Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 52
Filter
1.
BMC Med Educ ; 23(1): 406, 2023 Jun 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20235583

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the context of the coronavirus pandemic, countless face-to-face events as well as medical trainings were cancelled or moved to online courses, which resulted in increased digitalization in many areas. In the context of medical education, videos provide tremendous benefit for visualizing skills before they are practised. METHODS: Based on a previous investigation of video material addressing epidural catheterization available on the YouTube platform, we aimed to investigate new content produced in the context of the pandemic. Thus, a video search was conducted in May 2022. RESULTS: We identified twelve new videos since the pandemic with a significant improvement in the new content in terms of procedural items (p = 0.03) compared to the prepandemic video content. Video content released in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic was more often created by private content creators and were significantly shorter in total runtime than those from university and medical societies (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: The profound changes in the learning and teaching of health care education in relation to the pandemic are largely unclear. We reveal improved procedural quality of predominantly privately uploaded content despite a shortened runtime compared to the prepandemic period. This might indicate that technical and financial hurdles to producing instructional videos by discipline experts have decreased. In addition to the teaching difficulties caused by the pandemic, this change is likely to be due to validated manuals on how to create such content. The awareness that medical education needs to be improved has grown, so platforms offer specialized sublevels for high-quality medical videos.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Computer-Assisted Instruction , Social Media , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Health Education , Video Recording
2.
J Clin Med ; 12(7)2023 Mar 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2306778

ABSTRACT

Veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (VV-ECMO) therapy has become increasingly used and established in many hospitals as a routine treatment. With ECMO-therapy being a resource-demanding procedure, it is of interest whether a more prolonged VV-ECMO treatment would hold sufficient therapeutic success. Our retrospective study included all VV-ECMO runs from 1 January 2020 to 31 June 2022. We divided all runs into four groups (<14 days, 14-27, 28-49, 50+) of different durations and looked for differences overall in hospital survival. Additionally, corresponding treatments and therapeutic modalities, as well as laboratory results, were analyzed. We included 117 patients. Of those, 97 (82.9%) received a VV-ECMO treatment longer than two weeks. We did not find a significant association between ECMO duration (p = 0.15) and increased mortality though a significant correlation between the patients' age and their probability of survival (p = 0.02). Notably, we found significantly lower interleukin-6 levels with an increase in therapy duration (p < 0.01). Our findings show no association between the duration of ECMO therapy and mortality. Thus, the treatment duration alone may not be used for making assumptions about the prospect of survival. However, attention is also increasingly focused on long-term outcomes, such as post-intensive care syndrome with severe impairments.

4.
Anaesthesiologie ; 72(5): 317-324, 2023 05.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2252927

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV­2 pandemic posed unexpected challenges for hospitals worldwide and in addition to the supply emergency, simultaneously caused a high pressure to innovate. Due to the high number of cases of COVID-19 patients requiring intensive care, structured networking of hospitals gained particular importance. The tele-ICU communication platform TeleCOVID was developed to improve the quality of intensive care both by enabling teleconsultations and by supporting patient transfers. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to survey user experiences with TeleCOVID. The study investigated the extent to which the app is used, the user experiences of the participating hospitals, and the resulting implications for the further development of the telemedicine application. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A user survey was conducted in May 2022 using an online questionnaire. The survey contained both closed and open questions with a free text field. It was sent via the Hessian Ministry of Social Affairs and Integration (HMSI). All 135 hospitals in Hesse were contacted by e­mail and invited to participate in the study. The results of the closed questions were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and the results of the open questions were clustered and thematically summarized using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The study showed that TeleCOVID was used primarily for transfer requests, followed by the need for a treatment consultation without a transfer request. Most often, ECMO treatment or treatment in a hospital of a higher care level was required. The content analysis showed that users particularly rated the possibility of a data protection-compliant and structured transfer of patient data as advantageous. It is also worth mentioning that in almost 25% of the cases a transfer of patients could be prevented by TeleCOVID. Disadvantages frequently mentioned by respondents were the lack of connection to the electronic hospital information system, the increased time required for the registration process, and the poor primary accessibility of contact persons. CONCLUSION: In a further development of the application the connection to the electronic hospital information system should be considered particularly urgent. In addition, the time expenditure should be reduced by a simplified login process. Due to interface barriers, an alternative data infrastructure would also be conceivable to create interoperability. The introduction of a web client could also increase usability. The main beneficiaries of hospital networking are physicians and patients in a context associated with a high workload and specific medical issues. Continuation and expansion of the app to intensive care medicine and beyond are therefore recommended. In further studies on the project, personal interviews with decision makers could be useful to conduct a more targeted needs analysis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Critical Care , Remote Consultation , Humans , Surveys and Questionnaires , Patient Satisfaction , Telemedicine , Pandemics , Germany
5.
Shock ; 58(6): 514-523, 2022 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2191214

