Transfer of Veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Patients With COVID-19 Associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Interhospital transport of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients bears transport-associated risks. It is unknown how interhospital extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) transfer of COVID-19 patients by mobile ECMO units affects ARDS mortality. We compared the outcome of 94 COVID-19 patients cannulated in primary care hospitals and retrieved by mobile ECMO-teams to that of 84 patients cannulated at five German ECMO centers. Patients were recruited from March 2020 to November 2021. Twenty-six transports were airborne, 68 were land-based. Age, sex, body-mass-index, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, days invasively ventilated, and P/F-Ratio before ECMO initiation were similar in both groups. Counting only regional transports (≤250 km), mean transport distance was 139.5 km ± 17.7 km for helicopter (duration 52.5 ± 10.6 minutes) and 69.8 km ± 44.1 km for ambulance or mobile intensive care unit (duration 57.6 ± 29.4 minutes). Overall time of vvECMO support (20.4 ± 15.2 ECMO days for transported patients vs. 21.0 ± 20.5 for control, p = 0.83) and days invasively ventilated (27.9 ± 18.1 days vs. 32.6 ± 25.1 days, p = 0.16) were similar. Overall mortality did not differ between transported patients and controls (57/94 [61%] vs. 51/83 [61%], p = 0.43). COVID-19 patients cannulated and retrieved by mobile ECMO-teams have no excess risk compared with patients receiving vvECMO at experienced ECMO centers. Patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS, limited comorbidities, and no contraindication for ECMO should be referred early to local ECMO centers.

[Evaluation of the "TeleCOVID Hesse" project after 1 year in operation]. / Evaluation des Projekts "TeleCOVID Hessen" nach einjährigem Betrieb.

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.

Respiratory Physiology of COVID-19 and Influenza Associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Background: There is ongoing debate whether lung physiology of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) differs from ARDS of other origin. Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze and compare how critically ill patients with COVID-19 and Influenza A or B were ventilated in our tertiary care center with or without extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We ask if acute lung failure due to COVID-19 requires different intensive care management compared to conventional ARDS. Methods: 25 patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS were matched to a cohort of 25 Influenza patients treated in our center from 2011 to 2021. Subgroup analysis addressed whether patients on ECMO received different mechanical ventilation than patients without extracorporeal support. Results: Compared to Influenza-associated ARDS, COVID-19 patients had higher ventilatory system compliance (40.7 mL/mbar [31.8-46.7 mL/mbar] vs. 31.4 mL/mbar [13.7-42.8 mL/mbar], p = 0.198), higher ventilatory ratio (1.57 [1.31-1.84] vs. 0.91 [0.44-1.38], p = 0.006) and higher minute ventilation at the time of intubation (mean minute ventilation 10.7 L/min [7.2-12.2 L/min] for COVID-19 vs. 6.0 L/min [2.5-10.1 L/min] for Influenza, p = 0.013). There were no measurable differences in P/F ratio, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and driving pressures (ΔP). Respiratory system compliance deteriorated considerably in COVID-19 patients on ECMO during 2 weeks of mechanical ventilation (Crs, mean decrease over 2 weeks -23.87 mL/mbar ± 32.94 mL/mbar, p = 0.037) but not in ventilated Influenza patients on ECMO and less so in ventilated COVID-19 patients without ECMO. For COVID-19 patients, low driving pressures on ECMO were strongly correlated to a decline in compliance after 2 weeks (Pearson's R 0.80, p = 0.058). Overall mortality was insignificantly lower for COVID-19 patients compared to Influenza patients (40% vs. 48%, p = 0.31). Outcome was insignificantly worse for patients requiring veno-venous ECMO in both groups (50% mortality for COVID-19 on ECMO vs. 27% without ECMO, p = 0.30/56% vs. 34% mortality for Influenza A/B with and without ECMO, p = 0.31). Conclusion: The pathophysiology of early COVID-19-associated ARDS differs from Influenza-associated acute lung failure by sustained respiratory mechanics during the early phase of ventilation. We question whether intubated COVID-19 patients on ECMO benefit from extremely low driving pressures, as this appears to accelerate derecruitment and consecutive loss of ventilatory system compliance.

[ECMO support during the first two waves of the corona pandemic-a survey of high case volume centers in Germany]. / ECMO-Unterstützung während der ersten 2 Wellen der Coronapandemie ­ eine Umfrage an Zentren mit hohen Fallzahlen in Deutschland.

BACKGROUND: At the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, concerns were raised about sufficiency of available intensive care resources. In many places, routine interventions were postponed and criteria for the allocation of scarce resources were formulated. In Germany, some hospitals were at times seriously burdened during the course of the pandemic. Intensive care units in particular experienced a shortage of resources, which may have led to a restriction of services and a stricter indication setting for resource-intensive measures such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The aim of this work is to provide an overview of how these pressures were managed at large ECMO centers in Germany. METHODS: One representative of each major ECMO referral center in Germany was invited to participate in an online survey in spring 2021. RESULTS: Of 34 invitations that were sent out, the survey was answered by 23 participants. In all centers, routine procedures were postponed during the pandemic. Half of the centers increased the number of beds on which ECMO procedures could be offered. Nevertheless, in one-third of the centers, the start of at least one ECMO support was delayed because of a feared resource shortage. In 17% of centers, at least one patient was denied ECMO that he or she would have most likely received under prepandemic conditions. CONCLUSION: The results of this online survey indicate that the experienced pressures and resource constraints led some centers to be cautious about ECMO indications.

Key characteristics impacting survival of COVID-19 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

BACKGROUND: Severe COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) often requires extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Recent German health insurance data revealed low ICU survival rates. Patient characteristics and experience of the ECMO center may determine intensive care unit (ICU) survival. The current study aimed to identify factors affecting ICU survival of COVID-19 ECMO patients. METHODS: 673 COVID-19 ARDS ECMO patients treated in 26 centers between January 1st 2020 and March 22nd 2021 were included. Data on clinical characteristics, adjunct therapies, complications, and outcome were documented. Block wise logistic regression analysis was applied to identify variables associated with ICU-survival. RESULTS: Most patients were between 50 and 70 years of age. PaO2/FiO2 ratio prior to ECMO was 72 mmHg (IQR: 58-99). ICU survival was 31.4%. Survival was significantly lower during the 2nd wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A subgroup of 284 (42%) patients fulfilling modified EOLIA criteria had a higher survival (38%) (p = 0.0014, OR 0.64 (CI 0.41-0.99)). Survival differed between low, intermediate, and high-volume centers with 20%, 30%, and 38%, respectively (p = 0.0024). Treatment in high volume centers resulted in an odds ratio of 0.55 (CI 0.28-1.02) compared to low volume centers. Additional factors associated with survival were younger age, shorter time between intubation and ECMO initiation, BMI > 35 (compared to < 25), absence of renal replacement therapy or major bleeding/thromboembolic events. CONCLUSIONS: Structural and patient-related factors, including age, comorbidities and ECMO case volume, determined the survival of COVID-19 ECMO. These factors combined with a more liberal ECMO indication during the 2nd wave may explain the reasonably overall low survival rate. Careful selection of patients and treatment in high volume ECMO centers was associated with higher odds of ICU survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (study ID: DRKS00022964, retrospectively registered, September 7th 2020, https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00022964 .

Evaluation of a Clinical Decision Support System for the most evidence-based approach to managing perioperative anticoagulation.

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.

Injection of Recombinant Tissue Plasminogen Activator into Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenators Postpones Oxygenator Exchange in COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has drastically increased the number of patients requiring extracorporeal life support. We investigate the efficacy and safety of low-dose recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (rtPA) injection into exhausted oxygenators to delay exchange in critically ill COVID-19 patients on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO). Small doses of rtPA were injected directly into the draining section of a V-V ECMO circuit. We compared transmembrane pressure gradient, pump head efficiency, membrane arterial partial oxygen pressure, and membrane arterial partial carbon dioxide pressure before and after the procedure. Bleeding was compared with a matched control group of 20 COVID-19 patients on V-V ECMO receiving standard anticoagulation. Four patients received 16 oxygenator instillations with rtPA at 5, 10, or 20 mg per dose. Administration of rtPA significantly reduced transmembrane pressure gradient (Δ pm = 54.8 ± 18.1 mmHg before vs . 38.3 ± 13.3 mmHg after, p < 0.001) in a dose-dependent manner (Pearson's R -0.63, p = 0.023), allowing to delay oxygenator exchange, thus reducing the overall number of consumed oxygenators. rtPA increased blood flow efficiency η (1.20 ± 0.28 ml/revolution before vs . 1.24 ± 0.27 ml/r, p = 0.002). Lysis did not affect membrane blood gases or systemic coagulation. Minor bleeding occurred in 2 of 4 patients (50%) receiving oxygenator lysis as well as 19 of 20 control patients (95%). Lysis of ECMO oxygenators effectively delays oxygenator exchange, if exchange is indicated by an increase in transmembrane pressure gradient. Application of lysis did not result in higher bleeding incidences compared with anticoagulated patients on V-V ECMO for COVID-19.

A Novel Mock Circuit to Test Full-Flow Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has become an important therapeutic approach in the COVID-19 pandemic. The development and research in this field strongly relies on animal models; however, efforts are being made to find alternatives. In this work, we present a new mock circuit for ECMO that allows measurements of the oxygen transfer rate of a membrane lung at full ECMO blood flow. The mock utilizes a large reservoir of heparinized porcine blood to measure the oxygen transfer rate of the membrane lung in a single passage. The oxygen transfer rate is calculated from blood flow, hemoglobin value, venous saturation, and post-membrane arterial oxygen pressure. Before the next measuring sequence, the blood is regenerated to a venous condition with a sweep gas of nitrogen and carbon dioxide. The presented mock was applied to investigate the effect of a recirculation loop on the oxygen transfer rate of an ECMO setup. The recirculation loop caused a significant increase in post-membrane arterial oxygen pressure (paO2). The effect was strongest for the highest recirculation flow. This was attributed to a smaller boundary layer on gas fibers due to the increased blood velocity. However, the increase in paO2 did not translate to significant increases in the oxygen transfer rate because of the minor significance of physically dissolved oxygen for gas transfer. In conclusion, our results regarding a new ECMO mock setup demonstrate that recirculation loops can improve ECMO performance, but not enough to be clinically relevant.

First Use of a New Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation System in COVID19-Associated Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome: The MobyBox Device.

In late 2020, during the second wave of COVID-19 in Germany, we started using the MobyBox, which is a novel fully pneumatically driven ECMO device, on a regular basis to meet the increasing demand for ECMO therapy. In this case series, we performed a retrospective chart review of seven patients with severe COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring veno-venous (vv)-ECMO support with the MobyBox. During ECMO treatments we have observed no disadvantages in comparison to conventional ECMO systems. There were no system failures or adverse events directly attributable to the MobyBox system. Our data support that providing vv-ECMO with the MobyBox device is safe and feasible. Furthermore, our findings suggest that the MobyBox device might represent an advantage in terms of biocompatibility. Therefore, more data on this issue is needed to better understand how the pneumatically driven pump affects cellular blood components.

The janus-kinase inhibitor ruxolitinib in SARS-CoV-2 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), which is associated with high morbidity and mortality, especially in elder patients. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening complication of COVID-19 and has been linked with severe hyperinflammation. Dexamethasone has emerged as standard of care for COVID-19 associated respiratory failure. In a non-randomized prospective phase II multi-center study, we asked whether targeted inhibition of Janus kinase-mediated cytokine signaling using ruxolitinib is feasible and efficacious in SARS-CoV-2- induced ARDS with hyperinflammation. Sixteen SARS-CoV-2 infected patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for ARDS were treated with ruxolitinib in addition to standard treatment. Ruxolitinib treatment was well tolerated and 13 patients survived at least the first 28 days on treatment, which was the primary endpoint of the trial. Immediate start of ruxolitinib after deterioration was associated with improved outcome, as was a lymphocyte-to-neutrophils ratio above 0.07. Together, treatment with the janus-kinase inhibitor ruxolitinib is feasible and might be efficacious in COVID-19 induced ARDS patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. The trial has been registered under EudraCT-No.: 2020-001732-10 and NCT04359290.

Conservative management of COVID-19 associated hypoxaemia.

This correspondence argues that data presented previously cannot justify a novel approach for treating hypoxic patients with severe #COVID19 https://bit.ly/3dLaPlk.

Pulmonary Hemodynamics and Ventilation in Patients With COVID-19-Related Respiratory Failure and ARDS.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that COVID-19-associated severe respiratory failure (CARDS) might differ from usual acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to failing autoregulation of pulmonary vessels and higher shunt. We sought to investigate pulmonary hemodynamics and ventilation properties in patients with CARDS compared to patients with ARDS of pulmonary origin. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive adults with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 patients treated in our ICU in 04/2020 and a comparison of the data to matched controls with ARDS due to respiratory infections treated in our ICU from 01/2014 to 08/2019 for whom pulmonary artery catheter data were available. RESULTS: CARDS patients (n = 10) had ventilation characteristics similar to those of ARDS (n = 10) patients. Nevertheless, mechanical power applied by ventilation was significantly higher in CARDS patients (23.4 ± 8.9 J/min) than in ARDS (15.9 ± 4.3 J/min; P < 0.05). COVID-19 patients had similar pulmonary artery pressure but significantly lower pulmonary vascular resistance, as cardiac output was higher in CARDS vs. ARDS patients (P < 0.05). Shunt fraction and dead space were similar in CARDS compared to ARDS (P > 0.05) and were correlated with hypoxemia in both groups. The arteriovenous pCO2 difference (▵pCO2) was elevated (CARDS 5.5 ± 2.8 mmHg vs. ARDS 4.7 ± 1.1 mmHg; P > 0.05), as was the P(v-a)CO2/C(a-v)O2 ratio (CARDS mean 2.2 ± 1.5 vs. ARDS 1.7 ± 0.8; P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients seems to differ only slightly from ARDS regarding ventilation characteristics and pulmonary hemodynamics. Our data indicate microcirculatory dysfunction. More data need to be collected to assure these findings and gain more pathophysiological insights into COVID-19 and respiratory failure.

Extracorporeal life support in COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome: A EuroELSO international survey.

Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is a means to support patients with acute respiratory failure. Initially, recommendations to treat severe cases of pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with ECLS have been restrained. In the meantime, ECLS has been shown to produce similar outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 compared to existing data on ARDS mortality. We performed an international email survey to assess how ECLS providers worldwide have previously used ECLS during the treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19. A questionnaire with 45 questions (covering, e.g., indication, technical aspects, benefit, and reasons for treatment discontinuation), mostly multiple choice, was distributed by email to ECLS centers. The survey was approved by the European branch of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO); 276 ECMO professionals from 98 centers in 30 different countries on four continents reported that they employed ECMO for very severe COVID-19 cases, mostly in veno-venous configuration (87%). The most common reason to establish ECLS was isolated hypoxemic respiratory failure (50%), followed by a combination of hypoxemia and hypercapnia (39%). Only a small fraction of patients required veno-arterial cannulation due to heart failure (3%). Time on ECLS varied between less than 2 and more than 4 weeks. The main reason to discontinue ECLS treatment prior to patient's recovery was lack of clinical improvement (53%), followed by major bleeding, mostly intracranially (13%). Only 4% of respondents reported that triage situations, lack of staff or lack of oxygenators, were responsible for discontinuation of ECLS support. Most ECLS physicians (51%, IQR 30%) agreed that patients with COVID-19-induced ARDS (CARDS) benefitted from ECLS. Overall mortality of COVID-19 patients on ECLS was estimated to be about 55%. ECLS has been utilized successfully during the COVID-19 pandemic to stabilize CARDS patients in hypoxemic or hypercapnic lung failure. Age and multimorbidity limited the use of ECLS. Triage situations were rarely a concern. ECLS providers stated that patients with severe COVID-19 benefitted from ECLS.

COVID-19 Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome-A Multicenter Observational Study.

Background: Proportions of patients dying from the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) vary between different countries. We report the characteristics; clinical course and outcome of patients requiring intensive care due to COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods: This is a retrospective, observational multicentre study in five German secondary or tertiary care hospitals. All patients consecutively admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in any of the participating hospitals between March 12 and May 4, 2020 with a COVID-19 induced ARDS were included. Results: A total of 106 ICU patients were treated for COVID-19 induced ARDS, whereas severe ARDS was present in the majority of cases. Survival of ICU treatment was 65.0%. Median duration of ICU treatment was 11 days; median duration of mechanical ventilation was 9 days. The majority of ICU treated patients (75.5%) did not receive any antiviral or anti-inflammatory therapies. Venovenous (vv) ECMO was utilized in 16.3%. ICU triage with population-level decision making was not necessary at any time. Univariate analysis associated older age, diabetes mellitus or a higher SOFA score on admission with non-survival during ICU stay. Conclusions: A high level of care adhering to standard ARDS treatments lead to a good outcome in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Effects of inhaled nitric oxide in COVID-19-induced ARDS - Is it worthwhile?

BACKGROUND: Changes in pulmonary hemodynamics and ventilation/perfusion were proposed as hallmarks of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) may overcome these issues and improve arterial oxygenation. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed arterial oxygenation and pulmonary vasoreactivity in seven COVID-19 ARDS patients receiving 20 ppm iNO for 15-30 minutes. RESULTS: The inhalation of NO significantly improved oxygenation. All patients with severe ARDS had higher partial pressures of oxygen and reduced pulmonary vascular resistance. Significant changes in pulmonary shunting were not observed. CONCLUSION: Overall, iNO could provide immediate help and delay respiratory deterioration in COVID-19-induced moderate to severe ARDS.