Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Prone positioning during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors: Poon, Wynne Hsing
Ramanathan, Kollengode 
Ling, Ryan Ruiyang
Yang, Isabelle Xiaorui
Tan, Chuen Seng 
Schmidt, Matthieu
Shekar, Kiran
Keywords: Acute respiratory distress syndrome
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation
Prone positioning
Issue Date: 12-Aug-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central Ltd
Citation: Poon, Wynne Hsing, Ramanathan, Kollengode, Ling, Ryan Ruiyang, Yang, Isabelle Xiaorui, Tan, Chuen Seng, Schmidt, Matthieu, Shekar, Kiran (2021-08-12). Prone positioning during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Critical Care 25 (1) : 292. ScholarBank@NUS Repository.
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Abstract: Background: Prone positioning (PP) improves oxygenation and respiratory mechanics and is associated with lower mortality in patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Despite this, some patients develop refractory hypoxemia and hypercapnia requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) support and are usually cared for in supine position. The physiologic and outcome benefits of routine PP of patients during VV ECMO remains unclear. Hence, we conducted the systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the outcome benefits of PP for patients with ARDS being treated with VV ECMO. Methods: After registration with PROSPERO (CRD42020199723), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant studies that reported PP in more than 10 adult patients supported with VV ECMO from origin to 1 March 2021. Studies were reviewed for quality using appropriate Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. The random-effects model (DerSimonian and Laird) was used. The primary outcome of interest was cumulative survival. Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit length of stay (ICU LOS) and ECMO duration. Changes in arterial blood gas (ABG) values, ventilator mechanics and complication rates were also studied. Results: Of 812 potentially relevant publications, 12 studies (640 patients) met our inclusion criteria. Due to overlapping study populations, 11 studies were included in the final meta-analysis. Cumulative survival in patients that underwent PP was 57% (95% CI 41.9–71.4, high certainty). Patients that underwent PP had longer ICU LOS (+ 14.5 days, 95% CI 3.4–25.7, p = 0.01) and ECMO duration (+ 9.6 days, 95% CI 5.5–13.7, p < 0.0001). After PP, patients had significantly higher PaO2/FiO2 ratio, lower PaCO2 and reduced ventilator driving pressure, and no major complications were reported. Conclusions: PP during VV ECMO appears safe with a cumulative survival of 57% and may result in longer ECMO runs and ICU LOS. However, evidence from appropriately designed randomized trials is needed prior to widespread adoption of PP on VV ECMO. © 2021, The Author(s).
Source Title: Critical Care
ISSN: 1364-8535
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-021-03723-1
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1186_s13054-021-03723-1.pdf1.1 MBAdobe PDF




checked on Nov 29, 2022

Page view(s)

checked on Dec 1, 2022

Google ScholarTM



This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons