AWMF mold guideline "Medical clinical diagnostics for indoor mold exposure" - Update 2023 AWMF Register No. 161/001.

None.

[Clinical acute and emergency medicine curriculum-focus on internal medicine : Recommendations for advanced training in internal medicine in the emergency department]. / Curriculum Klinische Akut- und Notfallmedizin ­ Schwerpunkt Innere Medizin : Empfehlung zu Weiterbildungsinhalten der Inneren Medizin in der Notaufnahme.

In Germany, physicians qualify for emergency medicine by combining a specialty medical training-e.g. internal medicine-with advanced training in emergency medicine according to the statutes of the State Chambers of Physicians largely based upon the Guideline Regulations on Specialty Training of the German Medical Association. Internal medicine and their associated subspecialities represent an important column of emergency medicine. For the internal medicine aspects of emergency medicine, this curriculum presents an overview of knowledge, skills (competence levels I-III) as well as behaviours and attitudes allowing for the best treatment of patients. These include general aspects (structure and process quality, primary diagnostics and therapy as well as indication for subsequent treatment; resuscitation room management; diagnostics and monitoring; general therapeutic measures; hygiene measures; and pharmacotherapy) and also specific aspects concerning angiology, endocrinology, diabetology and metabolism, gastroenterology, geriatric medicine, hematology and oncology, infectiology, cardiology, nephrology, palliative care, pneumology, rheumatology and toxicology. Publications focussing on contents of advanced training are quoted in order to support this concept. The curriculum has primarily been written for internists for their advanced emergency training, but it may generally show practising emergency physicians the broad spectrum of internal medicine diseases or comorbidities presented by patients attending the emergency department.

ERS International Congress 2023: highlights from the Respiratory Intensive Care Assembly.

Early career members of Assembly 2 (Respiratory Intensive Care) attended the 2023 European Respiratory Society International Congress in Milan, Italy. The conference covered acute and chronic respiratory failure. Sessions of interest to our assembly members and to those interested in respiratory critical care are summarised in this article and include the latest updates in respiratory intensive care, in particular acute respiratory distress syndrome and mechanical ventilation.

Hospital admissions following emergency medical services in Germany: analysis of 2 million hospital cases in 2022.

BACKGROUND: The use of emergency medical services (EMS) in Germany has increased substantially over the last few decades. While current reform efforts aim to increase effectiveness and efficiency of the German hospital and EMS systems, there is lack of data on characteristics of hospital cases using EMS. OBJECTIVES: To analyze and compare the characteristics of cases hospitalized with and without the use of EMS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The BARMER health insurance data on more than 2 million hospital cases admitted in 2022 were analyzed. The distributions of age, clinical complexity (measured by patient clinical complexity levels, PCCL), main diagnoses, costs for EMS and hospital treatment, and multiple severity indicators were described. The overall severity of hospital cases was classified as "low or moderate" or "high" based on a combined severity indicator. All analyses were stratified by use of EMS and EMS type. RESULTS: A total of 28% of all included hospital cases used EMS. Relative to hospital cases without use of EMS, hospital cases with use of EMS were older (physician-staffed ambulance: 75 years, interquartile range [IQR] 59-84, double-crewed ambulance: 78 years, IQR 64-85) and had a higher clinical complexity. The severity of more than 30% of the cases using EMS (except for patient transport service ambulance) was classified as "low or moderate". The distributions of main diagnoses differed by severity and use of EMS. CONCLUSIONS: The high proportion of cases with low or moderate severity using EMS may indicate a substantial potential to avoid the use of EMS in the context of hospital admissions in Germany. Further investigation is required to explore whether the proportion of cases using EMS could be reduced by optimizing preclinical service.

[When mechanical ventilation fails-Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation]. / Wenn maschinelle Beatmung nicht mehr ausreicht ­ venovenöse extrakorporale Membranoxygenierung.

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) is predominantly being used as a rescue strategy in patients with acute lung failure, suffering from severe oxygenation and/or decarboxylation impairment. Cannulas introduced into the central veins lead blood through a membrane oxygenator in which it is oxygenated via sweep gas (pO2 up to 600 mm Hg) flow, eliminating CO2. According to the largest randomized studies carried out so far, the two most important indications for VV-ECMO are hypoxic respiratory failure (paO2 < 80 mm Hg for more than 6 h) and refractory hypercapnia (pH < 7.25 und pCO2 > 60 mm Hg with a breathing frequency of >30/min) despite optimal protective mechanical ventilation settings (ARDS, Δp < 14 mbar, plateau pressure < 30 mbar, tidal volume VT < 6 ml/kg idealized body weight). Relative contraindications are life-limiting comorbidities and terminal pulmonary diseases that cannot be treated by lung transplantation. Advanced patient age is not regarded as an absolute contraindication, though it highly impacts ARDS survival rates, especially for pneumonia associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The most frequent complications of VV-ECMO include bleeding, thrombus formation and rare cases of cannula-associated infections. Its use in nonintubated patients (awake ECMO) is possible in specific cases and has proven valuable as a bridge to lung transplant approach. Some ECMO centers offer cannulation of a patient at primary care hospitals, facilitating subsequent transport to the center (ECMO transport). The COVID-19 pandemic not only caused the number of VV-ECMO runs to skyrocket but has also drawn public attention to this extracorporeal procedure. Strict quality control to improve vvECMO outcomes according to the German hospital reform is urgently needed, especially so since the technique has a high demand in resources and bears significant risks when performed by untrained personnel.

