The use of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) devices has significantly increased in the last decades. Despite medical and technological advancements, a main challenge in the ECLS field remains the complex interaction between the human body, blood, and artificial materials. Indeed, blood exposure to artificial surfaces generates an unbalanced activation of the coagulation cascade, leading to hemorrhagic and thrombotic events. Over time, several anticoagulation and coatings methods have been introduced to address this problem. This narrative review summarizes trends, advantages, and disadvantages of anticoagulation and coating methods used in the ECLS field. Evidence was collected through a PubMed search and reference scanning. A group of experts was convened to openly discuss the retrieved references. Clinical practice in ECLS is still based on the large use of unfractionated heparin and, as an alternative in case of contraindications, nafamostat mesilate, bivalirudin, and argatroban. Other anticoagulation methods are under investigation, but none is about to enter the clinical routine. From an engineering point of view, material modifications have focused on commercially available biomimetic and biopassive surfaces and on the development of endothelialized surfaces. Biocompatible and bio-hybrid materials not requiring combined systemic anticoagulation should be the future goal, but intense efforts are still required to fulfill this purpose.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

OBJECTIVES: Data about inhospital outcomes in bleeding complications during extracorporeal life support (ECLS) have been poorly investigated. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Patients reported in Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry. PATIENTS: Data of 53.644 adult patients (greater than or equal to 18 yr old) mean age 51.4 ± 15.9 years, 33.859 (64.5%) male supported with single ECLS run between 01.01.2000 and 31.03.2020, and 19.748 cannulated for venovenous (V-V) ECLS and 30.696 for venoarterial (V-A) ECLS. INTERVENTIONS: Trends in bleeding complications, bleeding risk factors, and mortality. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: Bleeding complications were reported in 14.786 patients (27.6%), more often in V-A ECLS compared with V-V (30.0% vs 21.9%; p < 0.001). Hospital survival in those who developed bleeding complications was lower in both V-V ECLS (49.6% vs 66.6%; p < 0.001) and V-A ECLS (33.9 vs 44.9%; p < 0.001). Steady decrease in bleeding complications in V-V and V-A ECLS was observed over the past 20 years (coef., –1.124; p < 0.001 and –1.661; p < 0.001). No change in mortality rates was reported over time in V-V or V-A ECLS (coef., –0.147; p = 0.442 and coef., –0.195; p = 0.139). Multivariate regression revealed advanced age, ecls duration, surgical cannulation, renal replacement therapy, prone positioning as independent bleeding predictors in v-v ecls and female gender, ecls duration, pre-ecls arrest or bridge to transplant, therapeutic hypothermia, and surgical cannulation in v-a ecls. CONCLUSIONS: A steady decrease in bleeding over the last 20 years, mostly attributable to surgical and cannula-site–related bleeding has been found in this large cohort of patients receiving ECLS support. However, there is not enough data to attribute the decreasing trends in bleeding to technological refinements alone. Especially reduction in cannulation site bleeding is also due to changes in timing, patient selection, and ultrasound guided percutaneous cannulation. Other types of bleeding, such as CNS, have remained stable, and overall bleeding remains associated with a persistent increase in mortality.

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a challenging syndrome, associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Although pharmacological therapies are successful and can successfully control this acute cardiac illness, some patients remain refractory to drugs. Therefore, a more aggressive treatment strategy is needed. Temporary mechanical circulatory support (TCS) can be used to stabilise patients with decompensated heart failure. In the last two decades, the increased use of TCS has led to several kinds of devices becoming available. However, indications for TCS and device selection are part of a complex process. It is necessary to evaluate the severity of CS, any early and prompt haemodynamic resuscitation, prior TCS, specific patient risk factors, technical limitations and adequacy of resources and training, as well as an assessment of whether care would be futile. This article examines options for commonly used TCS devices, including intra-aortic balloon pumps, a pulsatile percutaneous ventricular assist device (the iVAC), veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation and Impella (Abiomed) and TandemHeart (LivaNova) percutaneous ventricular assist device.