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Background: Severe progression of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes respiratory failure and critical illness. Recently, COVID-19 has been associated with heparanase (HPSE)-induced endothelial barrier dysfunction and inflammation, so called endothelitis, and therapeutic treatment with heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) targeting HPSE has been postulated. Because, up to this date, clinicians are unable to measure the severity of endothelitis, which can lead to multiorgan failure and concomitant death, we investigated plasma levels of HPSE and heparin-binding protein (HBP) in COVID-19 intensive care patients to render a possible link between endothelitis and these plasma parameters. Therefore, a prospective prolonged cohort study was conducted, including 47 COVID-19 patients from the intensive care unit. Plasma levels of HPSE, and HBP were measured daily by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in survivors (n = 35) and nonsurvivors (n = 12) of COVID-19 from admission until discharge or death. All patients were either treated with heparin or LMWH, aiming for an activated partial thromboplastin time of ≥60 seconds or an anti-Xa level of >0.8 IU/mL using enoxaparin, depending on the clinical status of the patient (patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or >0.1 µg/kg/min noradrenaline received heparin, all others enoxaparin). Results: We found significantly higher plasma levels of HPSE and HBP in survivors and nonsurvivors of COVID-19, compared with healthy controls. Still, interestingly, plasma HPSE levels were significantly higher ( P < 0.001) in survivors compared with nonsurvivors of COVID-19. In contrast, plasma HBP levels were significantly reduced ( P < 0.001) in survivors compared with nonsurvivors of COVID-19. Furthermore, when patients received heparin, they had significantly lower HPSE ( P = 2.22 e - 16) and significantly higher HBP ( P = 0.00013) plasma levels as when they received LMWH. Conclusion: Our results demonstrated that patients, who recover from COVID-19-induced vascular and pulmonary damage and were discharged from the intensive care unit, have significantly higher plasma HPSE level than patients who succumb to COVID-19. Therefore, HPSE is not suitable as marker for disease severity in COVID-19 but maybe as marker for patient's recovery. In addition, patients receiving therapeutic heparin treatment displayed significantly lower heparanse plasma level than upon therapeutic treatment with LMWH.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Endothelium, Vascular , Glucuronidase , Lung , Vascular Diseases , Humans , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , Enoxaparin , Heparin/therapeutic use , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/therapeutic use , Prospective Studies , Survivors , Glucuronidase/blood , Recovery of Function , Endothelium, Vascular/physiopathology , Endothelium, Vascular/virology , Vascular Diseases/diagnosis , Vascular Diseases/virology , Lung/physiopathology , Lung/virology , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
6.
Elife ; 112022 12 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2203161

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and can affect multiple organs, among which is the circulatory system. Inflammation and mortality risk markers were previously detected in COVID-19 plasma and red blood cells (RBCs) metabolic and proteomic profiles. Additionally, biophysical properties, such as deformability, were found to be changed during the infection. Based on such data, we aim to better characterize RBC functions in COVID-19. We evaluate the flow properties of RBCs in severe COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit by using microfluidic techniques and automated methods, including artificial neural networks, for an unbiased RBC analysis. We find strong flow and RBC shape impairment in COVID-19 samples and demonstrate that such changes are reversible upon suspension of COVID-19 RBCs in healthy plasma. Vice versa, healthy RBCs resemble COVID-19 RBCs when suspended in COVID-19 plasma. Proteomics and metabolomics analyses allow us to detect the effect of plasma exchanges on both plasma and RBCs and demonstrate a new role of RBCs in maintaining plasma equilibria at the expense of their flow properties. Our findings provide a framework for further investigations of clinical relevance for therapies against COVID-19 and possibly other infectious diseases.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Erythrocyte Deformability , Humans , Proteomics , SARS-CoV-2 , Erythrocytes/physiology
7.
BMC Anesthesiol ; 22(1): 385, 2022 Dec 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2162294

