Efficacy of CytoSorb®: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Cytokine adsorption using the CytoSorb® adsorber has been proposed in various clinical settings including sepsis, ARDS, hyperinflammatory syndromes, cardiac surgery or recovery after cardiac arrest. The aim of this analysis is to provide evidence for the efficacy of the CytoSorb® adsorber with regard to mortality in various settings. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library database and the database provided by Cytosorbents™ (01.1.2010-29.5.2022). We considered randomized controlled trials and observational studies with control groups. The longest reported mortality was defined as the primary endpoint. We computed risk ratios and 95%-confidence intervals and used DerSimonian and Lairds random effects model. We analysed all studies combined and divided them into the subgroups: sepsis, cardiopulmonary bypass surgery (CPB), other severe illness, SARS-CoV-2 infection and recovery from cardiac arrest. The meta-analysis was registered in advance (PROSPERO: CRD42022290334). RESULTS: Of an initial 1295 publications, 34 studies were found eligible, including 1297 patients treated with CytoSorb® and 1314 controls. Cytosorb® intervention did not lower mortality (RR [95%-CI]: all studies 1.07 [0.88; 1.31], sepsis 0.98 [0.74; 1.31], CPB surgery 0.91 [0.64; 1.29], severe illness 0.95 [0.59; 1.55], SARS-CoV-2 1.58 [0.50; 4.94]). In patients with cardiac arrest, we found a significant survival advantage of the untreated controls (1.22 [1.02; 1.46]). We did not find significant differences in ICU length of stay, lactate levels, or IL-6 levels after treatment. Of the eligible 34 studies only 12 were randomized controlled trials. All observational studies showed moderate to serious risk of bias. INTERPRETATION: To date, there is no evidence for a positive effect of the CytoSorb® adsorber on mortality across a variety of diagnoses that justifies its widespread use in intensive care medicine.

Efficacy of CytoSorb® - A Metaanalysis (preprint)

Cytokine adsorption using the CytoSorb® device has been proposed in various clinical settings including sepsis, ARDS, hyperinflammatory syndromes, cardiac surgery or recovery after cardiac arrest. The aim of this analysis is to provide evidence for the efficacy of the CytoSorb® device with regard to mortality in various settings. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library database and the database provided by Cytosorbents™ (01.1.2010–29.5.2022). We considered randomized controlled trials and intervention studies with control groups. The longest reported mortality was defined as primary endpoint. For analyzing the data, we computed risk ratios and 95%-confidence intervals and used DerSimonian and Lairds random effects model. We analyzed all studies combined and divided into the subgroups sepsis, cardiac surgery, other severe illness, SARS-CoV-2 infection and recovery from cardiac arrest. The meta-analysis was registered in advance (PROSPERO: CRD42022290334). Results: Of an initial 1295 publications, 34 studies were found eligible, including 1297 patients treated with CytoSorb® and 1314 controls. Cytosorb® did not lower mortality in all studies together (1.07 [0.88; 1.31] RR [95%-CI]), in sepsis (0.98 [0.74; 1.31]), CPB surgery (0.91 [0.64; 1.29]), severe illness (0.95 [0.59; 1.55]) or SARS-CoV-2 (1.58 [0.50; 4.94]). In patients with cardiac arrest, we found a significant survival advantage of the untreated controls (RR 1.22 [1.02; 1.46]). We did not find significant differences in ICU length of stay, lactate levels, or IL-6 levels after treatment. Interpretation: To date there is no evidence for a positive effect of the CytoSorb® adsorber on mortality across a variety of indications that justifies its widespread use in intensive care medicine.

Successful surgical-multimodal treatment for vaccine-induced complete splanchnic vein thrombosis after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination

Objective Thrombotic-thrombocytopenic events are rare, but life-threatening, complications after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination and sometimes present as symptomatic splanchnic vein thrombosis with critical illness. Life-saving aggressive and multimodal treatment is essential in these cases. Design We report on a critically ill 40-year-old male patient with complete splanchnic (portal/mesenteric/splenic) vein thrombosis, becoming symptomatic 7 days after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination and diagnosed on day 12. Laparotomy for abdominal compartment syndrome and repeated transjugular/ transhepatic interventional and open surgical thrombectomy procedures were performed. Additional therapy consisted of thrombolysis with recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator over 5 days, anticoagulation (argatroban), platelet inhibition (Acetylsalicylic acid /clopidogrel), immunoglobulins and steroids. Results This aggressive treatment included 5 laparotomies and 4 angiographic interventions, open abdomen for 8 days, transfusion of 27 units of packed red cells, 9 abdominal and 4 cerebral CT scans, thrombolysis therapy for 5 days, mechanical ventilation for 15 days, and an ICU stay of 25 days. Full patient recovery and near complete recanalization of splanchnic veins was achieved. Conclusion Without treatment, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination-induced total splanchnic vein thrombosis has serious consequences with a high risk for death. The case described here shows that an aggressive multimodal surgical-medical treatment strategy in a specialized center can save these patients and achieve a good outcome.

Students' age and parental level of education influence COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy.

Widespread vaccination in pursuit of herd immunity has been recognized as the most promising approach to ending the global pandemic of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). The vaccination of children and adolescents has been extensively debated and the first COVID-19 vaccine is now approved in European countries for children aged > 12 years of age. Our study investigates vaccination hesitancy in a cohort of German secondary school students. We assessed 903 students between age 9 and 20 in the period between 17 May 2021 and 30 June 2021. 68.3% (n = 617) reported intention to undergo COVID-19 vaccination, while 7% (n = 62) did not want to receive the vaccine and 15% (n = 135) were not yet certain. Age and parental level of education influenced COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Children under the age of 16 as well as students whose parents had lower education levels showed significantly higher vaccine hesitancy.  Conclusion: Identifying subsets with higher vaccination hesitancy is important for targeting public information campaigns in support of immunization. What is Known: • The willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination among adults in Europe is about 70%, but data for children and adolescents is lacking. • The lack of immunization in younger cohorts represents a significant barrier to achieving herd immunity, and also leaves children and adolescents vulnerable to acute and long-term morbidity from natural COVID-19 infections. What is New: • Intention-to-vaccinate among children and adolescents is high (~ 70%); conversely, vaccination hesitancy is low. • Age and parental level of education influenced COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among children and adolescents.

Children and Adolescents' Behavioral Patterns in Response to Escalating COVID-19 Restriction Reveal Sex and Age Differences.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic affects students in a myriad of different ways. Our prospective, longitudinal study in a cohort of students in Hannover, Germany explores behavioral patterns during escalating COVID-19 restrictions. METHODS: In total, 777 students between the age of 9 and 20 were assessed for their activity engagement, travel patterns, and self-assessed compliance with protective recommendations at six time points between June 2020 and June 2021 (3,564 observations) and were monitored for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection by nasal swab polymerase chain reaction and serum antibody titers. RESULTS: Activity engagement decreased, but self-assessed compliance with measures such as mask wearing and social distancing was stable during escalating restrictions. Although we found no sex difference during the summer break, when incidence was lowest, females engaged in a higher variety of activities than males for all other time points. Older students engaged in more activities and self-assigned themselves lower compliance values than younger ones. Greater involvement in different activities was seen in households which traveled more frequently. Infection rate in our cohort was low (0.03% acute infections, 1.94% positive seroprevalence). DISCUSSION: Our study supports the view that, overall, students show high compliance with COVID-19 recommendations and restrictions. The identification of subsets, such as female and older students, with higher risk behavioral patterns should be considered when implementing public information campaigns. In light of the low infection rate in our cohort, we conclude that in-person learning can occur safely if extensive protective measures are in place and the incidence in the general population remains moderate.

[Management of COVID-19 mass casualty incidents in nursing and retirement homes]. / Managementstrategie für den Massenanfall von Erkrankten/Infizierten in Alten- und Pflegeheimen im Kontext der COVID-19-Pandemie.

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, outbreaks in inpatient care facilities, which grow into a large-scale emergency scenario, are frequently observed. A standardized procedure analogous to algorithms for mass casualty incidents (MCI) is lacking. METHODS: Based on a case report and the literature, the authors present a management strategy for infectious MCI during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic and distinguish it from traumatic MCI deployment tactics. RESULTS: This management strategy can be divided into three phases, beginning with the acute emergency response including triage, stabilization of critical patients, and transport of patients requiring hospitalization. Phase 2 involves securing the facility's operational readiness, or housing residents elsewhere in case staff are infected or quarantined to a relevant degree. Phase 3 marks the return to regular operations. DISCUSSION: Phase 1 is based on usual MCI principles, phase 2 on hospital crisis management. Avoiding evacuation of residents to relieve hospitals is an important operational objective. The lack of mission and training experience with such situations, the limited applicability of established triage algorithms, and the need to coordinate a large number of participants pose challenges. CONCLUSION: This strategic model offers a practical, holistic approach to the management of infectious mass casualty scenarios in nursing facilities.

[Isolation precautions, diagnostics and organization in German emergency departments during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic]. / Isolationsmaßnahmen, Diagnostik und Organisation in deutschen Notaufnahmen während der COVID-19-Pandemie 2020.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, German emergency departments (ED) have been working in the area of conflict between high case load and demanding hygienic and organizational challenges. The aim of this study was to gain an overview of the current status of isolation measures, diagnostics and patient allocation of suspected COVID-19 cases. METHODS: Supported by the German Society for Interdisciplinary Emergency and Acute Medicine (DGINA) we invited leading ED physicians to answer an anonymous online survey regarding isolation measures, diagnostics and organization in emergency rooms during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 139 responders from all federal states and all levels of care took part in the survey. Standard operating procedures on COVID-19 exist in almost all participating EDs, although concrete measures to end isolation are often missing. Most EDs screen patients for the "classic" COVID-19 symptoms such as fever, respiratory symptoms or contact to positive subjects in a standardized fashion, although the threshold for prophylactic isolation varies greatly. The individual swab-testing and allocation strategies vary relatively strongly. Less than half of all EDs have a separate procedure for uninterrogatable patients (e.g. major trauma). In about 8% of suspected cases, COVID-19-specific thoracic computed tomography is performed in the ED. CONCLUSION: The current survey shows that the German EDs are well positioned for the moment, even though the isolation threshold is too high at some locations. In view of a possible increase in the number of cases during the winter season, a more precise differentiation of the previous recommendations of the Robert Koch Institute, especially for emergency admission patients, would be desirable. In this context, we propose a universal algorithm for the (de-)isolation of suspect cases in the ED.