The clinical respiratory journal · 2026
Practice and Perceptions on Extracorporeal Carbon Dioxide Removal in the Current Era: A Multinational Survey.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tiruvoipati Ravindranath, Wang Andrew, Cove Matthew E, Do Son, Huynh QuangDai, Ching Simon Sin Wai
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) is a type of partial extracorporeal respiratory support with potential to reduce lung injury in patients with hypercapnic respiratory failure. We aimed to study the current practice and perceptions of ECCO2R and the need for an ECCO2R registry.
METHODS: A multinational survey was conducted among clinicians who have published clinical studies on ECCO2R or have used ECCO2R within the last 5 years in Europe, Asia, Oceania and the United States.
RESULTS: Seventy responses from 140 requests (response rate: 50%) were received from physicians across all targeted regions. ECCO2R is reported to be used mainly for ARDS (46%) management, followed by asthma (18%) and COPD (15%). Eighty-five percent of the participants reported low case volumes (0-10 cases per year). Variations in the practice of ECCO2R were evident, including triggers for initiating ECCO2R, devices used, access catheter type and size, targeted blood flow rates and monitoring of anticoagulation. The most common barriers to wider use of ECCO2R included lack of evidence, followed by the device's costs and operational complexity. Eighty-four percent (48/57) of the respondents thought an ECCO2R registry would be useful, and 98% (47/48) of the respondents reported that they would be willing to contribute to a dedicated ECCO2R registry.
CONCLUSION: ECCO2R practices varied considerably, but most respondents agreed on the usefulness of a dedicated ECCO2R registry. Practice variations may be associated with suboptimal outcomes. ECCO2R quality indicators are needed to optimise clinical outcomes and resource utilisation.
METHODS: A multinational survey was conducted among clinicians who have published clinical studies on ECCO2R or have used ECCO2R within the last 5 years in Europe, Asia, Oceania and the United States.
RESULTS: Seventy responses from 140 requests (response rate: 50%) were received from physicians across all targeted regions. ECCO2R is reported to be used mainly for ARDS (46%) management, followed by asthma (18%) and COPD (15%). Eighty-five percent of the participants reported low case volumes (0-10 cases per year). Variations in the practice of ECCO2R were evident, including triggers for initiating ECCO2R, devices used, access catheter type and size, targeted blood flow rates and monitoring of anticoagulation. The most common barriers to wider use of ECCO2R included lack of evidence, followed by the device's costs and operational complexity. Eighty-four percent (48/57) of the respondents thought an ECCO2R registry would be useful, and 98% (47/48) of the respondents reported that they would be willing to contribute to a dedicated ECCO2R registry.
CONCLUSION: ECCO2R practices varied considerably, but most respondents agreed on the usefulness of a dedicated ECCO2R registry. Practice variations may be associated with suboptimal outcomes. ECCO2R quality indicators are needed to optimise clinical outcomes and resource utilisation.