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Primary viral myocarditis associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov2) infection is a rare diagnosis. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of an unvaccinated, healthy patient with cardiogenic shock in the context of a COVID-19-associated myocarditis and therapy with simultaneous veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) and percutaneous left ventricular decompression therapy with an Impella. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of therapeutic options for patients with COVID-19-associated myocarditis. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients required a combination of two assist devices to achieve sufficient cardiac output until recovery of left ventricular ejection fraction. Due to the rapid onset of this fulminant cardiogenic shock immediate invasive bridging therapy in a specialized center was lifesaving.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heart-Assist Devices , Myocarditis , Humans , Shock, Cardiogenic/etiology , Shock, Cardiogenic/therapy , Stroke Volume , RNA, Viral , Ventricular Function, Left , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Myocarditis/complications , Myocarditis/therapy , Myocarditis/diagnosis
8.
J Clin Invest ; 2022 Nov 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2098125

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Results of many randomized trials on COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) have been reported but information on long-term outcome after CCP treatment is limited. The objectives of this extended observation of the randomized CAPSID trial are to assess long-term outcome and disease burden in patients initially treated with or without CCP. METHODS: Of 105 randomized patients, 50 participated in the extended observation. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed by questionnaires and a structured interview. CCP-donors (n=113) with asymptomatic to moderate COVID-19 were included as a reference group. RESULTS: The median follow-up of patients was 396 days, the estimated 1-year survival was 78.7% in the CCP and 60.2% in the control group (p=0.08). The subgroup treated with a higher cumulative amount of neutralizing antibodies showed a better 1-year survival compared to the control group (91.5% versus 60.2%; p=0.01). Medical events and QoL assessments showed a consistent trend for better results in the CCP group without reaching statistical significance. There was no difference in the increase of neutralizing antibodies after vaccination between CCP and the control group. CONCLUSION: The trial demonstrated a trend towards better outcome in the CCP group without reaching statistical significance. A pre-defined subgroup analysis showed a significant better outcome (long-term survival; time to discharge from ICU and time to hospital discharge) among those who received a higher amount of neutralizing antibodies compared to the control group. A substantial long-term disease burden remains after severe COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number 2020-001310-38FUNDING. Bundesministerium für Gesundheit (German Federal Ministry of Health): ZMVI1-2520COR802/ZMI1-2521COR802.

9.
J Clin Med ; 11(12)2022 Jun 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2080403

ABSTRACT

The sedation management of patients with severe COVID-19 is challenging. Processed electroencephalography (pEEG) has already been used for sedation management before COVID-19 in critical care, but its applicability in COVID-19 has not yet been investigated. We performed this prospective observational study to evaluate whether the patient sedation index (PSI) obtained via pEEG may adequately reflect sedation in ventilated COVID-19 patients. Statistical analysis was performed by linear regression analysis with mixed effects. We included data from 49 consecutive patients. None of the patients received neuromuscular blocking agents by the time of the measurement. The mean value of the PSI was 20 (±23). The suppression rate was determined to be 14% (±24%). A deep sedation equivalent to the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale of -3 to -4 (correlation expected PSI 25-50) in bedside examination was noted in 79.4% of the recordings. Linear regression analysis revealed a significant correlation between the sedative dosages of propofol, midazolam, clonidine, and sufentanil (p < 0.01) and the sedation index. Our results showed a distinct discrepancy between the RASS and the determined PSI. However, it remains unclear to what extent any discrepancy is due to the electrophysiological effects of neuroinflammation in terms of pEEG alteration, to the misinterpretation of spinal or vegetative reflexes during bedside evaluation, or to other causes.

