4 ms·

To be fair that pretty much describes all patient visits to the ICU. You're not there because things are fine and you'll be going home soon, you're there becau

To be fair that pretty much describes all patient visits to the ICU. You're not there because things are fine and you'll be going home soon, you're there because you're on death's door and the hospital folks want to keep you on this side of it.

crote 2y ago
The difference is that most other ICU patients are there with an (albeit slim) chance of recovery. Their body just needs time to heal, and the ICU provides the support necessary to do that. 75% of ICU patients are discharged from the hospital alive, and those who die often do so within the first few weeks. On the other hand, it seems some ECMO patients have zero chance of recovery. Their own organs have failed and aren't coming back, and a transplant doesn't seem to be an option. Sooner or later they will die in that room, most likely due to complications.
- kelseydh 2y ago
  It really seems similar to dialysis, except more expensive. As technology develops and cheaper devices can be made we can democratize access to these lifesaving devices. It's in the interests of both you and I to democratize access to technologies like ECMO.
  - nradov 2y ago
    I'm not convinced that is in my interest. Personally if I'm in a condition where I need ECMO and don't have a good chance to recover with a high quality of life then I'd rather just check out. (My preference only, not a choice that I want to impose on other patients.) While this technology is amazing, at a societal level I am skeptical whether widespread use is the right way to expend our limited resources. In the USA we could save a lot more life years by diverting some funding away from advanced life support and towards fixing our appalling maternal mortality rate. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2021/maternal-mortality-rates-2021.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2021...

crote 2y ago

The difference is that most other ICU patients are there with an (albeit slim) chance of recovery. Their body just needs time to heal, and the ICU provides the support necessary to do that. 75% of ICU patients are discharged from the hospital alive, and those who die often do so within the first few weeks. On the other hand, it seems some ECMO patients have zero chance of recovery. Their own organs have failed and aren't coming back, and a transplant doesn't seem to be an option. Sooner or later they will die in that room, most likely due to complications.

kelseydh 2y ago
It really seems similar to dialysis, except more expensive. As technology develops and cheaper devices can be made we can democratize access to these lifesaving devices. It's in the interests of both you and I to democratize access to technologies like ECMO.
- nradov 2y ago
  I'm not convinced that is in my interest. Personally if I'm in a condition where I need ECMO and don't have a good chance to recover with a high quality of life then I'd rather just check out. (My preference only, not a choice that I want to impose on other patients.) While this technology is amazing, at a societal level I am skeptical whether widespread use is the right way to expend our limited resources. In the USA we could save a lot more life years by diverting some funding away from advanced life support and towards fixing our appalling maternal mortality rate. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2021/maternal-mortality-rates-2021.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2021...