Abstract
Hemodynamic monitoring during veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A scoping review
Lorusso, R.
De Piero, M. E.
Mariani, S.
Ravaux, J. M.
Nardelli, P.
Jacobs, J. P.
Guarracino, F.
Patroniti, N.
van Bussel, B. C. T.
van der Horst, I. C. C.
Taccone, F. S.
Heinsar, S.
Shekar, K.
Yamashita, M. H.
Obonyo, N. G.
Ciullo, A. L.
Riera, J.
Dalton, H.
Wang, A.
Zaaqoq, A. M.
MacLaren, G.
Ramanathan, K.
Suen, J. Y.
Li Bassi, G.
Sato, K.
Fraser, J. F.
Peek, G. J.
Arora, R. C.
Covid, Critical Care Consortium Cardio ECMOCard
Perfusion. 2026; 4195S-109S
Permanent descriptor
https://doi.org/10.1177/02676591261429826BackgroundIn adult patients receiving veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV ECMO), cardiovascular performance plays a critical role in determining oxygen delivery, organ perfusion and safe titration of extracorporeal support. Despite the increasing VV ECMO use, contemporary guidance on hemodynamic monitoring remains limited and largely experience-based. This scoping review aimed to map available basic and advanced monitoring approaches and to identify current evidence gaps.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception until September 2025, along with reference lists of relevant articles. We included studies of any design reporting techniques, targets, or protocols for hemodynamic monitoring during VV ECMO.ResultsOf 465 records screened, 106 met inclusion criteria. No protocolized, evidence-based hemodynamic monitoring protocol specific to VV ECMO was identified. The available evidence was heterogeneous and mostly derived from physiologic studies or single-center observational cohorts. Findings were narratively synthesized across three domains: basic bedside monitoring, diagnostic/prognostic tools and advanced assessment of cardiopulmonary interaction. Across studies, no monitoring strategy consistently reduced time-to-wean or mortality. Observational data suggested that care bundles and multidisciplinary approaches may reduce complications. However, the risk of bias limits causal inference.ConclusionsDespite the complex interaction between native cardiovascular function and extracorporeal circulation, VV ECMO lacks consensus on evidence-based hemodynamic monitoring pathways. A pragmatic core monitoring bundle with tiered triggers for escalation is necessary. Future priorities include implementation models based on multidisciplinary teams, specific training, standardized bundles, and multicenter studies aimed to define right ventricular-centered targets to improve safety and clinical decision-making.
