernouilli’s equation. RVDD was defined in presence of RVEDA/LVEDA > 0.6 and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) < 15 mm (M-mode). Coupling of RV function to the pulmonary circulation was evaluated as the TAPSE to sPAP ratio. Each echo measure is performed three times, and the mean value was recorded[4,6].
All ultrasound cardiac procedures were performed using the necessary protective equipment for professionals. Dedicated machines (Ge HealthCare machine) were used in the COVID ICU and transducers are wrapped in single-use plastic covers. We considered VV ECMO in COVID when respiratory failure persisted despite optimum management including controlled ventilation with tidal volume 6 mL/kg, plateau pressure < 30 cm H2O, use of neuromuscular blockers, high-positive end-expiratory pressure, and repeated prone positioning sessions[1-3,7,8]. All patients were encouraged to mobilize early[3]. Outcome was death in the ICU.
Data have been stored in a dedicated database and analyzed with SPSS for Windows 20.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Categorical variables are reported as frequencies and percentages; continuous variables are reported as mean ± standard deviation (SD) or median (range), as needed. Comparisons between the groups were performed using Chi square for categorical data, and student’s t test and Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous data. Logistic regression backwards models have been developed to detect predictor(s) for ICU-death. Variables were selected based on univariate analysis and on clinical criteria. To avoid overfitting, each model included three variables. Receiver operating curve (ROC) was constructed to identify the cut-off for age and duration of pre-ECMO mechanical ventilation in relation to ICU-death.
Our population comprised 61 consecutive patients with COVID-related respiratory failure on ECMO support (Table 1). Patients transferred from peripheral hospitals accounted for the 62% of our population. Males were prevalent (73.8%) and patients with a body mass index > 30 kg/m2 were the majority (46/61, 75%). Renal replacement therapy was needed in almost half of the entire population (48%). Renal replacement therapy was started on ICU admission in five patients (17%) and after ECMO start in the remaining 24 patients (83%). The overall in-ICU mortality rate was 54.1% (33/61). At echocardiography left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was normal in all but three patients who had LVEF < 45% because of previously known heart disease.
Variable | All patients | RVDD (No. 34) | No RVDD (No. 27) | P value |
Clinical data | ||||
Age (yr), mean ± SD | 54.3 ± 10.3 | 53.8 ± 9.7 | 52.9 ± 11 | 0.735 |
Gender, M/F | 45/16 (74/26) | 28/6 (82/18) | 17/10 (63/37) | 0.087 |
BMI (kg/m2), mean ± SD | 32.9 ± 5.3 | 32.4 ± 5.6 | 32.7 ± 4.9 | 0.836 |
Charlson index, median (IQR) | 2.0 (1.0-3.0) | 2.0 (1.0-3.0) | 2.0 (1.0-3.0) | 0.772 |
Transferred from peripheral hospitals | 38 (62) | 18 (52) | 20 (74) | 0.9 |
Time from symptoms’ onset to ICU (d), median (IQR) | 13 (10-13) | 9 (8-12) | 12 (10-14) | 0.075 |
SOFA, median (IQR) | 8.0 (7.0-10.0) | 10 (8-10) | 7 (6-10) | 0.029 |
Mechanical ventilation length to ECMO support (d), median (IQR) | 6.0 (8.0-11.0) | 8.5 (6-12) | 7 (4-10) | 0.046 |
ECMO duration (d), median (IQR) | 22 (13-42) | 24.5 (9-44) | 21 (15-35) | 0.765 |
Renal replacement therapy | 29 (48) | 22 (65) | 7 (26) | 0.002 |
ICU death | 33 (54.1) | 21 (62) | 12 (44) | 0.024 |
Biohumoral data | ||||
Creatinine (mg/dL), median (IQR) | 1.00 (0.72-1.86) | 0.83 (0.61-1.34) | 1.65 (0.78-2.00) | 0.025 |
D-dimer (ng/mL), median (IQR) | 3594 (2252-7214) | 3748 (1740-12085) | 3550 (2368-5007) | 0.425 |
CRP (mg/dL), median (IQR) | 142 (88-144) | 121 (87-174) | 165 (98-212) | 0.55 |
IL-6 (pg/mL), median (IQR) | 34 (7.4-70.0) | 45 (6.9-105.0) | 34 (21-58.0) | 0.772 |
Troponin (pg/mL), median (IQR) | 21 (14.0-38.0) | 33.0 (14.0-112.0) | 21.0 (8.5-48.0) | 0.253 |
NT-pro BNP (pg/mL), median (IQR) | 874 (345-1654) | 735 (252-1467) | 1273 (585-1868) | 0.058 |
LDH IU/L, median (IQR) | 465 (375-538) | 421 (363-510) | 473 (424-542) | 0.078 |
Echocardiographic data | ||||
LVEF (%), mean ± SD | 63.9 ± 7.6 | 64.3 ± 7.9 | 64.5 ± 7.5 | 0.113 |
RV/LV, mean ± SD | 0.58 ± 0.17 | 0.69 ± 0.08 | 0.45 ± 0.14 | 0.0001 |
TAPSE (mm), mean ± SD | 18.0 (10.0-21.0) | 13.9 (10.0 ± 14.5) | 17.4 (16.0-22.5) | 0.015 |
sPAP (mmHg), mean ± SD | 58.4 ± 9.4 | 64 ± 11 | 59.1 ± 7.7 | 0.015 |
e/e1 | 11 ± 3 | 12 ± 3 | 9 ± 3 | 0.0003 |
TAPSE/sPAP (mm/mmHg), mean ± SD | 0.28 ± 0.13 | 0.19 ± 0.10 | 0.28 ± 0.11 | 0.001 |
Ventilatory parameters | ||||
PEEP (cm H2O), mean ± SD | 12.2 ± 2.3 | 12.4 ± -2.4 | 12.1 ± 2.6 | 0.64 |
PO2/FiO2, mean ± SD | 62 (50-88) | 66 (54-88) | 60 (50-88) | 0.442 |
Norepinephrine, mean ± SD | 0.34 ± 0.22 | 0.39 ± 0.26 | 0.24 ± 0.10 | 0.011 |
Table 1 shows the comparison between patients with RVDD and those without. In the entire population, RVDD was detectable in more than half of the population (34/61, 55.7%). In the comparison between the two subgroups, patients with RVDD showed higher values of simplified organ functional assessment (SOFA) (P = 0.029) and a longer mechanical ventilation duration prior to ECMO support (P = 0.046). Renal replacement therapy was more frequently needed in RVDD patients (P = 0.002). A higher in-ICU mortality (P = 0.024) was shown in RVDD patients. Higher values of NT-pro BNP were observed in RVDD patients (P = 0.014). At echocardiography, RVDD patients exhibited higher values of sPAP (P = 0.015), E/e1 (P = 0.0003) and lower TAPSE/sPAP (P = 0.001). Higher doses of norepinephrine were needed in patients with RVDD (P = 0.011) when compared with those without. No differences were detectable in ventilatory parameters between the two subgroups.
Table 2 shows the comparison between survivors and no survivors. No survivors were older (P = 0.003) and showed a higher SOFA (P = 0.010) and a longer mechanical ventilation duration before ECMO implantation (P = 0.006). Among biohumoral data, creatinine values were significantly higher in no survivors (P = 0.030), with no other significant difference between the two subgroups. Echocardiography, performed before ECMO implantation, did not show any significant difference between survivors and no survivors.