ESICM guidelines on acute respiratory distress syndrome: definition, phenotyping and respiratory support strategies.

The aim of these guidelines is to update the 2017 clinical practice guideline (CPG) of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM). The scope of this CPG is limited to adult patients and to non-pharmacological respiratory support strategies across different aspects of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), including ARDS due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). These guidelines were formulated by an international panel of clinical experts, one methodologist and patients' representatives on behalf of the ESICM. The review was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement recommendations. We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and grade recommendations and the quality of reporting of each study based on the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) network guidelines. The CPG addressed 21 questions and formulates 21 recommendations on the following domains: (1) definition; (2) phenotyping, and respiratory support strategies including (3) high-flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNO); (4) non-invasive ventilation (NIV); (5) tidal volume setting; (6) positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment maneuvers (RM); (7) prone positioning; (8) neuromuscular blockade, and (9) extracorporeal life support (ECLS). In addition, the CPG includes expert opinion on clinical practice and identifies the areas of future research.

Comparative outcomes of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19 delivered in experienced European centres during successive SARS-CoV-2 variant outbreaks (ECMO-SURGES): an international, multicentre, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: To inform future research and practice, we aimed to investigate the outcomes of patients who received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to different variants of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive adult patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who received ECMO for ARDS in 21 experienced ECMO centres in eight European countries (Austria, Belgium, England, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, and Spain) between Jan 1, 2020, and Sept 30, 2021. We collected data on patient characteristics, clinical status, and management before and after the initiation of ECMO. Participants were grouped according to SARS-CoV-2 variant (wild type, alpha, delta, or other) and period of the pandemic (first [Jan 1-June 30] and second [July 1-Dec 31] semesters of 2020, and first [Jan 1-June 30] and second [July 1-Sept 30] semesters of 2021). Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to analyse evolving characteristics, management, and patient outcomes over the first 2 years of the pandemic, and independent risk factors of mortality were determined using multivariable Cox regression models. The primary outcome was mortality 90 days after the initiation of ECMO, with follow-up to Dec 30, 2021. FINDINGS: ECMO was initiated in 1345 patients. Patient characteristics and management were similar for the groups of patients infected with different variants, except that those with the delta variant had a younger median age and less hypertension and diabetes. 90-day mortality was 42% (569 of 1345 patients died) overall, and 43% (297/686) in patients infected with wild-type SARS-CoV-2, 39% (152/391) in those with the alpha variant, 40% (78/195) in those with the delta variant, and 58% (42/73) in patients infected with other variants (mainly beta and gamma). Mortality was 10% higher (50%) in the second semester of 2020, when the wild-type variant was still prevailing, than in other semesters (40%). Independent predictors of mortality were age, immunocompromised status, a longer time from intensive care unit admission to intubation, need for renal replacement therapy, and higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment haemodynamic component score, partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide, and lactate concentration before ECMO. After adjusting for these variables, mortality was significantly higher with the delta variant than with the other variants, the wild-type strain being the reference. INTERPRETATION: Although crude mortality did not differ between variants, adjusted risk of death was highest for patients treated with ECMO infected with the delta variant of SARS-CoV-2. The higher virulence and poorer outcomes associated with the delta strain might relate to higher viral load and increased inflammatory response syndrome in infected patients, reinforcing the need for a higher rate of vaccination in the population and updated selection criteria for ECMO, should a new and highly virulent strain of SARS-CoV-2 emerge in the future. Mortality was noticeably lower than in other large, multicentre series of patients who received ECMO for COVID-19, highlighting the need to concentrate resources at experienced centres. FUNDING: None.

Association of analgosedation with psychiatric symptoms and health-related quality of life in ARDS survivors: Post hoc analyses of the DACAPO study.

