@article{HerrmannLotzKaragiannidisetal.2022, author = {Herrmann, Johannes and Lotz, Christopher and Karagiannidis, Christian and Weber-Carstens, Steffen and Kluge, Stefan and Putensen, Christian and Wehrfritz, Andreas and Schmidt, Karsten and Ellerkmann, Richard K. and Oswald, Daniel and Lotz, G{\"o}sta and Zotzmann, Viviane and Moerer, Onnen and K{\"u}hn, Christian and Kochanek, Matthias and Muellenbach, Ralf and Gaertner, Matthias and Fichtner, Falk and Brettner, Florian and Findeisen, Michael and Heim, Markus and Lahmer, Tobias and Rosenow, Felix and Haake, Nils and Lepper, Philipp M. and Rosenberger, Peter and Braune, Stephan and Kohls, Mirjam and Heuschmann, Peter and Meybohm, Patrick}, title = {Key characteristics impacting survival of COVID-19 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation}, series = {Critical Care}, volume = {26}, journal = {Critical Care}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1186/s13054-022-04053-6}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-299686}, year = {2022}, abstract = {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. PaO\(_{2}\)/FiO\(_{2}\) 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.}, language = {en} } @article{VollmuthMuljukovAbuMugheisibetal.2021, author = {Vollmuth, Christoph and Muljukov, Olga and Abu-Mugheisib, Mazen and Angermeier, Anselm and Barlinn, Jessica and Busetto, Loraine and Grau, Armin J. and G{\"u}nther, Albrecht and Gumbinger, Christoph and Hubert, Nikolai and H{\"u}ttemann, Katrin and Klingner, Carsten and Naumann, Markus and Palm, Frederick and Remi, Jan and R{\"u}cker, Viktoria and Schessl, Joachim and Schlachetzki, Felix and Schuppner, Ramona and Schwab, Stefan and Schwartz, Andreas and Trommer, Adrian and Urbanek, Christian and Volbers, Bastian and Weber, Joachim and Wojciechowski, Claudia and Worthmann, Hans and Zickler, Philipp and Heuschmann, Peter U. and Haeusler, Karl Georg and Hubert, Gordian Jan}, title = {Impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on stroke teleconsultations in Germany in the first half of 2020}, series = {European Journal of Neurology}, volume = {28}, journal = {European Journal of Neurology}, number = {10}, doi = {10.1111/ene.14787}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-259396}, pages = {3267-3278}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Background and purpose The effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on telemedical care have not been described on a national level. Thus, we investigated the medical stroke treatment situation before, during, and after the first lockdown in Germany. Methods In this nationwide, multicenter study, data from 14 telemedical networks including 31 network centers and 155 spoke hospitals covering large parts of Germany were analyzed regarding patients' characteristics, stroke type/severity, and acute stroke treatment. A survey focusing on potential shortcomings of in-hospital and (telemedical) stroke care during the pandemic was conducted. Results Between January 2018 and June 2020, 67,033 telemedical consultations and 38,895 telemedical stroke consultations were conducted. A significant decline of telemedical (p < 0.001) and telemedical stroke consultations (p < 0.001) during the lockdown in March/April 2020 and a reciprocal increase after relaxation of COVID-19 measures in May/June 2020 were observed. Compared to 2018-2019, neither stroke patients' age (p = 0.38), gender (p = 0.44), nor severity of ischemic stroke (p = 0.32) differed in March/April 2020. Whereas the proportion of ischemic stroke patients for whom endovascular treatment (14.3\% vs. 14.6\%; p = 0.85) was recommended remained stable, there was a nonsignificant trend toward a lower proportion of recommendation of intravenous thrombolysis during the lockdown (19.0\% vs. 22.1\%; p = 0.052). Despite the majority of participating network centers treating patients with COVID-19, there were no relevant shortcomings reported regarding in-hospital stroke treatment or telemedical stroke care. Conclusions Telemedical stroke care in Germany was able to provide full service despite the COVID-19 pandemic, but telemedical consultations declined abruptly during the lockdown period and normalized after relaxation of COVID-19 measures in Germany.}, language = {en} }