3 ms·
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
by crote 3y 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 3y agoIt 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 3y agoI'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...