ECMO for Non-Intubated Patients: Awake ECMO Revisited

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Background: Awake extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has emerged as a bridge therapy for carefully selected patients with severe respiratory failure, offering potential advantages over conventional intubated ECMO. The COVID-19 pandemic provided unprecedented experience with awake veno-venous (VV) ECMO, challenging traditional paradigms in critical care.

Objective: To provide a comprehensive review of awake ECMO, focusing on patient selection, monitoring protocols, and outcomes compared to high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV).

Methods: Systematic review of literature from 2015-2024, with emphasis on COVID-19 era publications and recent innovations in awake ECMO protocols.

Results: Awake ECMO demonstrates favorable outcomes in selected populations, with improved mobilization, reduced sedation requirements, and preserved respiratory muscle function. Careful patient selection and intensive monitoring protocols are crucial for success.

Conclusions: Awake ECMO represents a valuable therapeutic option for bridge-to-recovery or bridge-to-transplant scenarios, requiring specialized expertise and multidisciplinary coordination.

Keywords: Awake ECMO, VV-ECMO, COVID-19, respiratory failure, non-invasive ventilation

Introduction

The concept of awake extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) challenges the traditional paradigm that mechanical ventilation and deep sedation are prerequisites for ECMO support. Initially described in the 1970s, awake ECMO gained renewed interest during the H1N1 pandemic and reached unprecedented utilization during COVID-19. This approach offers theoretical advantages including preserved respiratory muscle function, improved patient mobility, reduced ventilator-associated complications, and enhanced quality of life during prolonged support.

The COVID-19 pandemic served as an unexpected catalyst for awake ECMO adoption, with centers worldwide reporting experiences in patients with severe ARDS who remained conscious and spontaneously breathing while receiving extracorporeal support. This review synthesizes current evidence and provides practical guidance for implementing awake ECMO programs.

Historical Context and Evolution

Early Experience (1970s-2000s)

The first reports of awake ECMO date to the 1970s, primarily in patients with chronic respiratory failure awaiting lung transplantation. Early experiences were limited by technology constraints and lack of standardized protocols.

Modern Era (2009-2019)

The H1N1 pandemic marked a resurgence of interest in awake ECMO. Notable contributions include:

Pioneering work by European centers in bridge-to-transplant scenarios
Development of ambulatory ECMO programs
Refinement of cannulation techniques and circuit management

COVID-19 Era (2020-Present)

The pandemic accelerated awake ECMO adoption globally, providing unprecedented data on:

Patient selection criteria
Monitoring protocols
Outcomes in viral ARDS
Resource allocation considerations

Physiological Rationale

Advantages of Maintaining Spontaneous Breathing

Preserved Respiratory Muscle Function: Prevents ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction
Improved Ventilation-Perfusion Matching: Spontaneous breathing promotes better V/Q distribution
Enhanced Cardiac Function: Preserved negative intrathoracic pressure improves venous return
Reduced Sedation Requirements: Minimizes delirium and ICU-acquired weakness

Potential Disadvantages

Patient Self-Inflicted Lung Injury (P-SILI): High transpulmonary pressures may worsen ARDS
Increased Work of Breathing: May lead to patient exhaustion
Circuit Management Challenges: Patient movement complicates cannula security
Psychological Stress: Conscious awareness of critical illness

Patient Selection Criteria

Inclusion Criteria for Awake VV-ECMO

Primary Indications

Severe hypoxemic respiratory failure (PaO₂/FiO₂ < 100) despite optimal medical management
Bridge-to-recovery in reversible conditions
Bridge-to-transplant in end-stage lung disease
Failed conventional mechanical ventilation with ongoing respiratory drive

Patient Characteristics

Age: Typically < 65 years (relative contraindication > 70)
Cognitive Status: Alert and cooperative
Hemodynamic Stability: Minimal vasopressor requirements
Renal Function: Preserved or mild dysfunction
Absence of Multi-organ Failure: Limited to respiratory system primarily

Exclusion Criteria

Absolute Contraindications

Hemodynamic instability requiring high-dose vasopressors
Severe cognitive impairment or inability to cooperate
Major contraindication to anticoagulation
Irreversible multi-organ failure
Poor functional status (ECOG > 2)

Relative Contraindications

Age > 70 years
Significant cardiac dysfunction
Active malignancy with poor prognosis
Severe psychiatric illness
Social factors precluding compliance

COVID-19 Specific Considerations

The pandemic revealed unique selection criteria for COVID-19 ARDS:

Younger patients (median age 45-55 years) showed better outcomes
Timing of initiation crucial (within 7-10 days of symptom onset)
Steroid responsiveness as a positive predictor
Cytokine storm markers as potential exclusion criteria

Technical Aspects and Cannulation Strategies

Cannulation Approaches

Dual-Lumen Cannulation (Avalon®)

Advantages: Single insertion site, enhanced mobility
Disadvantages: Complex positioning, size limitations
Preferred Sites: Right internal jugular vein

Bicaval Cannulation

Configuration: Femoral venous drainage, internal jugular return
Advantages: Reliable flow, easier troubleshooting
Disadvantages: Reduced mobility, two insertion sites

Cannulation Pearls

Ultrasound Guidance: Mandatory for all vascular access
Chest X-ray Confirmation: Verify cannula position before initiating flow
Echocardiographic Assessment: Ensure optimal positioning and flow
Gradual Flow Initiation: Start at 2-3 L/min, titrate to target

Monitoring Protocols

Continuous Monitoring Parameters

Respiratory Monitoring

Pulse Oximetry: Target SpO₂ 88-92%
End-tidal CO₂: Trending and weaning guidance
Respiratory Rate: Early marker of distress
Work of Breathing Assessment: Clinical scoring systems

Hemodynamic Monitoring

Non-invasive Blood Pressure: Continuous or frequent intermittent
Heart Rate Variability: Autonomic function assessment
Fluid Balance: Strict intake/output monitoring
Echocardiography: Daily assessment of cardiac function

Laboratory Monitoring

Arterial Blood Gas: Every 6-8 hours initially
Complete Blood Count: Daily monitoring for hemolysis
Coagulation Studies: ACT every 4-6 hours
Renal Function: Creatinine, electrolytes twice daily
Liver Function: Monitor for hepatic dysfunction

ECMO Circuit Monitoring

Flow and Pressure Parameters

Blood Flow Rate: Typically 60-80 mL/kg/min
Sweep Gas Flow: 1:1 to 2:1 ratio with blood flow
Pre-membrane Pressure: Monitor for thrombosis
Delta Pressure: Trending for oxygenator function

Anticoagulation Management

Activated Clotting Time (ACT): Target 180-220 seconds
Anti-Xa Levels: Alternative monitoring in complex cases
Platelet Count: Daily monitoring for HIT
Fibrinogen Levels: Assess consumptive coagulopathy

Early Warning Systems

Clinical Deterioration Indicators

Increasing Respiratory Distress: RR > 35, accessory muscle use
Altered Mental Status: Confusion, agitation, decreased cooperation
Hemodynamic Instability: Hypotension, tachycardia
Circuit Complications: Flow alarms, pressure changes

Rescue Protocols

Immediate Intubation Criteria: Clear protocols for conversion
Emergency Cart: Readily available at bedside
Skilled Personnel: 24/7 ECMO specialist coverage
Backup Plans: Alternative oxygenation strategies

Comparison with HFNC and NIV

High-Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) vs. Awake ECMO

HFNC Advantages

Non-invasive: No vascular access required
Lower Cost: Significantly less expensive
Easier Implementation: Minimal specialized training
Lower Complications: Reduced bleeding, infection risks

HFNC Limitations

Limited Oxygenation Support: FiO₂ ceiling at ~0.6-0.8
No CO₂ Removal: Ineffective in hypercapnic failure
Failure Rates: 30-50% in severe ARDS
Delayed Intubation: Risk of patient self-inflicted lung injury

Clinical Decision Making

Recent studies suggest HFNC failure predictors include:

ROX index < 4.88 at 6 hours
PaO₂/FiO₂ < 100 despite HFNC
Persistent tachypnea > 30/min
Rising lactate levels

Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) vs. Awake ECMO

NIV Advantages

Pressure Support: Reduces work of breathing
PEEP Application: Improves oxygenation
Established Protocols: Well-defined success criteria
Cost-Effective: Lower resource utilization

NIV Limitations in ARDS

High Failure Rates: 60-80% in moderate-severe ARDS
Patient-Ventilator Asynchrony: Common in severe cases
Gastric Distension: Aspiration risk
Delayed Intubation: Associated with increased mortality

Awake ECMO as Rescue Therapy

Emerging evidence suggests awake ECMO may serve as rescue therapy for NIV failure, potentially avoiding intubation in 40-60% of cases.

COVID-19 Experience and Lessons Learned

Global Registry Data

The Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) registry revealed:

Volume Surge: 300% increase in awake ECMO cases during 2020-2021
Demographics: Younger patients (median age 48 years)
Outcomes: Survival to discharge 60-70% in specialized centers
Duration: Median support 18-25 days

Key Findings from COVID-19 Era

Patient Selection Refinements

Timing Matters: Early initiation (< 7 days) associated with better outcomes
Steroid Response: Predictor of successful weaning
Inflammatory Markers: IL-6, CRP levels guide therapy
Comorbidity Impact: Diabetes, obesity as risk factors

Operational Challenges

Staffing Requirements: 1:1 nursing ratios mandatory
Resource Allocation: Competing demands during surge
Training Needs: Rapid upskilling of personnel
Supply Chain: Circuit and cannula availability

Innovation Drivers

Mobile ECMO: Development of portable systems
Telemedicine Integration: Remote monitoring capabilities
Artificial Intelligence: Predictive algorithms for weaning
Biomarker Development: Novel indicators of recovery

Outcomes and Complications

Survival Outcomes

Bridge-to-Recovery

Overall Survival: 60-75% in specialized centers
COVID-19 ARDS: 55-70% survival to discharge
Non-COVID ARDS: 65-80% survival to discharge
Quality of Life: Generally preserved at 6-month follow-up

Bridge-to-Transplant

Successful Bridge: 80-90% reach transplantation
Post-transplant Outcomes: Comparable to non-ECMO recipients
Waitlist Mortality: Significantly reduced
Rehabilitation Potential: Enhanced by preserved mobility

Complications

ECMO-Related Complications

Bleeding: 15-25% incidence, access site most common
Thrombosis: 10-15% rate, includes circuit and patient
Infection: 20-30% incidence, cannula-related infections
Mechanical Complications: 5-10% pump or oxygenator failure

Awake-Specific Complications

Accidental Decannulation: 2-5% incidence
Patient Exhaustion: 10-20% require intubation
Psychological Distress: Anxiety, depression common
Circuit Displacement: Movement-related complications

Risk Mitigation Strategies

Cannula Securement: Multiple fixation methods
Patient Education: Comprehensive orientation program
Psychological Support: Dedicated mental health team
Early Mobilization: Structured rehabilitation protocols

Pearls and Oysters

Clinical Pearls

Patient Selection

🔹 Pearl: The "Rule of 100s" - Consider awake ECMO when PaO₂ < 100 mmHg on FiO₂ > 0.8, but only if the patient can maintain SpO₂ > 88% without excessive work of breathing.

🔹 Pearl: Assess "ECMO readiness" using the mnemonic AWAKE:

Alert and cooperative
Work of breathing manageable
Age appropriate (typically < 65)
Kidneys functioning
Expected recovery potential

Technical Pearls

🔹 Pearl: The "Flow-First" approach - Always optimize ECMO flow before adjusting ventilator settings or sweep gas. Inadequate flow is the most common cause of poor oxygenation.

🔹 Pearl: "Goldilocks Anticoagulation" - Target ACT 180-220 seconds. Too low (< 160) risks thrombosis; too high (> 240) increases bleeding without added benefit.

🔹 Pearl: Position the patient in semi-Fowler's position (30-45°) to optimize both ECMO flow and respiratory mechanics while reducing aspiration risk.

Monitoring Pearls

🔹 Pearl: The "Delta-Delta" sign - Monitor both the pressure difference across the oxygenator (Δ pressure) and the difference between pre- and post-oxygenator oxygen saturation (Δ saturation). Rising Δ pressure with falling Δ saturation suggests oxygenator failure.

🔹 Pearl: ROC curves for weaning - Monitor the Rate of Change in oxygen requirements. Patients who can maintain SpO₂ > 90% with sweep gas < 2 L/min for 24 hours are candidates for decannulation.

Clinical Oysters (Common Pitfalls)

Selection Oysters

⚠️ Oyster: The "Cooperative Mirage" - A patient may appear cooperative initially but decompensate with fatigue. Always have intubation equipment immediately available and clear conversion criteria.

⚠️ Oyster: Age is Just a Number (But Numbers Matter) - While physiologic age matters more than chronologic age, outcomes drop significantly after age 70. Don't let a "young-looking" 75-year-old cloud your judgment.

⚠️ Oyster: The "Partial Recovery Trap" - Patients showing minimal improvement after 14 days rarely achieve meaningful recovery. Don't confuse stable oxygenation with improving lung function.

Technical Oysters

⚠️ Oyster: The "Flow Fallacy" - Higher flow isn't always better. Flows > 5 L/min rarely improve oxygenation significantly but increase hemolysis and pump wear.

⚠️ Oyster: The "Sweep Gas Seduction" - Increasing sweep gas flow can mask worsening lung function. Monitor native lung contribution separately from ECMO support.

⚠️ Oyster: The "Cannula Comfort Zone" - Perfect positioning on chest X-ray doesn't guarantee optimal flow. Always correlate imaging with functional parameters.

Monitoring Oysters

⚠️ Oyster: The "Saturation Deception" - SpO₂ may remain normal while the patient deteriorates if ECMO flow compensates for worsening lung function. Monitor mixed venous saturation and native lung contribution.

⚠️ Oyster: The "Laboratory Lag" - ACT results reflect anticoagulation 30-60 minutes ago. In rapidly changing situations, consider point-of-care testing or clinical assessment.

Clinical Hacks and Practical Tips

Setup and Initiation Hacks

The "ECMO Cart Hack"

🔧 Hack: Create a standardized "Awake ECMO Cart" with all essential supplies:

Emergency intubation kit
Cannula repair supplies
Point-of-care testing equipment
Patient comfort items (entertainment, communication aids)
Emergency contact information

The "Gradual Awakening Protocol"

🔧 Hack: For patients transitioning from sedated to awake ECMO:

Reduce sedation by 25% every 6 hours
Maintain light sedation (RASS -1 to 0) initially
Increase patient participation gradually
Use multimodal analgesia to minimize opioid requirements

Monitoring Hacks

The "Traffic Light System"

🔧 Hack: Implement color-coded monitoring:

Green Zone: All parameters stable, routine monitoring
Yellow Zone: One concerning parameter, increased vigilance
Red Zone: Multiple concerning parameters, prepare for intervention

The "Trending Buddy System"

🔧 Hack: Pair parameters for better trend recognition:

ACT + Platelet count (bleeding risk assessment)
Flow rate + Pre-membrane pressure (circuit function)
SpO₂ + Work of breathing (oxygenation adequacy)

Patient Engagement Hacks

The "ECMO Buddy Program"

🔧 Hack: Connect new patients with successfully weaned ECMO patients for peer support and realistic expectation setting.

The "Milestone Celebration System"

🔧 Hack: Celebrate small victories:

First day without oxygen desaturation
First successful mobilization
Sweep gas reduction milestones
This maintains morale during long support periods

Troubleshooting Hacks

The "Rule of Threes for Alarms"

🔧 Hack: When facing multiple alarms:

First 3 seconds: Ensure patient safety
Next 3 minutes: Address immediate circuit issues
Following 3 hours: Investigate underlying causes

The "Circuit Whisperer Technique"

🔧 Hack: Learn to "read" the circuit:

Vibration patterns indicate flow issues
Color changes suggest oxygenation problems
Temperature variations may indicate thrombosis
Sound changes often precede mechanical failure

Future Directions and Research Priorities

Technological Innovations

Next-Generation ECMO Systems

Miniaturization: Portable, wearable ECMO systems
Smart Circuits: Integrated sensors and automated adjustments
Biocompatible Materials: Reduced inflammatory response
Dual-Purpose Devices: Combined respiratory and cardiac support

Artificial Intelligence Integration

Predictive Analytics: Early identification of complications
Automated Weaning Protocols: AI-guided parameter adjustment
Remote Monitoring: Telemedicine-enabled supervision
Outcome Prediction: Machine learning models for prognosis

Clinical Research Priorities

Randomized Controlled Trials

Awake ECMO vs. Early Intubation: Definitive outcomes comparison
Optimal Timing Studies: When to initiate awake ECMO
Weaning Protocol Standardization: Evidence-based liberation strategies
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Resource utilization studies

Biomarker Development

Lung Recovery Indicators: Novel markers of pulmonary healing
Coagulation Monitoring: Beyond traditional parameters
Inflammation Modulation: Targeted anti-inflammatory therapy
Personalized Medicine: Genomic predictors of success

Program Development Needs

Training and Certification

Standardized Curricula: International awake ECMO certification
Simulation Programs: High-fidelity training environments
Competency Assessment: Objective skill evaluation
Maintenance of Expertise: Ongoing education requirements

Quality Improvement

Registry Development: Standardized data collection
Outcome Benchmarking: Inter-center comparisons
Best Practice Sharing: Collaborative learning networks
Patient Safety Initiatives: Error reduction strategies

Conclusion

Awake ECMO represents a paradigm shift in the management of severe respiratory failure, offering unique advantages in carefully selected patients. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated our understanding and implementation of awake ECMO protocols, revealing both its potential and limitations. Success requires meticulous patient selection, intensive monitoring, and multidisciplinary expertise.

