[S3-Guideline: Recommendations for intra-aortic balloon pumping in cardiac surgery]. / S3-Leitlinie "Einsatz der intraaortalen Ballongegenpulsation in der Herzchirurgie".

Although intra-aortic balloon pumping (IABP) is the most frequently used mechanical cardiac assist device in cardiothoracic surgery, there are only guidelines for substantive sections of aortic counterpulsation including prophylactic and postoperative use. In contrast, evidence-based recommendations are still lacking concerning intraoperative use, management, contraindication and other relevant issues. According to international surveys, important aspects of IABP usage show a wide variation in clinical practice. The results of a national questionnaire performed before initiation of this guideline confirmed these findings and demonstrated a clear need for the development of a consensus-based guideline. Therefore, the presented multidisciplinary S-3-guideline was developed under the direction of the German Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Thorax-, Herz- und Gefäßchirurgie, DGTHG) to make evidence-based recommendations for the usage of aortic counterpulsation after cardiothoracic surgery according to the requirements of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) and the Medical Centre for Quality (Ärztliches Zentrum für Qualität - (ÄZQ)). Main topics discussed in this guideline involve IABP support in the prophylactic, preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative setting as well as the treatment of right heart failure, contraindications, anticoagulation, monitoring, weaning, and limitations of IABP therapy. The presented 15 key messages of the guideline were approved after two consensus meetings under moderation of the AWMF with participation of the German Society of Cardiology (DGK), German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI), German Interdisciplinary Association for Intensive Care (DIVI) and the German Society for Cardiovascular Engineering (DGfK).

Evidence and consensus based guideline for the management of delirium, analgesia, and sedation in intensive care medicine. Revision 2015 (DAS-Guideline 2015) - short version.

In 2010, under the guidance of the DGAI (German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine) and DIVI (German Interdisciplinary Association for Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine), twelve German medical societies published the "Evidence- and Consensus-based Guidelines on the Management of Analgesia, Sedation and Delirium in Intensive Care". Since then, several new studies and publications have considerably increased the body of evidence, including the new recommendations from the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) in conjunction with Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) from 2013. For this update, a major restructuring and extension of the guidelines were needed in order to cover new aspects of treatment, such as sleep and anxiety management. The literature was systematically searched and evaluated using the criteria of the Oxford Center of Evidence Based Medicine. The body of evidence used to formulate these recommendations was reviewed and approved by representatives of 17 national societies. Three grades of recommendation were used as follows: Grade "A" (strong recommendation), Grade "B" (recommendation) and Grade "0" (open recommendation). The result is a comprehensive, interdisciplinary, evidence and consensus-based set of level 3 guidelines. This publication was designed for all ICU professionals, and takes into account all critically ill patient populations. It represents a guide to symptom-oriented prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of delirium, anxiety, stress, and protocol-based analgesia, sedation, and sleep-management in intensive care medicine.

Mid-term results of endoscopic mitral valve repair in combination with endocardial or epicardial ablation.

OBJECTIVE: Concomitant ablative therapy for atrial fibrillation can be effective at converting patients to normal sinus rhythm and at maintaining a regular rhythm for at least 5 years. We provide herein a comparison of an endocardial approach using Cryoablation with an epicardial approach using a suction-based RF ablation technology. METHODS: Between February 2004 and January 2009, 325 patients underwent an endoscopic mitral valve repair. Of those patients, 112 (35%) had a history of atrial fibrillation prior to the procedure, all of whom underwent a concomitant ablation procedure. The first group of 78 concomitant ablation patients underwent a left-sided endocardial ablation procedure using a Cryoablation device. The second group of 34 ablation patients underwent a left-sided epicardial ablation procedure using an internally cooled monopolar RF device. No significant differences existed between groups in the preoperative data. All ablated patients were treated by the same Amiodarone protocol. Patients were followed for a minimum of 6 months for determining each ablated patient's rhythm, medication use, and overall health status. RESULTS: The AF-free rates of group I and group II patients were statistically equivalent for both ablation groups at all evaluation time points. None of the 112 patients treated with endoscopic mitral valve repair and ablative therapy experienced a specific patient injury attributable to ablation; no ablated patients died in hospital following the procedure; there were no esophageal perforations and no coronary artery stenosis due to the ablations in either ablation group. The rate of patients without AF was 74% in group I and 82% in group II in the 6-month follow-up. The group I pacemaker implantation rate of 14% was significantly higher than non-ablated group (4.7%), but the group II rate of 5.9% observed did not differ significantly from the non-ablated group. CONCLUSIONS: It was shown with our results that one succeeds with the en bloc-ablation in treating patients with different kinds of atrial fibrillation with concurrent intervention in the mitral valve reliably and with a high rate. The combination of this procedure with endocardial interventional ablation technologies can possibly develop to a promising strategy in the hybrid therapy of the isolated chronic atrial fibrillation as a standalone procedure.

Evidence and consensus-based German guidelines for the management of analgesia, sedation and delirium in intensive care--short version.

Targeted monitoring of analgesia, sedation and delirium, as well as their appropriate management in critically ill patients is a standard of care in intensive care medicine. With the undisputed advantages of goal-oriented therapy established, there was a need to develop our own guidelines on analgesia and sedation in intensive care in Germany and these were published as 2(nd) Generation Guidelines in 2005. Through the dissemination of these guidelines in 2006, use of monitoring was shown to have improved from 8 to 51% and the use of protocol-based approaches increased to 46% (from 21%). Between 2006-2009, the existing guidelines from the DGAI (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin) and DIVI (Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin) were developed into 3(rd) Generation Guidelines for the securing and optimization of quality of analgesia, sedation and delirium management in the intensive care unit (ICU). In collaboration with another 10 professional societies, the literature has been reviewed using the criteria of the Oxford Center of Evidence Based Medicine. Using data from 671 reference works, text, diagrams and recommendations were drawn up. In the recommendations, Grade "A" (very strong recommendation), Grade "B" (strong recommendation) and Grade "0" (open recommendation) were agreed. As a result of this process we now have an interdisciplinary and consensus-based set of 3(rd) Generation Guidelines that take into account all critically illness patient populations. The use of protocols for analgesia, sedation and treatment of delirium are repeatedly demonstrated. These guidelines offer treatment recommendations for the ICU team. The implementation of scores and protocols into routine ICU practice is necessary for their success.