Amerikanische Gesellschaft für Hirudotherapie

Alternate and Emerging Anticoagulation Strategies for Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Scoping Review

Review published in Journal of clinical medicine (2026)

Zuletzt aktualisiert: June 18, 2026Geprüft von: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Narrative reviewArzneimittelentwicklungKumar AP et al. · Journal of clinical medicine, 2026

Abstract

Background: Unfractionated heparin (UFH) remains the standard anticoagulant for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), despite complications, such as heparin resistance, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, bleeding and variable pharmacokinetics. This has prompted the search for alternative and novel anticoagulation strategies, including pharmacologic agents, circuit modifications, and monitoring approaches. This scoping review aimed to map the breadth and characteristics of evidence on ECMO anticoagulation strategies beyond UFH. Methods: A comprehensive search of peer-reviewed and gray literature was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane, Clinical Trials, WHO Trials Registry, and conference abstracts through manual searches in key journals. Clinical, pre-clinical, and gray literature studies evaluating pharmacologic agents, anticoagulation-free or heparin-sparing, biocompatible circuits, and monitoring innovations were included. Data were charted and synthesized descriptively to identify trends, gaps, and emerging directions. Results: A total of 269 records were included. Evidence was highly heterogeneous among study designs, populations, ECMO modalities, and outcome definitions. Most clinical studies were retrospective cohorts and adult-centered, with limited multicenter randomized controlled trials and underrepresentation of neonatal and pediatric populations. Direct thrombin inhibitors were frequently studied and clinically implemented alternatives to UFH. Other agents, including nafamostat mesylate, prostaglandin E1, and factor pathway inhibitors remain early in clinical investigation. Anticoagulation-free strategies and biocompatible circuit technologies were mostly supported through pre-clinical and single-center studies. Monitoring and modeling innovations, like TEG, ROTEM, real-time imaging, and machine learning, are quickly emerging. Conclusions: ECMO anticoagulation is transitioning from UFH reliance toward diversified and personalized strategies. Future research should prioritize multicenter randomized controlled trials, standardize protocols, expand to neonatal and pediatric investigation, and integrate strategies.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeJournal ArticleReview

Zusammenfassung

Alternate and Emerging Anticoagulation Strategies for Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Scoping Review.

Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist

This scoping review mapped 269 records on ECMO anticoagulation strategies beyond UFH, finding that DTIs were frequently studied and clinically implemented alternatives, while other agents (nafamostat mesylate, prostaglandin E1, factor pathway inhibitors) and biocompatible circuit technologies remain earlier in development. Evidence was largely retrospective, adult-centered, and limited in pediatric and neonatal populations. No defensible connection to hirudotherapy or the leech secretome exists from this abstract, which does not mention bivalirudin, hirudin, leeches, or any leech-derived compounds. The review addresses pharmaceutical and technological anticoagulation strategies in ECMO only, and relevance to ASH's domain is absent based solely on the abstract.

Zitation

Alternate and Emerging Anticoagulation Strategies for Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Scoping Review

Kumar AP et al. · Journal of clinical medicine, 2026

Verwandter klinischer Kontext

Erfahren Sie, wie diese Forschung mit der klinischen Praxis verknüpft ist

Zur ASH-Bibliothek hinzugefügt: May 27, 2026 · Letzte Aktualisierung der Website: June 18, 2026

Diese Website stellt Bildungsinformationen bereit und ist weder eine medizinische Beratung noch eine Diagnose oder Behandlungsempfehlung. Die medizinische Blutegeltherapie ist mit klinisch relevanten Risiken verbunden und sollte ausschließlich von qualifizierten Klinikerinnen und Klinikern unter institutionell genehmigten Protokollen durchgeführt werden. Die FDA-510(k)-Zulassung für medizinische Blutegel ist auf bestimmte Indikationen beschränkt; experimentelle und Off-Label-Diskussionen werden entsprechend gekennzeichnet. Für patientenspezifische Beratung wenden Sie sich an eine qualifizierte Gesundheitsfachkraft.