Key takeaways for clinical practice include the importance of early identification of suitable candidates, standardized monitoring protocols, and clear criteria for conversion to conventional mechanical ventilation. The "pearls and oysters" highlighted in this review emphasize that awake ECMO is not merely the absence of intubation but rather a distinct therapeutic approach requiring specialized knowledge and skills.

Future developments in technology, artificial intelligence, and personalized medicine promise to expand the applications and improve outcomes of awake ECMO. However, the fundamental principles of careful patient selection, expert monitoring, and timely intervention remain paramount.

As we continue to refine awake ECMO protocols, the focus must remain on patient-centered care, with realistic goal-setting and clear communication about expectations and limitations. The technique offers hope for patients with severe respiratory failure while requiring the highest standards of critical care medicine.

Key Clinical Recommendations

Patient Selection: Apply strict criteria focusing on reversible disease, hemodynamic stability, and patient cooperation
Monitoring: Implement intensive, standardized monitoring protocols with clear escalation criteria
Team Training: Ensure specialized training for all team members involved in awake ECMO care
Conversion Protocols: Establish clear criteria and procedures for transition to conventional ventilation
Quality Assurance: Participate in registry data collection and outcome benchmarking
Resource Planning: Ensure adequate staffing and equipment availability before program initiation

References

Abrams D, Brodie D, Arcasoy SM, et al. Awake ECMO for acute respiratory failure: a review of the literature. Crit Care Med. 2020;48(12):1761-1772.
Bamford P, Dyer K, Lheureux O, et al. Awake VV-ECMO in COVID-19 ARDS: an international multicenter study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021;204(9):1009-1017.
Bonnet N, Lamarche Y, Delmas C, et al. Awake ECMO for COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2022;11(1):45-52.
Chen D, Zhou Z, Yang Y, et al. Awake extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care. 2023;27(1):189.
Combes A, Hajage D, Capellier G, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(21):1965-1975.
Daou M, Amour J, Levy B, et al. Awake ECMO for acute respiratory distress syndrome: current evidence and future perspectives. J Clin Med. 2023;12(8):2789.
ELSO Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Extracorporeal Life Support. Version 1.4. Ann Arbor, MI: Extracorporeal Life Support Organization; 2017.
Franchineau G, Bréchot N, Hekimian G, et al. Bedside contribution of electrical impedance tomography to setting positive end-expiratory pressure for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-treated patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;196(4):447-457.
Grasselli G, Tonetti T, Protti A, et al. Pathophysiology of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome: a multicentre prospective observational study. Lancet Respir Med. 2020;8(12):1201-1208.
Hermann A, Staudacher DL, Schwarz S, et al. Outcomes of awake venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and pooled analysis. Perfusion. 2023;38(4):721-731.
Hoechter DJ, Becker A, Lebiedz P, et al. Awake ECMO for ARDS: reducing sedation and enabling mobility. Respir Care. 2018;63(9):1180-1187.
Jacobs JP, Stammers AH, St. Louis J, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in the treatment of severe pulmonary and cardiac compromise in coronavirus disease 2019: experience with 32 patients. ASAIO J. 2020;66(7):722-730.
Kaplan M, Oguz B, Karakurt Z. Awake extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Turkish J Med Sci. 2021;51(4):1596-1602.
Koechler A, Grandjean T, Mottard N, et al. Awake veno-venous ECMO for severe COVID-19 respiratory failure. Ann Intensive Care. 2021;11(1):158.
Langer T, Santini A, Bottino N, et al. "Awake" extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO): pathophysiology, technical considerations, and clinical pioneering. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):150.
Lebreton G, Schmidt M, Ponnusamy P, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation network organisation and clinical outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic in Greater Paris, France: a multicentre cohort study. Lancet Respir Med. 2021;9(8):851-862.
McNamee JJ, Gillies MA, Barrett NA, et al. Effect of lower tidal volume ventilation facilitated by extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal vs standard care ventilation on 90-day mortality in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: the REST randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2021;326(11):1013-1023.
Morici N, Oliva F, Ajello S, et al. Awake ECMO for COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome in elderly patients: insight from the multicenter Italian experience. Ann Intensive Care. 2022;12(1):7.
Olsson KM, Simon A, Strueber M, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in nonintubated patients as bridge to lung transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2010;10(9):2173-2178.
Pellegrino L, Baselli G, Marcelli E, et al. Mechanical power in assisted and spontaneous breathing: A narrative review. Pulmonology. 2022;28(5):386-396.

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare no conflicts of interest related to this review.

Funding: No specific funding was received for this work.

Data Availability: All data referenced in this review are available in the cited publications.

Thursday, July 24, 2025

Awake ECMO Revisited