Withdrawal of Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients With Capacity

被引:9
|
作者
Carey, Matthew R. [1 ]
Tong, Wendy [2 ]
Godfrey, Sarah [3 ]
Takeda, Koji [4 ]
Nakagawa, Shunichi [5 ]
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Dept Med, Irving Med Ctr, 601 West 168th St,Suite 37-38, New York, NY 10032 USA
[2] Columbia Univ, Vagelos Coll Phys & Surg, New York, NY USA
[3] Univ Texas Southwestern Med Ctr Dallas, Div Cardiol, Dept Med, Dallas, TX 75390 USA
[4] Columbia Univ, Dept Surg, Irving Med Ctr, Div Cardiothorac Surg, New York, NY USA
[5] Columbia Univ, Dept Med, Irving Med Ctr, Adult Palliat Care Serv, New York, NY USA
关键词
Withdrawal of life support; mechanical circulatory support; decision-making; end-of-life; capacity; palliative care; EXTRACORPOREAL MEMBRANE-OXYGENATION; CARDIOGENIC-SHOCK; PALLIATIVE CARE; MYOCARDIAL-INFARCTION; BRIDGE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2021.10.007
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Context. Little is known about the real-time decision-making process of patients with capacity to choose withdrawal of temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Objectives. To assess how withdrawal of temporary MCS occurs when patients possess the capacity to make this decision themselves. Methods. This retrospective case series included adults supported by CentriMag Acute Circulatory Support or Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation from February 2, 2007 to May 27, 2020 at a tertiary academic medical center who possessed capacity to participate in end-of-life discussions. Authors performed chart review to determine times between "initiation of temporary MCS," "determination of 'bridge to nowhere,'" "patient expressing desire to withdraw," "agreement to withdraw," "withdrawal," and "death," as well as reasons for withdrawal and the role of ethics, psychiatry, and palliative care. Results. A total of 796 individuals were included. MCS was withdrawn in 178 (22.4%) of cases. Six of these 178 patients (3.4%) possessed the capacity to decide to withdraw MCS. Time between "patient expressing desire to withdraw" and "agree-ment to withdraw" ranged from 0 to 3 days; time between "agreement to withdraw" and "withdrawal" ranged from 0 to 6 days. Common reasons for withdrawal include perceived decline in quality of life or low probability of recovery. Ethics and psychiatry were consulted in 3 of 6 cases and palliative care in 5 of 6 cases. Conclusion. While it is rare for patients on MCS to request withdrawal, such cases provide insight into reasons for withdrawal and the important roles of multidisciplinary teams in helping patients and families through end-of-life decision-making. (C) 2021 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:387 / 394
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Characteristics and Impact of Bloodstream Infections in Cardiogenic Shock Patients on Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support
    Nair, Raunak M.
    Kumar, Sachin
    Saleem, Talha
    Chawla, Sanchit
    Vural, Adil
    Abdelghaffar, Bahaa
    Lee, Ran
    Higgins, Andrew
    Cremer, Paul
    Rampersad, Penelope
    Menon, Venu
    JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2022, 15 (20) : 2110 - 2112
  • [42] Bloodstream Infection in Pre-Heart Transplant Patients on Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support
    Eichenberger, E.
    Satola, S.
    Gupta, D.
    Pouch, S.
    JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION, 2023, 42 (04): : S126 - S127
  • [43] Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID-19 patients: A systematic review of literature
    Mariani, Silvia
    De Piero, Maria Elena
    Ravaux, Justine M.
    Saelmans, Alexander
    Kawczynski, Michal J.
    van Bussel, Bas C. T.
    Di Mauro, Michele
    Willers, Anne
    Swol, Justyna
    Kowalewski, Mariusz
    Li, Tong
    Delnoij, Thijs S. R.
    van Der Horst, Iwan C. C.
    Maessen, Jos
    Lorusso, Roberto
    ARTIFICIAL ORGANS, 2022, 46 (07) : 1249 - 1267
  • [44] Axillary Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support to Bridge Cardiogenic Shock Patients to Heart Transplantation
    Aleman, R. A.
    Napoli, F. A.
    Baran, D. A.
    Velez, M. A.
    Estep, J. A.
    Sheffield, C. A.
    Navia, J. L.
    Brozzi, N.
    JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION, 2024, 43 (04): : S281 - S281
  • [45] Risk Factors of Mortality in Patients on Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support Undergoing Heart Transplant
    Memon, Rahat A.
    Dhaliwal, Jasninder S.
    Ravalani, Abhimanyu
    Ramphul, Kamleshun
    Kumar, Nomesh
    Sombans, Shaheen
    Ramphul, Yogeshwaree
    Lohana, Petras
    CIRCULATION, 2023, 148
  • [46] Recognizing patients as candidates for temporary mechanical circulatory support along the spectrum of cardiogenic shock
    Montisci, Andrea
    Panoulas, Vasileios
    Chieffo, Alaide
    Skurk, Carsten
    Schaefer, Andreas
    Werner, Nikos
    Baldetti, Luca
    D'Ettore, Nicoletta
    Pappalardo, Federico
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL SUPPLEMENTS, 2023, 25 : I3 - I10
  • [47] Outcomes and Associated Costs With Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock
    Malik, Aroosa
    Basu, Tanima
    Shore, Supriya
    CIRCULATION, 2021, 144
  • [48] Clinical experience with temporary right ventricular mechanical circulatory support
    Bhama, Jay K.
    Bansal, Utsav
    Winger, Daniel G.
    Teuteberg, Jeffrey J.
    Bermudez, Christian
    Kormos, Robert L.
    Bansal, Aditya
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2018, 156 (05): : 1885 - 1891
  • [49] Temporary Percutaneous Mechanical Circulatory Support in Advanced Heart Failure
    Brown, Jessica L.
    Estep, Jerry D.
    HEART FAILURE CLINICS, 2016, 12 (03) : 385 - +
  • [50] Temporary Mechanical Circulatory Support for Acute Right Ventricular Failure
    Cheung, A.
    White, C. W.
    Davis, M.
    Freed, D. H.
    JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION, 2013, 32 (04): : S177 - S177