Advertisement

Use of Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VA-ECMO) in an Adult Patient with Septic and Cardiogenic Shock

  • Henrique Louzan Machado
  • Leonardo Jadyr Silva Rodrigues Alves
  • Helmgton José Brito de Souza
Chapter

Abstract

A.C.F.F., female, 40 years old, on her 20th week of pregnancy with twins, without cardiac prior history, presented mild pelvic pain and vaginal bleeding. By ultrasonography, a protusion of the amniotic sac was observed. On the second day of hospitalization, a failed attempt to inhibit preterm labor was performed, resulting in the rupture of the amniotic sac of one of the fetuses. After 24 h, the patient was diagnosed with septic abortion and uterine infection. Hysterectomy was made due to severe septic endometritis. During the procedure, the patient had two episodes of cardiorespiratory arrest, both rapidly reversed. After the surgery, she was transferred to an intensive care unit with tachycardia (HR 159 bpm) and shock (MAP 60 mmHg). Evaluation by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) revealed severe left ventricular dysfunction, with an estimated ejection fraction of 18%, requiring supramaximal doses of vasoactive drugs. Considering the patient’s clinical history and evolution, ECMO was installed in the venoarterial mode. After 6 days of mechanical circulatory assistance, a TTE was performed, and an improvement in the cardiac function was identified, with LVEF at 70%. Considering the improvement in cardiac function, ECMO explantation was made. Four days after ECMO withdrawal, bilateral amputation of the infrapatellar region of the lower limbs, left upper forearm (as shown in Fig. 2), and right upper limb digital pulps was performed. One week after explantation of the circulatory assistance device, the patient developed a new sepsis episode resulting in her death.

Bibliography

  1. 1.
    Abrams D, Combes A, Brodie D. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in cardiopulmonary disease in adults. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(25 Pt A):2769–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). J Am Med Assoc. 2016;315(8):801–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Howell MD, Davis AM. Management of sepsis and septic shock. JAMA. 2017. Available from: http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2598892. Access on: Janeiro, 2017.
  4. 4.
    Annich G, Lynch W, MacLaren G, Wilson J, Barlett R. Ecmo: extracorporeal cardiopulmonary support in critical care. 44th ed. Ann Arbor: ELSO Office; 2012.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carvalho P, Trotta E. Avanços no diagnóstico e tratamento da sepse. J Pediatr. 2003;79(2):195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bittar R, Carvalho M, Zugaib M. Condutas para o trabalho de parto prematuro. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2005;27(9):561–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ayub-Ferreira SM, et al. Diretriz de assistência circulatória mecânica da sociedade brasileira de cardiologia. Arq Bras Cardiolog. 2016;107(2 Supl. 2):1–33.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Felice CD, Susin CF, Costabeber AM. Shock: emergency diagnosis and treatment. Rev AMRIGS. 2011;55(2):179–96.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO). International summary of July – 2015. ECLS Registry Report. 23; 2015.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Robbins SL, Cotran RS. Pathologic basis of disease. 9th ed. Elsevier; 2015. p. 131–3.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henrique Louzan Machado
    • 1
  • Leonardo Jadyr Silva Rodrigues Alves
    • 1
  • Helmgton José Brito de Souza
    • 1
  1. 1.Unified School of Brasília (UNICEUB)BrasíliaBrazil

Personalised recommendations