Complications Associated With Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation—What Can Go Wrong?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Despite increasing use and promising outcomes, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) introduces the risk of a number of complications across the spectrum of ECMO care. This narrative review describes the variety of short- and long-term complications that can occur during treatment with ECMO and how patient selection and management decisions may influence the risk of these complications. DATA SOURCES: English language articles were identified in PubMed using phrases related to V-V ECMO, acute respiratory distress syndrome, severe respiratory failure, and complications. STUDY SELECTION: Original research, review articles, commentaries, and published guidelines from the Extracorporeal Life support Organization were considered. DATA EXTRACTION: Data from relevant literature were identified, reviewed, and integrated into a concise narrative review. DATA SYNTHESIS: Selecting patients for V-V ECMO exposes the patient to a number of complications. Adequate knowledge of these risks is needed to weigh them against the anticipated benefit of treatment. Timing of ECMO initiation and transfer to centers capable of providing ECMO affect patient outcomes. Choosing a configuration that insufficiently addresses the patient's physiologic deficit leads to consequences of inadequate physiologic support. Suboptimal mechanical ventilator management during ECMO may lead to worsening lung injury, delayed lung recovery, or ventilator-associated pneumonia. Premature decannulation from ECMO as lungs recover can lead to clinical worsening, and delayed decannulation can prolong exposure to complications unnecessarily. Short-term complications include bleeding, thrombosis, and hemolysis, renal and neurologic injury, concomitant infections, and technical and mechanical problems. Long-term complications reflect the physical, functional, and neurologic sequelae of critical illness. ECMO can introduce ethical and emotional challenges, particularly when bridging strategies fail. CONCLUSIONS: V-V ECMO is associated with a number of complications. ECMO selection, timing of initiation, and management decisions impact the presence and severity of these potential harms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.087 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".