10.
Front Immunol ; 13: 1008438, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2080155

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To determine the profile of cytokines in patients with severe COVID-19 who were enrolled in a trial of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP). Methods: Patients were randomized to receive standard treatment and 3 CCP units or standard treatment alone (CAPSID trial, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04433910). The primary outcome was a dichotomous composite outcome (survival and no longer severe COVID-19 on day 21). Time to clinical improvement was a key secondary endpoint. The concentrations of 27 cytokines were measured (baseline, day 7). We analyzed the change and the correlation between serum cytokine levels over time in different subgroups and the prediction of outcome in receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses and in multivariate models. Results: The majority of cytokines showed significant changes from baseline to day 7. Some were strongly correlated amongst each other (at baseline the cluster IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-6, IL-8, G-CSF, MIP-1α, the cluster PDGF-BB, RANTES or the cluster IL-4, IL-17, Eotaxin, bFGF, TNF-α). The correlation matrix substantially changed from baseline to day 7. The heatmaps of the absolute values of the correlation matrix indicated an association of CCP treatment and clinical outcome with the cytokine pattern. Low levels of IP-10, IFN-γ, MCP-1 and IL-1ß on day 0 were predictive of treatment success in a ROC analysis. In multivariate models, low levels of IL-1ß, IFN-γ and MCP-1 on day 0 were significantly associated with both treatment success and shorter time to clinical improvement. Low levels of IP-10, IL-1RA, IL-6, MCP-1 and IFN-γ on day 7 and high levels of IL-9, PDGF and RANTES on day 7 were predictive of treatment success in ROC analyses. Low levels of IP-10, MCP-1 and high levels of RANTES, on day 7 were associated with both treatment success and shorter time to clinical improvement in multivariate models. Conclusion: This analysis demonstrates a considerable dynamic of cytokines over time, which is influenced by both treatment and clinical course of COVID-19. Levels of IL-1ß and MCP-1 at baseline and MCP-1, IP-10 and RANTES on day 7 were associated with a favorable outcome across several endpoints. These cytokines should be included in future trials for further evaluation as predictive factors.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cytokines , Humans , Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein , Interleukin-17 , Chemokine CCL3 , Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha , Interleukin-6 , Interleukin-4 , Capsid , COVID-19/therapy , Becaplermin , Chemokine CXCL10 , Interleukin-2 , Interleukin-8 , Interleukin-9 , Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor , COVID-19 Serotherapy
11.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 15406, 2022 09 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2028725

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 adds to the complexity of optimal timing for tracheostomy. Over the course of this pandemic, and expanded knowledge of the disease, many centers have changed their operating procedures and performed an early tracheostomy. We studied the data on early and delayed tracheostomy regarding patient outcome such as mortality. We performed a retrospective analysis of all tracheostomies at our institution in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from March 2020 to June 2021. Time from intubation to tracheostomy and mortality of early (≤ 10 days) vs. late (> 10 days) tracheostomy were the primary objectives of this study. We used mixed cox-regression models to calculate the effect of distinct variables on events. We studied 117 tracheostomies. Intubation to tracheostomy shortened significantly (Spearman's correlation coefficient; rho = - 0.44, p ≤ 0.001) during the course of this pandemic. Early tracheostomy was associated with a significant increase in mortality in uni- and multivariate analysis (Hazard ratio 1.83, 95% CI 1.07-3.17, p = 0.029). The timing of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients has a potentially critical impact on mortality. The timing of tracheostomy has changed during this pandemic tending to be performed earlier. Future prospective research is necessary to substantiate these results.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Tracheostomy , Humans , Length of Stay , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , Tracheostomy/methods
12.
Nat Med ; 28(10): 2117-2123, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2016773

ABSTRACT

Cardiac symptoms are increasingly recognized as late complications of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in previously well individuals with mild initial illness, but the underlying pathophysiology leading to long-term cardiac symptoms remains unclear. In this study, we conducted serial cardiac assessments in a selected population of individuals with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) with no previous cardiac disease or notable comorbidities by measuring blood biomarkers of heart injury or dysfunction and by performing magnetic resonance imaging. Baseline measurements from 346 individuals with COVID-19 (52% females) were obtained at a median of 109 days (interquartile range (IQR), 77-177 days) after infection, when 73% of participants reported cardiac symptoms, such as exertional dyspnea (62%), palpitations (28%), atypical chest pain (27%) and syncope (3%). Symptomatic individuals had higher heart rates and higher imaging values or contrast agent accumulation, denoting inflammatory cardiac involvement, compared to asymptomatic individuals. Structural heart disease or high levels of biomarkers of cardiac injury or dysfunction were rare in symptomatic individuals. At follow-up (329 days (IQR, 274-383 days) after infection), 57% of participants had persistent cardiac symptoms. Diffuse myocardial edema was more pronounced in participants who remained symptomatic at follow-up as compared to those who improved. Female gender and diffuse myocardial involvement on baseline imaging independently predicted the presence of cardiac symptoms at follow-up. Ongoing inflammatory cardiac involvement may, at least in part, explain the lingering cardiac symptoms in previously well individuals with mild initial COVID-19 illness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heart Diseases , COVID-19/complications , Contrast Media , Female , Heart/diagnostic imaging , Heart Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Male , Myocardium/pathology , SARS-CoV-2
14.
Neurosurg Rev ; 45(5): 3437-3446, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2007164