BACKGROUND: The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening condition with the risk of developing hypoxia and thus requires for invasive mechanical ventilation a long-term analgosedation. Yet, prolonged analgosedation may be a reason for declining health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the development of psychiatric disorders. METHODS: We used data from the prospective observational nation­wide ARDS study across Germany (DACAPO) to investigate the influence of sedation and analgesia on HRQoL and the risk of psychiatric symptoms in ARDS survivors 3, 6 and 12 months after their discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU). HRQoL was measured with the Physical and Mental Component Scale of the Short­Form 12 Questionnaire (PCS­12, MCS­12). The prevalence of psychiatric symptoms (depression and post­traumatic stress disorder [PTSD]) was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire­9 and the Post­Traumatic Stress Syndrome­14. The associations of analgosedation with HRQoL and psychiatric symptoms were investigated by means of multivariable linear regression models. RESULTS: The data of 134 ARDS survivors (median age [IQR]: 55 [44-64], 67% men) did not show any significant association between analgosedation and physical or mental HRQoL up to 1 year after ICU discharge. Multivariable linear regression analysis (B [95%­CI]) yielded a significant association between symptoms of psychiatric disorders and increased cumulative doses of ketamine up to 6 months after ICU discharge (after 3 months: depression: 0.15 [0.05, 0.25]; after 6 months: depression: 0.13 [0.03, 0.24] and PTSD: 0.42 [0.04, 0.80)]). CONCLUSIONS: Up to 1 year after ICU discharge, analgosedation did not influence HRQoL of ARDS survivors. Prolonged administration of ketamine during ICU treatment, however, was positively associated with the risk of psychiatric symptoms. The administration of ketamine to ICU patients with ARDS should be with caution. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02637011 (Registered 15 December 2015, retrospectively registered).

Respiratory indications for ECMO: focus on COVID-19.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly being used for patients with severe respiratory failure and has received particular attention during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Evidence from two key randomized controlled trials, a subsequent post hoc Bayesian analysis, and meta-analyses support the interpretation of a benefit of ECMO in combination with ultra-lung-protective ventilation for select patients with very severe forms of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). During the pandemic, new evidence has emerged helping to better define the role of ECMO for patients with COVID-19. Results from large cohorts suggest outcomes during the first wave of the pandemic were similar to those in non-COVID-19 cohorts. As the pandemic continued, mortality of patients supported with ECMO has increased. However, the precise reasons for this observation are unclear. Known risk factors for mortality in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients are higher patient age, concomitant extra-pulmonary organ failures or malignancies, prolonged mechanical ventilation before ECMO, less experienced treatment teams and lower ECMO caseloads in the treating center. ECMO is a high resource-dependent support option; therefore, it should be used judiciously, and its availability may need to be constrained when resources are scarce. More evidence from high-quality research is required to better define the role and limitations of ECMO in patients with severe COVID-19.

[Psychological aspects during and after intensive care treatment of ARDS]. / Psychologische Aspekte während und nach intensivmedizinischer Behandlung von ARDS.

Approximately 10% of all patients requiring intensive care develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The COVID-19 pandemic led to an accumulation of patients with severe ARDS. The experience of this severe respiratory failure is accompanied by feelings of existential anxiety in many patients.The complexity of the challenges and stresses that the disease and its treatment pose for the ARDS patient require an early multiprofessional approach to treatment already during intensive care. Psychological approaches are suitable to support the patient as well as the relatives in coping with the disease and to minimise risks for potential subsequent stress. Despite the long-term impairments of patients who have survived ARDS and the resulting need for follow-up care, suitable multimodal follow-up care concepts and the necessary care structures are still lacking. The article presents the psychological support during and after the intensive care treatment of ARDS.

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 .

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation during Respiratory Pandemics: Past, Present, and Future.

The role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in the management of severe acute respiratory failure, including acute respiratory distress syndrome, has become better defined in recent years in light of emerging high-quality evidence and technological advances. Use of ECMO has consequently increased throughout many parts of the world. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, however, has highlighted deficiencies in organizational capacity, research capability, knowledge sharing, and resource use. Although governments, medical societies, hospital systems, and clinicians were collectively unprepared for the scope of this pandemic, the use of ECMO, a highly resource-intensive and specialized form of life support, presented specific logistical and ethical challenges. As the pandemic has evolved, there has been greater collaboration in the use of ECMO across centers and regions, together with more robust data reporting through international registries and observational studies. Nevertheless, centralization of ECMO capacity is lacking in many regions of the world, and equitable use of ECMO resources remains uneven. There are no widely available mechanisms to conduct large-scale, rigorous clinical trials in real time. In this critical care review, we outline lessons learned during COVID-19 and prior respiratory pandemics in which ECMO was used, and we describe how we might apply these lessons going forward, both during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and in the future.

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) for severe respiratory failure in adult cancer patients: a retrospective multicenter analysis.