Variable | All patients | Survivors (No. 28) | No survivors (No. 33) | P value |
Clinical data | ||||
Age (yr), mean ± SD | 54.3 ± 10.3 | 50.1 ± 11.6 | 58.0 ± 7.3 | 0.003 |
Gender, M/F | 45/16 (73.8/26.2) | 18/10 (40.0/62.5) | 6/27 (60.0/37.5) | 0.121 |
BMI (kg/m2), mean ± SD | 32.9 ± 5.3 | 31.8 ± 4.0 | 33.8 ± 6.1 | 0.138 |
Charlson index, median (IQR) | 2.0 (1.0-3.0) | 2.0 (1.0-3.0) | 2.0 (1.0-3.0) | 0.772 |
Time from symptoms’ onset to ICU (d), median (IQR) | 13 (10-13) | 10 (8-13) | 13 (10-15) | 0.066 |
SOFA, median (IQR) | 8.0 (7.0-10.0) | 7.5 (5.5-9.0) | 10.0 (8.0-10.0) | 0.01 |
Mechanical ventilation length to ECMO support (d), median (IQR) | 6.0 (8.0-11.0) | 6.5 (4.5-9.5) | 10.0 (7.0-12.0) | 0.006 |
ECMO duration (d), median (IQR) | 22 (13-42) | 35 (19-48) | 18 (10-30) | 0.015 |
ICU death | 33 (54.1) | - | - | - |
Biohumoral data | ||||
Creatinine (mg/dL), median (IQR) | 1.00 (0.70-1.88) | 0.82 (0.60-1.35) | 1.60 (0.77-2.00) | 0.03 |
D-dimer (ng/mL), median (IQR) | 3694 (2153-7326) | 3948 (1740-13095) | 3600 (2378-5007) | 0.418 |
CRP (mg/dL), median (IQR) | 140 (86-143) | 120 (85-172) | 164 (97-215) | 0.553 |
IL-6 (pg/mL), median (IQR) | 35.5 (7.9-71.0) | 46.5 (6.8-107.0) | 35.5 (20.5-59.0) | 0.851 |
Troponin (pg/mL), median (IQR) | 20.5 (15.0-39.0) | 34.0 (15.0-115.0) | 22.0 (9.0-50.0) | 0.281 |
NT-pro BNP (pg/mL), median (IQR) | 875 (355-1754) | 734 (254-1542) | 1272 (586-1870) | 0.064 |
LDH IU/L, median (IQR) | 466 (378-540) | 423 (367-513) | 475 (426-543) | 0.089 |
Echocardiographic data | ||||
LVEF (%) | 63.9 ± 7.6 | 65.6 ± 8.1 | 62.5 ± 6.9 | 0.113 |
RV/LV | 0.58 ± 0.17 | 0.58 ± 0.19 | 0.58 ± 0.16 | 0.945 |
TAPSE (mm) | 18.0 (10.0-21.0) | 19.0 (10.0 ± 22.5) | 18.0 (10.0-21.0) | 0.375 |
RVDD | 34 (55.7) | 13 | 21 | 0.275 |
sPAP (mmHg) | 58.4 ± 9.4 | 60.2 ± 7.6 | 61.3 ± 10.7 | 0.638 |
E/e1 | 11 ± 3 | 10.7 ± 2.9 | 11.6 ± 3.7 | 0.34 |
TAPSE/sPAP (mm/mmHg) | 0.28 ± 0.13 | 0.29 ± 0.13 | 0.27 ± 0.13 | 0.692 |
Ventilatory parameters | ||||
PEEP (cm H2O) | 12.2 ± 2.3 | 12.3 ± 2.3 | 12.2 ± 2.4 | 0.91 |
PO2/FiO2 | 62 (50-88) | 66 (54-88) | 60 (50-88) | 0.442 |
Norepinephrine (μg/kg/min), mean ± SD | 0.34 ± 0.22 | 0.30 ± 0.20 | 0.35 ± 0.24 | 0.388 |
Different models were calculated (Table 3). The following parameters resulted independent predictors of in-ICU death: Age, SOFA, time from symptoms’ onset, mechanical ventilation preECMO ≥ 10 d and creatinine. RV dilatation, RV dysfunction and RVDD (dilatation and dysfunction) were not independently associated with in-ICU mortality. At ROC analysis, the age cut-off was ≥ 57 years [area under the curve: 70.5% (95% confidence interval: 57.3- 83.7%), P = 0.006, sensitivity 72.7%, specificity 58.0%].
Model | OR | 95%CI | P value |
Model 1 | |||
Age (yr) | 1.09 | 1.02-1.16 | 0.015 |
SOFA | 1.26 | 0.99-1.62 | 0.062 |
Admission RV/LV | 0.64 | 0.02-21.42 | 0.805 |
Model 2 | |||
SOFA | 1.24 | 0.98-1.56 | 0.062 |
RV DYS | 0.98 | 0.31-3.84 | 0.985 |
Creatinine (mg/dL) | 1.78 | 0.82-3.11 | 0.14 |
Model 3 | |||
Age (yr) | 1.1 | 1.03-1.18 | 0.005 |
BMI (kg/m2) | 1.09 | 0.97-1.22 | 0.138 |
TAPSE (mm) | 0.97 | 0.89-1.06 | 0.544 |
Model 4 | |||
SOFA | 1.29 | 1.03-1.61 | 0.026 |
BMI (kg/m2) | 1.06 | 0.95-1.19 | 0.278 |
TAPSE/SPAP (mm/mmHg) | 2.53 | 0.03-20.92 | 0.68 |
Model 5 | |||
BMI (kg/m2) | 1.1 | 0.98-1.24 | 0.107 |
Charlson index | 0.59 | 0.29-1.18 | 0.133 |
Time from symptom’s onset (d) | 1.26 | 1.02-1.56 | 0.032 |
Model 6 | |||
NT pro BNP (pg/mL) | 0.99 | 0.97-1.02 | 0.517 |
Mechanical ventilation to ECMO ≥ 10 (d) | 4.64 | 1.42-15.12 | 0.011 |
Creatinine (mg/dL) | 2.56 | 1.16-5.67 | 0.02 |
The main finding of the present investigation is that, in COVID-related respiratory failure on ECMO support, RVDD (defined as the coexistence of dilatation and dysfunction) is a common finding. The presence of RVDD identifies a subset of patients characterized by a more severe disease (as indicated by higher SOFA values and need of renal replacement therapy) and by a higher in-ICU mortality. However, at logistic regression analysis, RVDD (even when considered separately) did not result independently associated with in-ICU mortality in these patients.
Growing evidence suggests that, in COVID respiratory failure, varEchoious echocardiographic patterns may be observed across disease severity progression, ranging from isolated systolic pulmonary hypertension to RVDD. Studies are quite often heterogeneous, especially in respect to selected echo parameters and definition of RV dysfunction and dilatation. In a small series of mechanically ventilated COVID patients, acute pulmonary hypertension (observed in the 39%) was associated with higher 30-d mortality[9]. Likewise, in a retrospective investigation including 214 patients, RV dysfunction, pulmonary hypertension, and moderate to severe tricuspid regurgitation were associated with increased odds for 30-d mortality[10]. In 98 consecutive COVID-related respiratory failure, three different subgroups were identified at serial echocardiograms according to the presence/occurrence and timing of RVDD (defined as the association of RVDD), that is admission RVDD, new onset RVDD, no RV changes. Admission and newly developed RVDD subgroups identified severe COVID respiratory disease which in a high percentage of cases needed ECMO support[11]. In the present investigation, the study population comprises the most severe state of COVID-related respiratory failure, refractory to standard treatment and requiring ECMO support in whom RVDD (dilatation and dysfunction) is quite common being detectable in more than a half of the entire population. Few data are available on echocardiographic data in patients with COVID-related respiratory failure on ECMO support.
In the series by Bleakley et al[11] quite a large proportion of enrolled patients (38/90, 42%) were on ECMO support, but they were not analysed separately. Kopanczyk et al[12] performed echocardiography in 11 consecutive patients on ECMO and observed that RV dysfunction (as indicated by abnormal free wall longitudinal strain and fractional area change) was present in the majority (9/11 patients). RV dysfunction was defined as RV dilatation (visual assessment) and abnormal septal motion in the study by Ortiz et al[13] who documented that no echo variable was predictor of outcomes (survival to discharge and survival to decannulation) in 64 COVID patients on ECMO (echocardiography performed post cannulation). In a small series of COVID patients on ECMO, we observed, by means of serial echocardiographic exams, that RVDD (defined as the coexistence of dilatation and dysfunction) may be reversible, especially in survivors[13]. We confirm and extend previous findings in a larger series, focusing on the prognostic role (if any) of RVDD for in-ICU death. According to our data, patients with RVDD showed a more severe disease (as indicated by SOFA) and a higher incidence of renal impairment (as inferred by the higher use of renal replacement therapy). Higher values of systolic pulmonary arterial pressure and of NT-pro BNP, observed in RVDD patients, suggest increased RV pressure which might contribute to renal impairment. The lack of differences in creatinine serum values between patients with RVDD and those without can be due to renal replacement therapy itself which does affect creatinine levels. Despite the higher in-ICU mortality observed in patients with RVDD, RVDD (even when considered separately) are not independent predictor of early death in our population. This might be due to several factors. Firstly, the high incidence of RVDD in these patients, in agreement with previous investigations[3,12,13]. Secondly, at serial echocardiographic assessments, RVDD may be reversible in COVID-related respiratory failure on ECMO support, though a percentage of critically ill COVID patients has been reported to develop RVDD during ICU course[13].