ABSTRACT

Following elective craniotomy, patients routinely receive 24-h monitoring in an intensive care unit (ICU). However, the benefit of intensive care monitoring and treatment in these patients is discussed controversially. This study aimed to evaluate the complication profile of a "No ICU - Unless" strategy and to compare this strategy with the standardized management of post-craniotomy patients in the ICU. Two postoperative management strategies were compared in a matched-pair analysis: The first cohort included patients who were managed in the normal ward postoperatively ("No ICU - Unless" group). The second cohort contained patients routinely admitted to the ICU (control group). Outcome parameters contained detailed complication profile, length of hospital and ICU stay, duration to first postoperative mobilization, number of unplanned imaging before scheduled postoperative imaging, number and type of intensive care interventions, as well as pre- and postoperative modified Rankin scale (mRS). Patient characteristics and clinical course were analyzed using electronic medical records. The No ICU - Unless (NIU) group consisted of 96 patients, and the control group consisted of 75 patients. Complication rates were comparable in both cohorts (16% in the NIU group vs. 17% in the control group; p = 0.123). Groups did not differ significantly in any of the outcome parameters examined. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the NIU group but did not reach statistical significance (average 5.8 vs. 6.8 days; p = 0.481). There was no significant change in the distribution of preoperative (p = 0.960) and postoperative (p = 0.425) mRS scores in the NIU and control groups. Routine postoperative ICU management does not reduce postoperative complications and does not affect the surgical outcome of patients after elective craniotomies. Most postoperative complications are detected after a 24-h observation period. This approach may represent a potential strategy to prevent the overutilization of ICU capacities while maintaining sufficient postoperative care for neurosurgical patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Craniotomy , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Length of Stay , Postoperative Care , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/therapy , Retrospective Studies
15.
Trials ; 23(1): 688, 2022 Aug 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2002216

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: More than 2.7 million hospitalizations of COVID-19-infected patients have occurred in Europe alone since the outbreak of the coronavirus in 2020. Interventions against SARS-CoV-2 are still in high need to prevent admissions to ICUs worldwide. FX06, a naturally occurring peptide in humans and other mammals, has the potential to reduce capillary leak by improving endothelial dysfunction and thus preventing the deterioration of patients. With IXION, we want to investigate the potential of FX06 to prevent disease progression in hospitalized, non-intubated COVID-19 patients. METHODS: IXION is an EU-wide, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, parallel, randomized (2:1) phase II clinical study. Patient recruitment will start in September 2022 (to Q2/2023) in Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Spain, Romania, Portugal, and France. A total of 306 hospitalized patients (≥ 18 years and < 75 years) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test and a COVID-19 severity of 4-6 according to the WHO scale will be enrolled. After randomization to FX06 or placebo, patients will be assessed until day 28 (and followed up until day 60). FX06 (2 × 200 mg per day) or placebo will be administered intravenously for 5 consecutive days. The primary endpoint is to demonstrate a difference in the proportion of patients with progressed/worsened disease state in patients receiving FX06 compared to patients receiving placebo. Secondary endpoints are lung function, oxygen saturation and breathing rate, systemic inflammation, survival, capillary refill time, duration of hospital stay, and drug accountability. DISCUSSION: With IXION, the multidisciplinary consortium aims to deliver a new therapy in addition to standard care against SARS-CoV-2 for the clinical management of COVID-19 during mild and moderate stages. Potential limitations might refer to a lack of recruiting and drop-out due to various possible protocol violations. While we controlled for drop-outs in the same size estimation, recruitment problems may be subject to external problems difficult to control for. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2021-005059-35 . Registered on 12 December 2021. Study Code TMP-2204-2021-47.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disease Progression , Hospitalization , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain , Treatment Outcome
16.
Trials ; 23(1), 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1998951

ABSTRACT

Background More than 2.7 million hospitalizations of COVID-19-infected patients have occurred in Europe alone since the outbreak of the coronavirus in 2020. Interventions against SARS-CoV-2 are still in high need to prevent admissions to ICUs worldwide. FX06, a naturally occurring peptide in humans and other mammals, has the potential to reduce capillary leak by improving endothelial dysfunction and thus preventing the deterioration of patients. With IXION, we want to investigate the potential of FX06 to prevent disease progression in hospitalized, non-intubated COVID-19 patients. Methods IXION is an EU-wide, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, parallel, randomized (2:1) phase II clinical study. Patient recruitment will start in September 2022 (to Q2/2023) in Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Spain, Romania, Portugal, and France. A total of 306 hospitalized patients (≥ 18 years and < 75 years) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test and a COVID-19 severity of 4–6 according to the WHO scale will be enrolled. After randomization to FX06 or placebo, patients will be assessed until day 28 (and followed up until day 60). FX06 (2 × 200 mg per day) or placebo will be administered intravenously for 5 consecutive days. The primary endpoint is to demonstrate a difference in the proportion of patients with progressed/worsened disease state in patients receiving FX06 compared to patients receiving placebo. Secondary endpoints are lung function, oxygen saturation and breathing rate, systemic inflammation, survival, capillary refill time, duration of hospital stay, and drug accountability. Discussion With IXION, the multidisciplinary consortium aims to deliver a new therapy in addition to standard care against SARS-CoV-2 for the clinical management of COVID-19 during mild and moderate stages. Potential limitations might refer to a lack of recruiting and drop-out due to various possible protocol violations. While we controlled for drop-outs in the same size estimation, recruitment problems may be subject to external problems difficult to control for. Trial registration EudraCT 2021-005059-35. Registered on 12 December 2021. Study Code TMP-2204-2021-47. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06609-x.

17.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 11116, 2022 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1972644

ABSTRACT

The ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is characterized by poor outcome and a high mortality especially in the older patient cohort. Up to this point there is a lack of data characterising COVID-19 patients in Germany admitted to intensive care (ICU) vs. non-ICU patients. German Reimbursement inpatient data covering the period in Germany from January 1st, 2020 to December 31th, 2021 were analyzed. 561,379 patients were hospitalized with COVID-19. 24.54% (n = 137,750) were admitted to ICU. Overall hospital mortality was 16.69% (n = 93,668) and 33.36% (n = 45,947) in the ICU group. 28.66% (n = 160,881) of all patients suffer from Cardiac arrhythmia and 17.98% (n = 100,926) developed renal failure. Obesity showed an odds-ratio ranging from 0.83 (0.79-0.87) for WHO grade I to 1.13 (1.08-1.19) for grade III. Mortality-rates peaked in April 2020 and January 2021 being 21.23% (n = 4539) and 22.99% (n = 15,724). A third peak was observed November and December 2021 (16.82%, n = 7173 and 16.54%, n = 9416). Hospitalized COVID-19 patient mortality in Germany is lower than previously shown in other studies. 24.54% of all patients had to be treated in the ICU with a mortality rate of 33.36%. Congestive heart failure was associated with a higher risk of death whereas low grade obesity might have a protective effect on patient survival. High admission numbers are accompanied by a higher mortality rate.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Obesity , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 204, 2022 07 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1923569

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A profound inflammation-mediated lung injury with long-term acute respiratory distress and high mortality is one of the major complications of critical COVID-19. Immunoglobulin M (IgM)-enriched immunoglobulins seem especially capable of mitigating the inflicted inflammatory harm. However, the efficacy of intravenous IgM-enriched preparations in critically ill patients with COVID-19 is largely unclear. METHODS: In this retrospective multicentric cohort study, 316 patients with laboratory-confirmed critical COVID-19 were treated in ten German and Austrian ICUs between May 2020 and April 2021. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Analysis was performed by Cox regression models. Covariate adjustment was performed by propensity score weighting using machine learning-based SuperLearner to overcome the selection bias due to missing randomization. In addition, a subgroup analysis focusing on different treatment regimens and patient characteristics was performed. RESULTS: Of the 316 ICU patients, 146 received IgM-enriched immunoglobulins and 170 cases did not, which served as controls. There was no survival difference between the two groups in terms of mortality at 30 days in the overall cohort (HRadj: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.55 to 1.25; p = 0.374). An improved 30-day survival in patients without mechanical ventilation at the time of the immunoglobulin treatment did not reach statistical significance (HRadj: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.05 to 1.08; p = 0.063). Also, no statistically significant difference was observed in the subgroup when a daily dose of ≥ 15 g and a duration of ≥ 3 days of IgM-enriched immunoglobulins were applied (HRadj: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.41 to 1.03; p = 0.068). CONCLUSIONS: Although we cannot prove a statistically reliable effect of intravenous IgM-enriched immunoglobulins, the confidence intervals may suggest a clinically relevant effect in certain subgroups. Here, an early administration (i.e. in critically ill but not yet mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients) and a dose of ≥ 15 g for at least 3 days may confer beneficial effects without concerning safety issues. However, these findings need to be validated in upcoming randomized clinical trials. Trial registration DRKS00025794 , German Clinical Trials Register, https://www.drks.de . Registered 6 July 2021.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Cohort Studies , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Immunoglobulin M/therapeutic use , Immunoglobulins, Intravenous , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
19.
Journal of Clinical Medicine ; 11(12):3494, 2022.
Article in English | MDPI | ID: covidwho-1893946

