Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Indications and contraindications for extracorporeal life support for severe heart or lung failure: a systematic review


Brandi, Giovanna; Drewniak, Daniel; Buehler, Philipp K; Budilivschi, Ana; Steiger, Peter; Krones, Tanja (2021). Indications and contraindications for extracorporeal life support for severe heart or lung failure: a systematic review. Minerva Anestesiologica, 87(2):199-209.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

he effectiveness of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in critically ill patients remains unclear despite a substantial increase in its use. This study critically assesses existing ECLS guidelines, consensus statements, and position papers to systematically review them for agreements and differences regarding indications and contraindications for ECLS.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The aims of this review were to identify available indications and contraindications for ECLS and to evaluate the quality of the evidence on which they are based. Documents containing recommendations regarding indications and/or contraindications for ECLS in adults (aged 18+) were identified through Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL searches. Additional documents were identified from guideline-specific databases and the internet websites of professional societies. Based on the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II), four independent reviewers assessed the rigor of development and quality of the documents.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eleven documents met the inclusion criteria. Three documents received an average score of ≥ 50% in all domains. However, the domain "Editorial independence" only scored <50% in most of the documents. Overall, 13 cardiac and 13 pulmonary ECLS indications, and 23 cardiac and 14 pulmonary contraindications were identified. Indications and contraindications for ECLS use are variable across the documents included and leave considerable room for interpretation.

CONCLUSIONS

The documents included for review show considerable variability, with little consensus on indications and contraindications. This lack of consensus may reflect a lack of clarity regarding ECLS utility. Additionally, it may reveal the necessity for individualized, patient-dependent criteria supported by the best evidence available.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

he effectiveness of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in critically ill patients remains unclear despite a substantial increase in its use. This study critically assesses existing ECLS guidelines, consensus statements, and position papers to systematically review them for agreements and differences regarding indications and contraindications for ECLS.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The aims of this review were to identify available indications and contraindications for ECLS and to evaluate the quality of the evidence on which they are based. Documents containing recommendations regarding indications and/or contraindications for ECLS in adults (aged 18+) were identified through Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL searches. Additional documents were identified from guideline-specific databases and the internet websites of professional societies. Based on the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II), four independent reviewers assessed the rigor of development and quality of the documents.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eleven documents met the inclusion criteria. Three documents received an average score of ≥ 50% in all domains. However, the domain "Editorial independence" only scored <50% in most of the documents. Overall, 13 cardiac and 13 pulmonary ECLS indications, and 23 cardiac and 14 pulmonary contraindications were identified. Indications and contraindications for ECLS use are variable across the documents included and leave considerable room for interpretation.

CONCLUSIONS

The documents included for review show considerable variability, with little consensus on indications and contraindications. This lack of consensus may reflect a lack of clarity regarding ECLS utility. Additionally, it may reveal the necessity for individualized, patient-dependent criteria supported by the best evidence available.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Institute of Intensive Care Medicine
04 Faculty of Medicine > Institute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:1 February 2021
Deposited On:30 Sep 2020 10:51
Last Modified:19 Feb 2021 07:58
Publisher:Edizioni Minerva Medica
ISSN:0375-9393
OA Status:Closed
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.23736/S0375-9393.20.14513-9
PubMed ID:32755087

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher

Get full-text in a library