Finally, factors other than RV echo variables can independently predict in-ICU death in COVID-related refractory respiratory failure on ECMO support, such as age and duration of mechanical ventilation. The high frequency of RVDD may be responsible for the lack of association between echocardiographic data and mortality in our patients. Our results are in keeping with those reported by investigations enrolling only critically ill COVID patients who, similarly, were not able to detect a relation between mortality and RV dilatation[13].
In our series, multivariate logistic regression analysis identified the following predictors of in-ICU analysis: Age, severity of disease (as inferred by SOFA and creatinine values) and COVID-disease duration (indicated by time from symptoms’ onset) and mechanical ventilation pre-ECMO. A longer time from symptoms’ onset to ICU suggests more severe forms of disease, characterized by more pronounced pulmonary derangements, often unresponsive to therapy. Age is a well-known strong predictor in COVID respiratory failure, in line with recent evidence[1] and, though we enrolled patients aged < 65 years according to guidelines, the ROC-determined cut-off was 57 years in our series. Regarding the duration of pre-ECMO mechanical ventilation to date there is no clear indication on the optimal duration of mechanical ventilation before ECMO implantation in COVID disease. Extracorporeal Life Support Organization guidelines report that a period of more than 10 d of mechanical ventilation should be considered a contraindication for ECMO support, while a period of 7 d is reported as a cut-off by other studies[1,2].
This is a single centre investigation, including a limited number of patients. On the other hand, ours is a high-volume ECMO centre. Indeed 61 COVID patients on ECMO support were managed at our center in a 15-mo period, treated by the same intensive care team.
In patients with COVID-related respiratory failure on ECMO support RVDD (dilatation and dysfunction) is a common finding and identifies a subset of patients characterized by a more severe disease (as indicated by higher SOFA values and need of renal replacement therapy) by a higher in-ICU mortality. RVDD (also when considered separately) did not result independently associated with in-ICU mortality in these patients.
Echocardiography is recognized as a clinical tool in coronavirus disease (COVID)-related respiratory failure needing veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO).
The assessment of the prognostic role of right ventricle dilatation and dysfunction (RVDD) in COVID-related respiratory failure refractory to standard treatment requesting ECMO.
In COVID-related respiratory failure on ECMO RVDD is a common finding and identifies a subset of patients characterized by a more severe disease (as indicated by higher sequential organ failure assessment values and need of renal replacement therapy) by a higher in-intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. RVDD (also when considered separately) did not result independently associated with in-ICU mortality in these patients.
Observational single center study.
An echocardiographic examination was performed before ECMO implantation.
In patients with COVID-related respiratory failure on ECMO support, RVDD is a common finding and identifies a subset of patients characterized by a more severe disease and by a higher in-ICU mortality. RVDD (also when considered separately) did not result independently associated with in-ICU mortality in these patients.
Risk stratification in COVID-related refractory respiratory failure.
Provenance and peer review: Unsolicited article; Externally peer reviewed.
