• Akbarshakh Akhmerov, Raymond Huang, Kjirsten Carlson, Navpreet K Dhillon, Eric J Ley, Daniel R Margulies, Danny Ramzy, and Galinos Barmparas.
• Department of Surgery, Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
• J Card Surg. 2020 Apr 1; 35 (4): 826-830.

BackgroundAccess to centers with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) capabilities varies by region and may affect overall outcomes. We assessed the outcomes of trauma patients requiring ECMO support and compared the overall survival of all patients with trauma at facilities with and without ECMO capabilities.MethodsA retrospective review of the National Trauma Data Bank was performed to identify all trauma patients receiving care at ECMO and non-ECMO centers. Baseline patient characteristics and outcomes were analyzed. Adjusted odds ratio (OR) was used to compare survival at ECMO and non-ECMO facilities.ResultsBetween 2007 and 2015, a total of 5 781 123 patients with trauma were identified with 1 983 986 (34%) admitted to an ECMO facility and 3 797 137 (66%) admitted to a non-ECMO facility. A total of 522 (0.03%) patients required ECMO. Both the number of patients with trauma requiring ECMO support and the number of trauma facilities utilizing ECMO increased over the 9-year-study period (4.9 to 13.8 patients per 100 000 admissions, and 18 to 77 centers, respectively). The mortality for ECMO patients was 40.5%. Patients with trauma admitted to ECMO facilities had more severe injuries (injury severity score: 9.0 vs 8.0; P < .001). The overall mortality was 3.3%. The adjusted OR for mortality associated with admission to an ECMO facility vs a non-ECMO facility was 0.96 (95% confidence interval: 0.95-0.97; adjusted P < .001).ConclusionsThe use of ECMO for patients with trauma is expanding. Our study demonstrates a survival benefit associated with admission to a facility with ECMO capabilities. Thus, access to ECMO is a potential quality metric for trauma centers.© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

20 keywords...

hide…