[Treatment of Burn Shock - The First 24 hours and Beyond]. / Die Therapie des Verbrennungsschocks ­ die ersten 24 h und darüber hinaus.

Acute phase and resuscitation after burn trauma are challenging even for specialised burn centres due to the individual onset and differences compared with other forms of shock. The guidelines of the German Society of Burn Medicine (DGV) cover the scientific basis of modern burn treatment. Nevertheless, uncertainty remains regarding the detailed practical handling. This expert consensus focuses on best practices for the treatment of patients with major burns in specialised burn centres and by clinical first responders. The short version of this expert consensus can be downloaded at: https://verbrennungsmedizin.de/files/dgv_files/pdf/positionspapier/Pos%20Therapie%20des%20Verbrennungsschock%20AK%20Intensivmedizin%202023.pdf.

Early Autocalibrated Arterial Waveform Analysis for the Management of Burn Shock-A Cohort Study.

Adequate fluid therapy is crucial for resuscitation after major burns. To adapt this to individual patient demands, standard is adjustment of volume to laboratory parameters and values of enhanced hemodynamic monitoring. To implement calibrated parameters, patients must have reached the intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of this study was, to evaluate the use of an auto-calibrated enhanced hemodynamic monitoring device to improve fluid management before admission to ICU. We used PulsioflexProAqt® (Getinge) during initial treatment and burn shock resuscitation. Analysis was performed regarding time of measurement, volume management, organ dysfunction, and mortality. We conducted a monocentre, prospective cohort study of 20 severely burned patients, >20% total body surface area (TBSA), receiving monitoring immediately after admission. We compared to 57 patients, matched in terms of TBSA, age, sex, and existence of inhalation injury out of a retrospective control group, who received standard care. Hemodynamic measurement with autocalibrated monitoring started significantly earlier: 3.75(2.67-6.0) hours (h) after trauma in the study group versus 13.6(8.1-17.5) h in the control group (P < .001). Study group received less fluid after 6 h: 1.7(1.2-2.2) versus 2.3(1.6-2.8) ml/TBSA%/kg, P = .043 and 12 h: 3.0(2.5-4.0) versus 4.2(3.1-5.0) ml/TBSA%/kg, P = .047. Dosage of norepinephrine was higher after 18 h in the study group: 0.20(0.12-0.3) versus 0.08(0.02-0.18) µg/kg/min, P = .014. The study group showed no adult respiratory distress syndrome versus 21% in the control group, P = .031. There was no difference in other organ failures, organ replacement therapy, and mortality. The use of auto-calibrated enhanced hemodynamic monitoring is a fast and feasible way to guide early fluid therapy after burn trauma. It reduces the time to reach information about patient's volume capacity. Management of fluid application changed to a more restrictive fluid use in the early period of burn shock and led to a reduction of pulmonary complications.

Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor as Potential Biomarker for COVID-19 Severity.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is characterized by immunological responses to viral replication and coherent with endothelitis, microvascular disturbance of lung vasculature and coagulopathy. Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) is a proangiogenic mediator regulating endothelial changes. It is induced by proinflammatory signaling and hypoxia. We sought to determine whether VEGF levels differ between SARS-CoV-2-positive patients of different disease severity and whether VEGF might be useful in risk stratification. METHODS: After retrospective screening of all SARS-CoV-2-positive patients treated in Unfallkrankenhaus Berlin in 2020, we included those with documented VEGF measurement. We extracted laboratory values and clinical parameters. An exploratory data analysis was performed to detect possible relations between VEGF level and clinical disease features. RESULTS: We included 167 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients of which 139 suffered from COVID-19. Seventy-one of the COVID-19 patients had to be treated in the intensive care unit (ICU), those patients exhibited higher VEGF levels than those being admitted to normal wards (535 vs 279 pg/L, P < .001). APACHE-2 (Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation Score) correlated with mortality and patients with high values showed higher VEGF concentrations on admission (456 vs 875 pg/L, p = 0.006). Receiver operating characteristic analytic revealed that the occurrence of organ dysfunctions like acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), shock, or acute kidney injury could be predicted by VEGF. It was significantly higher in patients who later died compared to survivors (637 vs 389 pg/mL, P = 0.041) and predicted mortality with same accuracy as established markers. In our cohort, association of VEGF above 277 pg/L on admission with risk of ARDS could be confirmed in logistic regression adjusting for possible confounding factors (odds ratio 3.1, 95% confidence interval: 1.34-7.7). DISCUSSION: Even though there are several limitations to this retrospective study it revealed that in COVID-19 patients VEGF can contribute to the prediction of necessity of ICU, mortality and the prediction of ARDS, kidney injury or shock. Its use in risk stratification and potential pathogenetic involvement should be further investigated.