Peer-review model: Single blind
Specialty type: Cardiac and cardiovascular systems
Country/Territory of origin: Italy
Peer-review report’s scientific quality classification
Grade A (Excellent): 0
Grade B (Very good): 0
Grade C (Good): C, C
Grade D (Fair): 0
Grade E (Poor): 0
P-Reviewer: Lakusic N, Croatia; Lee S, South Korea S-Editor: Wang JJ L-Editor: A P-Editor: Wang JJ
1. | Barbaro RP, MacLaren G, Boonstra PS, Iwashyna TJ, Slutsky AS, Fan E, Bartlett RH, Tonna JE, Hyslop R, Fanning JJ, Rycus PT, Hyer SJ, Anders MM, Agerstrand CL, Hryniewicz K, Diaz R, Lorusso R, Combes A, Brodie D; Extracorporeal Life Support Organization. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support in COVID-19: an international cohort study of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry. Lancet. 2020;396:1071-1078. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 669] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 621] [Article Influence: 155.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
2. | Shekar K, Badulak J, Peek G, Boeken U, Dalton HJ, Arora L, Zakhary B, Ramanathan K, Starr J, Akkanti B, Antonini MV, Ogino MT, Raman L, Barret N, Brodie D, Combes A, Lorusso R, MacLaren G, Müller T, Paden M, Pellegrino V; ELSO Guideline Working Group. Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Coronavirus Disease 2019 Interim Guidelines: A Consensus Document from an International Group of Interdisciplinary Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Providers. ASAIO J. 2020;66:707-721. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 188] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 256] [Article Influence: 64.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
3. | Lazzeri C, Bonizzoli M, Batacchi S, Cianchi G, Franci N, Socci F, Peris A. Persistent Right Ventricle Dilatation in SARS-CoV-2-Related Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2022;36:1956-1961. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 7] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
4. | Dandel M. Heart-lung interactions in COVID-19: prognostic impact and usefulness of bedside echocardiography for monitoring of the right ventricle involvement. Heart Fail Rev. 2022;27:1325-1339. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 22] [Article Influence: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
5. | Isgro G, Yusuff HO, Zochios V; Protecting the Right Ventricle Network. The Right Ventricle in COVID-19 Lung Injury: Proposed Mechanisms, Management, and Research Gaps. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2021;35:1568-1572. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
6. | D'Alto M, Marra AM, Severino S, Salzano A, Romeo E, De Rosa R, Stagnaro FM, Pagnano G, Verde R, Murino P, Farro A, Ciccarelli G, Vargas M, Fiorentino G, Servillo G, Gentile I, Corcione A, Cittadini A, Naeije R, Golino P. Right ventricular-arterial uncoupling independently predicts survival in COVID-19 ARDS. Crit Care. 2020;24:670. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 76] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 70] [Article Influence: 17.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
7. | Cho HJ, Heinsar S, Jeong IS, Shekar K, Li Bassi G, Jung JS, Suen JY, Fraser JF. ECMO use in COVID-19: lessons from past respiratory virus outbreaks-a narrative review. Crit Care. 2020;24:301. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 54] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 59] [Article Influence: 14.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
8. | Kon ZN, Smith DE, Chang SH, Goldenberg RM, Angel LF, Carillo JA, Geraci TC, Cerfolio RJ, Montgomery RA, Moazami N, Galloway AC. Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support in Severe COVID-19. Ann Thorac Surg. 2021;111:537-543. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 54] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 59] [Article Influence: 14.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
9. | Norderfeldt J, Liliequist A, Frostell C, Adding C, Agvald P, Eriksson M, Lönnqvist PA. Acute pulmonary hypertension and short-term outcomes in severe Covid-19 patients needing intensive care. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2021;65:761-769. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 15] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 27] [Article Influence: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
10. | Wats K, Rodriguez D, Prins KW, Sadiq A, Fogel J, Goldberger M, Moskovits M, Tootkaboni MP, Shani J, Jacob J. Association of right ventricular dysfunction and pulmonary hypertension with adverse 30-day outcomes in COVID-19 patients. Pulm Circ. 2021;11:20458940211007040. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 13] [Article Influence: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
11. | Bleakley C, Singh S, Garfield B, Morosin M, Surkova E, Mandalia MS, Dias B, Androulakis E, Price LC, McCabe C, Wort SJ, West C, Li W, Khattar R, Senior R, Patel BV, Price S. Right ventricular dysfunction in critically ill COVID-19 ARDS. Int J Cardiol. 2021;327:251-258. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 52] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 76] [Article Influence: 19.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
12. | Kopanczyk R, Al-Qudsi OH, Uribe A, Periel L, Fiorda-Diaz J, Abdel-Rasoul M, Kumar N, Bhatt AM. Right Ventricular Dysfunction in Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 Supported with Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2022;36:629-631. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
13. | Ortiz F, Brunsvold ME, Bartos JA. Right Ventricular Dysfunction and Mortality After Cannulation for Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation. Crit Care Explor. 2020;2:e0268. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |