@article{FiedlerMuellenbachRolfesetal.2022,
  author    = {Fiedler, Mascha O. and Muellenbach, Ralf M. and Rolfes, Caroline and Lotz, Christopher and Nickel, Felix and M{\"u}ller-Stich, Beat P. and Supady, Alexander and Lepper, Philipp M. and Weigand, Markus A. and Meybohm, Patrick and Kalenka, Armin and Reyher, Christian},
  title     = {Pumpless extracorporeal hemadsorption technique (pEHAT): a proof-of-concept animal study},
  series = {Journal of Clinical Medicine},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Journal of Clinical Medicine},
  number    = {22},
  issn      = {2077-0383},
  doi       = {10.3390/jcm11226815},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-297347},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Background: Extracorporeal hemadsorption eliminates proinflammatory mediators in critically ill patients with hyperinflammation. The use of a pumpless extracorporeal hemadsorption technique allows its early usage prior to organ failure and the need for an additional medical device. In our animal model, we investigated the feasibility of pumpless extracorporeal hemadsorption over a wide range of mean arterial pressures (MAP). Methods: An arteriovenous shunt between the femoral artery and femoral vein was established in eight pigs. The hemadsorption devices were inserted into the shunt circulation; four pigs received CytoSorb\(^®\) and four Oxiris\(^®\) hemadsorbers. Extracorporeal blood flow was measured in a range between mean arterial pressures of 45-85 mmHg. Mean arterial pressures were preset using intravenous infusions of noradrenaline, urapidil, or increased sedatives. Results: Extracorporeal blood flows remained well above the minimum flows recommended by the manufacturers throughout all MAP steps for both devices. Linear regression resulted in CytoSorb\(^®\) blood flow [mL/min] = 4.226 × MAP [mmHg] - 3.496 (R-square 0.8133) and Oxiris\(^®\) blood flow [mL/min] = 3.267 × MAP [mmHg] + 57.63 (R-square 0.8708), respectively. Conclusion: Arteriovenous pumpless extracorporeal hemadsorption resulted in sufficient blood flows through both the CytoSorb\(^®\) and Oxiris\(^®\) devices over a wide range of mean arterial blood pressures and is likely an intriguing therapeutic option in the early phase of septic shock or hyperinflammatory syndromes.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HerrmannAdamNotzetal.2020,
  author    = {Herrmann, Johannes and Adam, Elisabeth Hannah and Notz, Quirin and Helmer, Philipp and Sonntagbauer, Michael and Ungemach-Papenberg, Peter and Sanns, Andreas and Zausig, York and Steinfeldt, Thorsten and Torje, Iuliu and Schmid, Benedikt and Schlesinger, Tobias and Rolfes, Caroline and Reyher, Christian and Kredel, Markus and Stumpner, Jan and Brack, Alexander and Wurmb, Thomas and Gill-Schuster, Daniel and Kranke, Peter and Weismann, Dirk and Klinker, Hartwig and Heuschmann, Peter and R{\"u}cker, Viktoria and Frantz, Stefan and Ertl, Georg and Muellenbach, Ralf Michael and Mutlak, Haitham and Meybohm, Patrick and Zacharowski, Kai and Lotz, Christopher},
  title     = {COVID-19 Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome — A Multicenter Observational Study},
  series = {Frontiers in Medicine},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Medicine},
  issn      = {2296-858X},
  doi       = {10.3389/fmed.2020.599533},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-219834},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {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.},
  language  = {en}
}