BackgroundAlthough the utilization of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasing and its technology is evolving, only a few epidemiologic reports have described the uses and outcomes of ECMO. The aim of this study was to investigate the changes in utilization and survival rate in patients supported with ECMO for severe respiratory failure in Korea.MethodsThis was a multicenter study on consecutive patients who underwent ECMO across 16 hospitals in Korea. The records of all patients who required ECMO for acute respiratory failure between 2012 and 2015 were retrospectively reviewed, and the utilization of ECMO was analyzed over time.ResultsDuring the study period, 5552 patients received ECMO in Korea as a whole, and a total of 2472 patients received ECMO at the participating 16 hospitals. We analyzed 487 (19.7%) patients who received ECMO for respiratory failure. The number of ECMO procedures provided for respiratory failure increased from 104 to 153 during the study period. The in-hospital survival rate increased from 30.8% to 35.9%. The use of prone positioning increased from 6.8% to 49.0% (p < 0.001), and the use of neuromuscular blockers also increased from 28.2% to 58.2% (p < 0.001). Multiple regression analysis showed that old age (OR 1.038 (95% CI 1.022, 1.054)), use of corticosteroid (OR 2.251 (95% CI 1.153, 4.397)), continuous renal replacement therapy (OR 2.196 (95% CI 1.135, 4.247)), driving pressure (OR 1.072 (95% CI 1.031, 1.114)), and prolonged ECMO duration (OR 1.020 (95% CI 1.003, 1.038)) were associated with increased odds of mortality.ConclusionsUtilization of ECMO and survival rates of patients who received ECMO for respiratory failure increased over time in Korea. The use of pre-ECMO prone positioning and neuromuscular blockers also increased during the same period.

Dexamethasone provides benefits in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), although data regarding immunological profiles and viral clearance are limited. This study aimed to evaluate for differences in biomarkers among patients with severe COVID-19 who did and did not receive dexamethasone. We measured plasma biomarkers of lung epithelial/endothelial injury and inflammation in 31 patients with severe COVID-19 and in 13 controls. Changes in biomarkers and clinical parameters were compared during the 7-day period among COVID-19 patients, and also according to dexamethasone use. Thirty-two patients with severe COVID-19 who received mechanical ventilation (n = 6), high-flow nasal cannula (n = 11), and supplemental oxygen (n = 15) were analyzed. Relative to controls, patients with severe COVID-19 had significantly higher concentrations of biomarkers related to glycocalyx shedding (endocan and syndecan-1), endothelial injury (von Willebrand factor), and inflammation (soluble receptor for advanced glycation end-products [sRAGE] and interleukin-6). The 7-day decreases in biomarkers of endothelial injury (angiopoietin-2 [Ang-2] and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 [ICAM-1]) and sRAGE, but not in the biomarker of lung epithelial injury (surfactant protein D), were correlated with decreases in C-reactive protein and radiologic score at day 7. Twenty patients (63%) received dexamethasone, and the dexamethasone and non-dexamethasone groups differed in terms of disease severity. However, dexamethasone was associated marginally with increased SpO2/FiO2 and significantly with decreases in C-reactive protein and radiologic score after adjusting for baseline imbalances. Furthermore, the dexamethasone group exhibited a significant decrease in the concentrations of Ang-2, ICAM-1, soluble form of the Tie2 receptor (a biomarker of glycocalyx shedding), and sRAGE. Both groups exhibited a clinically insignificant increase in the cycle threshold value. Severe COVID-19 may be characterized by more severe endothelial injury and inflammation, and less severe lung epithelial injury. There is a possibility that dexamethasone improved severe COVID-19 and related endothelial injury without delaying viral clearance.

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) could increase both the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and experiencing poor outcomes. To compare the clinical outcomes between ICS users and nonusers, COVID-19-related claims in the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment database were evaluated. To evaluate susceptibility to COVID-19 among patients with COPD or asthma, a nested case-control study was performed using the same database. In total, 7341 patients were confirmed to have COVID-19, including 114 ICS users and 7227 nonusers. Among 5910 patients who were hospitalized, death was observed for 9% of ICS users and 4% of nonusers. However, this association was not significant when adjusted for age, sex, region, comorbidities, and hospital type (aOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.43–2.07). The case-control analysis of COPD compared 640 cases with COVID-19 to 2560 matched controls without COVID-19, and the analysis of asthma compared 90 cases with COVID-19 to 360 matched controls without COVID-19. Use of ICS was not significantly associated with COVID-19 among patients with COPD (aOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.46–2.25) or asthma (aOR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.13–1.17). Prior ICS use was not significantly associated with COVID-19 in patients with COPD or asthma, nor with clinical outcomes among patients with COVID-19.