PURPOSE: The question of whether cancer patients with severe respiratory failure benefit from veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) remains unanswered. We, therefore, analyzed clinical characteristics and outcomes of a large cohort of cancer patients treated with vv-ECMO with the aim to identify prognostic factors. METHODS: 297 cancer patients from 19 German and Austrian hospitals who underwent vv-ECMO between 2009 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. A multivariable cox proportional hazards analysis for overall survival was performed. In addition, a propensity score-matched analysis and a latent class analysis were conducted. RESULTS: Patients had a median age of 56 (IQR 44-65) years and 214 (72%) were males. 159 (54%) had a solid tumor and 138 (47%) a hematologic malignancy. The 60-day overall survival rate was 26.8% (95% CI 22.1-32.4%). Low platelet count (HR 0.997, 95% CI 0.996-0.999; p = 0.0001 per 1000 platelets/µl), elevated lactate levels (HR 1.048, 95% CI 1.012-1.084; p = 0.0077), and disease status (progressive disease [HR 1.871, 95% CI 1.081-3.238; p = 0.0253], newly diagnosed [HR 1.571, 95% CI 1.044-2.364; p = 0.0304]) were independent adverse prognostic factors for overall survival. A propensity score-matched analysis with patients who did not receive ECMO treatment showed no significant survival advantage for treatment with ECMO. CONCLUSION: The overall survival of cancer patients who require vv-ECMO is poor. This study shows that the value of vv-ECMO in cancer patients with respiratory failure is still unclear and further research is needed. The risk factors identified in the present analysis may help to better select patients who may benefit from vv-ECMO.

Risks and Benefits of Ultra-Lung-Protective Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Strategies with a Focus on Extracorporeal Support.

Lung-protective ventilation strategies are the current standard of care for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome in an effort to provide adequate ventilatory requirements while minimizing ventilator-induced lung injury. Some patients may benefit from ultra-lung-protective ventilation, a strategy that achieves lower airway pressures and Vt than the current standard. Specific physiological parameters beyond severity of hypoxemia, such as driving pressure and respiratory system elastance, may be predictive of those most likely to benefit. Because application of ultra-lung-protective ventilation is often limited by respiratory acidosis, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal, which remove carbon dioxide from blood, is an attractive option. These strategies are associated with hematological complications, especially when applied at low blood-flow rates with devices designed for higher blood flows, and a recent large randomized controlled trial failed to show a benefit from an extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal-facilitated ultra-lung-protective ventilation strategy. Only in patients with very severe forms of acute respiratory distress syndrome has the use of an ultra-lung-protective ventilation strategy-accomplished with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-been suggested to have a favorable risk-to-benefit profile. In this critical care perspective, we address key areas of controversy related to ultra-lung-protective ventilation, including the trade-offs between minimizing ventilator-induced lung injury and the risks from strategies to achieve this added protection. In addition, we suggest which patients might benefit most from an ultra-lung-protective strategy and propose areas of future research.

Observational study of changes in utilization and outcomes in mechanical ventilation in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The role of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in severe COVID-19 remains a matter of debate. Therefore, the utilization and outcome of NIV in COVID-19 in an unbiased cohort was determined. AIM: The aim was to provide a detailed account of hospitalized COVID-19 patients requiring non-invasive ventilation during their hospital stay. Furthermore, differences of patients treated with NIV between the first and second wave are explored. METHODS: Confirmed COVID-19 cases of claims data of the Local Health Care Funds with non-invasive and/or invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) in the spring and autumn pandemic period in 2020 were comparable analysed. RESULTS: Nationwide cohort of 17.023 cases (median/IQR age 71/61-80 years, 64% male) 7235 (42.5%) patients primarily received IMV without NIV, 4469 (26.3%) patients received NIV without subsequent intubation, and 3472 (20.4%) patients had NIV failure (NIV-F), defined by subsequent endotracheal intubation. The proportion of patients who received invasive MV decreased from 75% to 37% during the second period. Accordingly, the proportion of patients with NIV exclusively increased from 9% to 30%, and those failing NIV increased from 9% to 23%. Median length of hospital stay decreased from 26 to 21 days, and duration of MV decreased from 11.9 to 7.3 days. The NIV failure rate decreased from 49% to 43%. Overall mortality increased from 51% versus 54%. Mortality was 44% with NIV-only, 54% with IMV and 66% with NIV-F with mortality rates steadily increasing from 62% in early NIV-F (day 1) to 72% in late NIV-F (>4 days). CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of NIV rapidly increased during the autumn period, which was associated with a reduced duration of MV, but not with overall mortality. High NIV-F rates are associated with increased mortality, particularly in late NIV-F.