Physiological and clinical effects of two ultraprotective ventilation strategies in patients with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: the ECMOVENT study
In the context of our center, a ventilatory strategy targeting a PEEP of 14 cmH<sub>2</sub>O, a ∆P of 8 cmH<sub>2</sub>O and a RR of 10 min<sup>-1</sup> led to the application of ∆P, RR and static elastic mechanical power and improved decarboxylation, compared to a strategy in volumetric mode with a V<sub>T</sub> of 1 ml.kg<sup>-1</sup> PBW and a RR of 5 min<sup>-1</sup>, in patients with ARDS and VV-ECMO. No significant difference on clinical outcomes was observed between both strategies.
Authors
- Mehdi Mezidi (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8715-8323)
- Louis Chauvelot (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5995-7921)
- Laurent Bitker (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4698-053X)
- Jean‐Christophe Richard (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1503-3035)
- Guillaume Deniel (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4006-6114)
- Hodane Yonis
- Yolanda Cristina Valdés Rodríguez
- Alexandre Thomachot
Institutions
- Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (FR)
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Inserm (FR)
- Lyon College (US)
- Hôpital de la Croix-Rousse (FR)
- Centre de Recherche en Acquisition et Traitement de l'Image pour la Santé (FR)
- Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon (FR)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Annals of Intensive Care
- Published
- 2025-01-01
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-025-01525-0
- Primary Topic
- Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00