Skip to main content

Prone positioning under VV-ECMO in SARS-CoV-2-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome

Background

Infection due to severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may lead to an atypical acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) [1], requiring in the most severe cases veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). The management of persistent severe hypoxemia under VV-ECMO requires a multi-step clinical approach including prone positioning (PP), which could improve oxygenation [2].

Methods

We performed a retrospective study of patients with SARS-CoV-2-induced ARDS submitted to PP during VV-ECMO. We aimed to describe mechanical ventilation parameters and gas exchanges before and after PP. We assess the safety of PP and compare patients with PP under ECMO (prone ECMO group) to those maintained in the supine position (supine ECMO group). Patients were treated in accordance with the recommendation guidelines on ARDS [3]. During VV-ECMO, PP was considered in case of severe hypoxemia (PaO2/FiO2 ratio below 80 mmHg) despite FDO2 and FiO2 both at 100% and in case of extensive lung consolidation (ECL) on chest imaging (> 50% of lung volume).

Results

We enrolled 208 COVID-19 patients. Among the 125 patients with ARDS, 25 (20%) required VV-ECMO, and 14 (56%) were placed at least once in PP for a total of 24 procedures with a median duration of 16 (15–17) h. The delay from ECMO implantation therapy to PP was 1.5 days [1,2,3]. The resultant changes in ventilator/ECMO settings and blood gas analysis before and after PP are displayed in Table 1. The median PaO2/FiO2 ratio improvement after PP was 28% [2–36]. High responders (increase PaO2/FiO2 ratio > 20%) were 62.5%, moderate-responders (increase PaO2/FiO2 < 20%) were 16.7%, and non-responders (decrease PaO2/FiO2) were 20.8%. We did not observe any major safety concerns but only pressure sores after 6 procedures, three minor hemorrhages at the injection cannula, and three moderate drops in VV-ECMO flow requiring fluid resuscitation. Pre-ECMO characteristics, ventilator/ECMO settings, and outcomes are exposed in Table 2. Patients in the prone ECMO group were less likely to be weaned from ECMO, and 28-day mortality rate was significantly higher.

Table 1 The resultant changes in ventilator/ECMO settings and blood gas analysis before and after PP
Table 2 Pre-ECMO characteristics, ventilator/ECMO settings, and outcomes

Discussion

We report that during VV-ECMO, PP improved oxygenation without a change in respiratory system compliance and PaCO2 at constant levels of minute ventilation and sweep gas flow. This does not suggest lung recruitment by PP but rather an optimization of ventilation and perfusion matching. Three explanations could be advanced for the mortality rate in the prone ECMO group (78.6%). First, prone ECMO patients may be more severe than supine ECMO patients. As described by Gattinoni et al., worsening patients progress from type 1 to type 2 (higher percentage of non-aerated tissue) [1], which is associated with a higher mortality rate [4]. Prone ECMO patients had much more consolidations, obviously because ECL was the main indication to be prone (n = 10/14). Furthermore, prone ECMO patients need a higher respiratory rate for a higher sweep gas flow suggesting that they may be exposed to a higher mechanical power, and they possibly had also a higher dead space. Second, postmortem biopsies, performed in 6 patients with ECL in the prone ECMO group, found a fibrin exudative presence both in the alveolar spaces and bronchioles followed by a fibroblastic phase [5] and raise the question of the use of corticosteroids (only one patient in the prone ECMO group). Third, as already described by Zeng et al. [6], more than half (8/11) of the patients died from septic shock and multiple organ failure, for which ECMO may be useless.

Conclusion

Prone positioning under VV-ECMO improves oxygenation in SARS-CoV-2-induced ARDS without compromising the safety of the patients. The high mortality rate in prone ECMO patients may be explained by the greater illness severity and the lack of an immunomodulatory therapy such as corticosteroids.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

ARDS:

Acute respiratory distress syndrome

ICU:

Intensive care unit

PP:

Prone positioning

VV-ECMO:

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

SARS-CoV-2:

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

FiO2 :

Fraction of inspired oxygen

PaO2 :

Arterial partial pressure of oxygen

FDO2 :

Fraction on oxygen delivered in the sweep gas

ECL:

Extensive lung consolidation

References

  1. 1.

    Gattinoni L, Chiumello D, Rossi S. COVID-19 pneumonia: ARDS or not? Crit Care. 2020;24(1):154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Kimmoun A, Roche S, Bridey C, Vanhuyse F, Fay R, Girerd N, Mandry D, Levy B. Prolonged prone positioning under VV-ECMO is safe and improves oxygenation and respiratory compliance. Ann Intensive Care. 2015;5(1):35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Papazian L, Aubron C, Brochard L, Chiche J-D, Combes A, Dreyfuss D, Forel JM, Guérin C, Jaber S, Mekontso-Dessap A, et al. Formal guidelines: management of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Ann Intensive Care. 2019;9:69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Yuan M, Yin W, Tao Z, Tan W, Hu Y. Association of radiologic findings with mortality of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. PloS One. 2020;15(3):e0230548.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Copin M-C, Parmentier E, Duburcq T, Poissy J, Mathieu D, Lille COVID-19 ICU and Anatomopathology Group. Time to consider histologic pattern of lung injury to treat critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection. Intensive Care Med. 2020.46(6):1124-1126.

  6. 6.

    Zeng Y, Cai Z, Xianyu Y, Yang BX, Song T, Yan Q. Prognosis when using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for critically ill COVID-19 patients in China: a retrospective case series. Crit Care. 2020;24(1):148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are indebted to thank the whole members of the Lille Intensive Care COVID-19 Group and the entire nursing staff of the intensive care unit of the “Roger Salengro Hospital” of the “Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille.”.

Lille Intensive Care COVID-19 group:

Pauline Boddaert1 (Pauline.boddaert@chru-lille.fr), Arthur Durand1 (Arthur.durand@chru-lille.fr), Ahmed El Kalioubie1 (Ahmed.elkalioubie@chru-lille.fr), Patrick Girardie1 (Patrick.girardie@chru-lille.fr), Marion Houard1 (Marion.houard@chru-lille.fr), Geoffrey Ledoux1 (Geoffrey.ledoux@chru-lille.fr), Anne Sophie Moreau1 (Annesophie.moreau@chru-lille.fr), Christopher Niles1 (Christopher.niles@chru-lille.fr), Saad Nseir1 (Saad.nseir@chru-lille.fr), Thierry Onimus1 (Thierry.onimus@chru-lille.fr), Aurelia Toussaint1 (Aurelia.toussaint@chru-lille.fr), Sebastien Préau1 (Sebastien.preau@chru-lille.fr), Laurent Robriquet1 (Laurent.robriquet@chru-lille.fr), Anahita Rouze1 (Anahita.rouze@chru-lille.fr), Arthur Simonnet1 (Arthur.simonnet@chru-lille.fr), Sophie Six1 (Sophie.six@chru-lille.fr), Morgan Caplan1 (morgan.caplan@chru-lille.fr), Julien Goutay1 (julien.goutay@chru-lille.fr), Emmanuelle Jaillette1 (emmanuelle.jaillette@chru-lille.fr), Erika Parmentier-Decrucq1 (erika.decrucq@chru-lille.fr), Raphael Favory1 (raphael.favory@chru-lille.fr), Daniel Mathieu1 (daniel.mathieu@chru-lille.fr), Guillaume Degouy (Guillaume.degouy@chru-lille.fr), Mouhamed Moussa2 (Mouhamed.MOUSSA@CHRU-LILLE.FR)

1Pôle de Réanimation, CHU Lille, University of Lille, F-59000 Lille, France

2Service d’Anesthésie-Réanimation Cardio-Vasculaire, CHU Lille, University of Lille, F-59000 Lille, France

Funding

This study was supported by the French government through the Programme Investissement d’Avenir (I-SITE ULNE / ANR-16-IDEX-0004 ULNE) managed by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche ("PHYSIO COVID" and "PREDICT" projects)

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Consortia

Contributions

B.G and T.D. conceived the study. B.G, C.B., and N.C. collected the data. T.D. conducted the data analysis. B.G and T.D. drafted the manuscript. M.J. and J.P. revised the draft of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thibault Duburcq.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

French institutional authority for personal data protection (National Commission for Information Technology and Freedom, registration no DEC20-086) and ethics committee (ID-CRB 2020-A00763-36) approved the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Garcia, B., Cousin, N., Bourel, C. et al. Prone positioning under VV-ECMO in SARS-CoV-2-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit Care 24, 428 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-020-03162-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • COVID-19
  • Prone positioning
  • ECMO
  • Refractory hypoxemia