Background: It remains unclear which cannulation method is best in cases of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. We assessed the effect of ultrasound- and fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous cannulation on complication incidence, compared with that using only ultrasound guidance.
Methods: This single-center retrospective observational study was conducted between February 2011 and December 2015. In the comparison group, cannulation was performed percutaneously using only ultrasound guidance. In the exposure group, cannulation was performed percutaneously using fluoroscopy and ultrasound guidance. The primary outcome assessed was whether complications were associated with cannulation. The secondary outcome assessed was the duration from hospital arrival to extracorporeal circulation start. In addition to univariate analysis, multivariate logistic-regression analysis for cannulation complications was performed to adjust for several presumed confounders.
Results: Of the patients who underwent ECPR, 73 were eligible; the comparison group included 50 cases and the exposure group included 23 cases. Univariate analysis showed that the complication incidence of the exposure group was significantly lower than that of the comparison group (8.7 vs. 36.0%, p = 0.022). Duration from hospital arrival to extracorporeal circulation start was almost the same in both groups (median, 17.0 min vs. 17.0 min, p = 0.92). After multivariate logistic regression analysis, cannulation using fluoroscopy and ultrasound was independently associated with a lower complication incidence (adjusted odds ratio, 0.14; p = 0.024).
Conclusions: Ultrasound- and fluoroscopy-guided cannulation may reduce the complication incidence of cannulation without delaying extracorporeal circulation start.
Keywords: Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation; Catheterization; Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation; Fluoroscopy; Ultrasonography.