Evidence Hub

Percutaneous debulking of tricuspid valve endocarditis in severe COVID-19 pneumonia after prolonged venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with right-ventricular support: a case series

Kara F. Morton, Brittain F. Heindl, S. McElwee, S. Litovsky, M. Ahmed, Stephen A. Clarkson

European Heart Journal: Case Reports, 2022

11 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Over the past 2 years, the utilization of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has increased. While supporting respiratory function, VV-ECMO requires large-bore indwelling venous cannulas, which risk bleeding and infections, including endocarditis. Case summary We describe two adults hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia who developed ARDS and right-ventricular failure, requiring VV-ECMO and ProtekDuo cannulation. After over 100 days with these devices, both patients developed tricuspid valve vegetations. Our first patient was decannulated from ECMO and discharged, but re-presented with a segmental pulmonary embolism and tricuspid mass. The Inari FlowTriver system was chosen to percutaneously remove both the tricuspid mass and pulmonary thromboembolism. Pathological examination of the mass demonstrated Candida albicans endocarditis in the setting of Candida fungemia. Our second patient developed a tricuspid valve vegetation which was also removed with the FlowTriever system. Pathological examination demonstrated endocarditis consistent with Pseudomonas aeruginosa in the setting of Pseudomonas bacteremia. Both patients experienced resolution of fungemia and bacteremia after percutaneous vegetation removal. After ECMO decannulation and percutaneous debulking, both patients experienced prolonged hospital stays for ventilator weaning and were…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free