『How Much Heparin on ECMO? (RATE)』のカバーアート

How Much Heparin on ECMO? (RATE)

How Much Heparin on ECMO? (RATE)

無料で聴く

ポッドキャストの詳細を見る
概要
 Sixty-five per cent of patients on standard-dose heparin on ECMO had a severe bleed. Eleven per cent had a severe clot. And the heparin is there to prevent the eleven. This is a journal club on RATE, published in The Lancet in July 2026: the first adequately powered randomised trial of anticoagulation intensity on ECMO. Three hundred and thirty adults on veno-venous or veno-arterial ECMO across seven Dutch intensive care units were randomised to standard-dose unfractionated heparin (APTT 2–2.5 times baseline), low-dose unfractionated heparin (1.5–2 times baseline) or therapeutic subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin. We go through the question, the methods, the non-inferiority margin and what it actually means, and the results: both lower-intensity strategies were non-inferior, with no increase in thrombosis, no extra oxygenator changes, and a consistent but non-significant lean towards less bleeding and fewer deaths. Then the critique — a composite endpoint dominated by death and bleeding, wide confidence intervals, a narrow definition of thrombosis, unstandardised APTT reagents, two thirds of ECMO patients never enrolled, and the practical problems with subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin in shocked patients — and the strengths. Finally, what it means for us. Our unit already runs heparin at very low doses and reserves full anticoagulation for a specific indication such as pulmonary embolism; ECMO on its own isn't one. RATE draws the same line. And the practical point every resident should take away: blood products go through a peripheral drip, never the central line, because the oxygenator is downstream. Chapters (00:00) Cold open — sixty-five against eleven(00:50) Why the standard target was never tested(02:05) Trial design and patients(02:30) Exclusions — and what they tell you(03:00) The three arms(04:00) The composite outcome(04:45) Statistics and the non-inferiority margin(05:40) Who was enrolled(06:30) Did the arms separate?(07:30) Primary outcome(08:00) Bleeding, thrombosis and mortality(08:50) Oxygenators and transfusion(09:15) Crossovers, tracheostomy and subgroups(09:55) Cost(10:10) Critique(12:10) Strengths(12:30) What it means for our practice(13:20) Blood products: peripheral, not central(14:15) Wider implications and anti-Xa targets(14:45) Three rules Key takeaways The standard ECMO target — UFH to an APTT of 2–2.5 times baseline (about 60–75 s) — had never been tested in an adequately powered randomised trialRATE: 330 adults, VV and VA ECMO, seven Dutch ICUs; standard-dose UFH vs low-dose UFH (1.5–2 times baseline, about 45–60 s) vs therapeutic subcutaneous LMWHPrimary composite (severe bleeding, severe thromboembolism, 6-month mortality): 81% vs 72% vs 75% — both lower-intensity strategies non-inferiorSevere bleeding 65% vs 58% vs 59%; severe thromboembolism 11% vs 10% vs 9%; 6-month mortality 50% vs 42% vs 44% — all non-significantNo increase in oxygenator changes or transfusion with lower-intensity anticoagulationNon-inferior is not superior: the confidence intervals are wide, and subgroup signals are hypothesis-generating onlyThrombosis was probably undercounted, APTT reagents weren't standardised, and most ECMO patients in the participating units weren't enrolledSubcutaneous LMWH is less predictable in shocked, oedematous patients, accumulates in renal failure and can't be switched off quicklyECMO on its own is not an indication for full anticoagulation — reserve that for a specific indication such as PE, a mechanical mitral valve or intracardiac thrombusGive blood products through a peripheral drip, not the central line, to avoid sending a bolus of clotting factors straight onto the oxygenator References / further reading van Minnen O, Oude Lansink-Hartgring A, van Amstel RBE, et al. Standard-dose unfractionated heparin versus low-dose unfractionated heparin and low-molecular-weight heparin in extracorporeal life support (RATE): an open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2026; published online July 7. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(26)00851-2Martucci G, Giani M, Schmidt M, et al. Anticoagulation and bleeding during veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: insights from the PROTECMO study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2024; 209: 417–26McMichael ABV, Ryerson LM, Ratano D, et al. 2021 ELSO adult and pediatric anticoagulation guidelines. ASAIO J 2022; 68: 303–10 Follow the podcast Bluesky: @cardiacoutput.bsky.social X: @CardiacOutputMC If you've found this useful, a follow or a share genuinely helps other trainees find it — and do get in touch if there's a topic you'd like covered. This podcast is for medical education for healthcare professionals. It is not clinical advice.
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
まだレビューはありません