4.5 Article

Severe Adenovirus Pneumonia Requiring Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support in Immunocompetent Children

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PEDIATRICS
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2020.00162

关键词

adenovirus pneumonia; extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; acute respiratory distress syndrome; survival rate; risk factors

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81170016, 81470214]
  2. Zhejiang Provincial Program for the Cultivation of High-Level Innovative Health Talents

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To highlight severe adenovirus pneumonia in immunocompetent patients by analysis of severe adenovirus pneumonia associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome in whom extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support is required. Methods:Pediatric patients with adenovirus pneumonia and ECMO supports in our hospital from February 2018 to May 2019 were retrospectively analyzed, and having 100 common adenovirus pneumonia children as a control. Results:A total of 8 patients, including 4 boys (50.0%), were enrolled. They were previously immunocompetent with a median age of 31 months. They were admitted as persistent fever and cough for more than one week. Median time prior to development of respiratory failure requiring intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation was 5 days. Venoarterial ECMO support as rescue ventilation was instituted after a median time of 24.5 h of conventional mechanical ventilator support. The median duration on ECMO support was 9 days and mechanical ventilation was 14 days, respectively. Six patients (75%) were recovered and 2 (25%) died. Median length of stay in ICU and hospital were 27.5 days and 47.5 days, respectively. Conclusion:The promising outcomes of our cases suggested that ECMO support for rescue ventilation may be considered when symptoms deteriorated in adenovirus pneumonia patients, and may improve outcome. However, sequelae of adenovirus pneumonia and ECMO-related complications should also be taken into account.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据