ABSTRACT

The sedation management of patients with severe COVID-19 is challenging. Processed electroencephalography (pEEG) has already been used for sedation management before COVID-19 in critical care, but its applicability in COVID-19 has not yet been investigated. We performed this prospective observational study to evaluate whether the patient sedation index (PSI) obtained via pEEG may adequately reflect sedation in ventilated COVID-19 patients. Statistical analysis was performed by linear regression analysis with mixed effects. We included data from 49 consecutive patients. None of the patients received neuromuscular blocking agents by the time of the measurement. The mean value of the PSI was 20 (±23). The suppression rate was determined to be 14% (±24%). A deep sedation equivalent to the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale of −3 to −4 (correlation expected PSI 25–50) in bedside examination was noted in 79.4% of the recordings. Linear regression analysis revealed a significant correlation between the sedative dosages of propofol, midazolam, clonidine, and sufentanil (p < 0.01) and the sedation index. Our results showed a distinct discrepancy between the RASS and the determined PSI. However, it remains unclear to what extent any discrepancy is due to the electrophysiological effects of neuroinflammation in terms of pEEG alteration, to the misinterpretation of spinal or vegetative reflexes during bedside evaluation, or to other causes.

20.
J Clin Anesth ; 80: 110877, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1878228

ABSTRACT

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We explored the feasibility of a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) to guide evidence-based perioperative anticoagulation. DESIGN: Prospective randomised clinical management simulation multicentre study. SETTING: Five University and 11 general hospitals in Germany. PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled physicians (anaesthesiologist (n = 73), trauma surgeons (n = 2), unknown (n = 1)) with different professional experience. INTERVENTIONS: A CDSS based on a multiple-choice test was developed and validated at the University Hospital of Frankfurt (phase-I). The CDSS comprised European guidelines for the management of anticoagulation in cardiology, cardio-thoracic, non-cardio-thoracic surgery and anaesthesiology. Phase-II compared the efficiency of physicians in identifying evidence-based approach of managing perioperative anticoagulation. In total 168 physicians were randomised to CDSS (PERI-KOAG) or CONTROL. MEASUREMENTS: Overall mean score and association of processing time and professional experience were analysed. The multiple-choice test consists of 11 cases and two correct answers per question were required to gain 100% success rate (=22 points). MAIN RESULTS: In total 76 physicians completed the questionnaire (n = 42 PERI-KOAG; n = 34 CONTROL; attrition rate 54%). Overall mean score (max. 100% = 22 points) was significantly higher in PERI-KOAG compared to CONTROL (82 ± 15% vs. 70 ± 10%; 18 ± 3 vs. 15 ± 2 points; P = 0.0003). A longer processing time is associated with significantly increased overall mean scores in PERI-KOAG (≥33 min. 89 ± 10% (20 ± 2 points) vs. <33 min. 73 ± 15% (16 ± 3 points), P = 0.0005) but not in CONTROL (≥33 min. 74 ± 13% (16 ± 3 points) vs. <33 min. 69 ± 9% (15 ± 2 points), P = 0.11). Within PERI-KOAG, there is a tendency towards higher results within the more experienced group (>5 years), but no significant difference to less (≤5 years) experienced colleagues (87 ± 10% (19 ± 2 points) vs. 78 ± 17% (17 ± 4 points), P = 0.08). However, an association between professional experience and success rate in CONTROL has not been shown (71 ± 8% vs. 70 ± 13%, 16 ± 2 vs. 15 ± 3 points; P = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: CDSS significantly improved the identification of evidence-based treatment approaches. A precise usage of CDSS is mandatory to maximise efficiency.


Subject(s)
Decision Support Systems, Clinical , Physicians , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Hospitals, University , Humans , Prospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL