@article{SchmidKredelUllrichetal.2021, author = {Schmid, Benedikt and Kredel, Markus and Ullrich, Roman and Krenn, Katharina and Lucas, Rudolf and Markstaller, Klaus and Fischer, Bernhard and Kranke, Peter and Meybohm, Patrick and Zwißler, Bernhard and Frank, Sandra}, title = {Safety and preliminary efficacy of sequential multiple ascending doses of solnatide to treat pulmonary permeability edema in patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS - a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial}, series = {Trials}, volume = {22}, journal = {Trials}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1186/s13063-021-05588-9}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-258783}, pages = {643}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Background Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a complex clinical diagnosis with various possible etiologies. One common feature, however, is pulmonary permeability edema, which leads to an increased alveolar diffusion pathway and, subsequently, impaired oxygenation and decarboxylation. A novel inhaled peptide agent (AP301, solnatide) was shown to markedly reduce pulmonary edema in animal models of ARDS and to be safe to administer to healthy humans in a Phase I clinical trial. Here, we present the protocol for a Phase IIB clinical trial investigating the safety and possible future efficacy endpoints in ARDS patients. Methods This is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind intervention study. Patients with moderate to severe ARDS in need of mechanical ventilation will be randomized to parallel groups receiving escalating doses of solnatide or placebo, respectively. Before advancing to a higher dose, a data safety monitoring board will investigate the data from previous patients for any indication of patient safety violations. The intervention (application of the investigational drug) takes places twice daily over the course of 7 days, ensued by a follow-up period of another 21 days. Discussion The patients to be included in this trial will be severely sick and in need of mechanical ventilation. The amount of data to be collected upon screening and during the course of the intervention phase is substantial and the potential timeframe for inclusion of any given patient is short. However, when prepared properly, adherence to this protocol will make for the acquisition of reliable data. Particular diligence needs to be exercised with respect to informed consent, because eligible patients will most likely be comatose and/or deeply sedated at the time of inclusion. Trial registration This trial was prospectively registered with the EU Clinical trials register (clinicaltrialsregister.eu). EudraCT Number: 2017-003855-47.}, language = {en} } @article{SitterSchlesingerReinholdetal.2022, author = {Sitter, Magdalena and Schlesinger, Tobias and Reinhold, Ann-Kristin and Scholler, Axel and Heymann, Christian von and Welfle, Sabine and Bartmann, Catharina and W{\"o}ckel, Achim and Kleinschmidt, Stefan and Schneider, Sven and Gottschalk, Andr{\´e} and Greve, Susanne and Wermelt, Julius Z. and Wiener, Roland and Schulz, Frank and Chappell, Daniel and Brunner, Maya and Neumann, Claudia and Meybohm, Patrick and Kranke, Peter}, title = {COVID-19 in der geburtshilflichen An{\"a}sthesie: Prospektive Erfassung von SARS-CoV-2-Infektionen zum Zeitpunkt der Geburt sowie des peripartalen Verlaufs SARS-CoV-2-positiver Schwangerer}, series = {Der Anaesthesist}, volume = {71}, journal = {Der Anaesthesist}, number = {6}, issn = {1432-055X}, doi = {10.1007/s00101-021-01068-6}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-264878}, pages = {452-461}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Hintergrund Im Rahmen der Pandemie des SARS-CoV-2-Virus erlangte das Patientenkollektiv der Schwangeren fr{\"u}h Aufmerksamkeit. Initial wurde angesichts sich fr{\"u}h abzeichnender Krankheitsf{\"a}lle bei j{\"u}ngeren Patienten mit einem erheblichen Aufkommen peripartal zu betreuender, COVID-19-positiver Schwangerer gerechnet. Ziel der Arbeit Diese Arbeit vermittelt einen Einblick in die SARS-CoV-2-Infektionszahlen im Rahmen der geburtshilflichen An{\"a}sthesie zu Beginn der Pandemie sowie w{\"a}hrend der zweiten Infektionswelle in Deutschland. Methoden {\"U}ber das COALA-Register (COVID-19 related Obstetric Anaesthesia Longitudinal Assessment-Registry) wurden sowohl von M{\"a}rz bis Mai 2020 als auch von Oktober 2020 bis Februar 2021 in Deutschland und der Schweiz w{\"o}chentlich prospektiv Daten zu Verdachts- und best{\"a}tigten SARS-CoV-2-F{\"a}llen bei Schwangeren zum Zeitpunkt der Geburt erhoben. Betrachtet wurden die Verteilung dieser auf die Anzahl der Geburten, Zentren und Erhebungswochen sowie m{\"u}tterliche Charakteristika und Krankheitsverl{\"a}ufe. Ergebnisse Neun Zentren haben im Verlauf 44 SARS-CoV-2-positive Schwangere zum Zeitpunkt der Geburt bei 7167 Geburten (0,6 \%) gemeldet (3 F{\"a}lle auf 2270 Geburten (0,4 \%) und 41 F{\"a}lle auf 4897 Geburten (0,8 \%)). Berichtet wurden 2 schwere COVID-19-Verl{\"a}ufe (n = 1 mit Todesfolge nach ECMO, n = 1 mit ECMO {\"u}berlebt). Bei 28 (68 \%) Patientinnen verlief die Infektion asymptomatisch. Ein Neugeborenes wurde im Verlauf positiv auf SARS-CoV‑2 getestet. Schlussfolgerung Mithilfe des Registers konnte das Auftreten von F{\"a}llen zu Beginn der Pandemie zeitnah eingesch{\"a}tzt werden. Es traten sporadisch Verdachtsf{\"a}lle bzw. best{\"a}tigte F{\"a}lle auf. Aufgrund fehlender fl{\"a}chendeckender Testung muss aber von einer Dunkelziffer asymptomatischer F{\"a}lle ausgegangen werden. W{\"a}hrend der zweiten Infektionswelle wurden 68 \% asymptomatische F{\"a}lle gemeldet. Jedoch kann es bei jungen, gesunden Patientinnen ohne das Vorliegen typischer Risikofaktoren zu schwerwiegenden Verl{\"a}ufen kommen.}, language = {de} } @article{SitterPecksRuedigeretal.2022, author = {Sitter, Magdalena and Pecks, Ulrich and R{\"u}diger, Mario and Friedrich, Sabine and Fill Malfertheiner, Sara and Hein, Alexander and K{\"o}nigbauer, Josefine T. and Becke-Jakob, Karin and Z{\"o}llkau, Janine and Ramsauer, Babett and Rathberger, Katharina and Pontones, Constanza A. and Kraft, Katrina and Meybohm, Patrick and H{\"a}rtel, Christoph and Kranke, Peter}, title = {Pregnant and postpartum women requiring intensive care treatment for COVID-19 — first data from the CRONOS-registry}, series = {Journal of Clinical Medicine}, volume = {11}, journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine}, number = {3}, issn = {2077-0383}, doi = {10.3390/jcm11030701}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-255257}, year = {2022}, abstract = {(1) Background: Data on coronavirus 2 infection during pregnancy vary. We aimed to describe maternal characteristics and clinical presentation of SARS-CoV-2 positive women requiring intensive care treatment for COVID-19 during pregnancy and postpartum period based on data of a comprehensive German surveillance system in obstetric patients. (2) Methods: Data from COVID-19 Related Obstetric and Neonatal Outcome Study (CRONOS), a prospective multicenter registry for SARS-CoV-2 positive pregnant women, was analyzed with respect to ICU treatment. All women requiring intensive care treatment for COVID-19 were included and compared regarding maternal characteristics, course of disease, as well as maternal and neonatal outcomes. (3) Results: Of 2650 cases in CRONOS, 101 women (4\%) had a documented ICU stay. Median maternal age was 33 (IQR, 30-36) years. COVID-19 was diagnosed at a median gestational age of 33 (IQR, 28-35) weeks. As the most invasive form of COVID-19 treatment interventions, patients received either continuous monitoring of vital signs without further treatment requirement (n = 6), insufflation of oxygen (n = 30), non-invasive ventilation (n = 22), invasive ventilation (n = 28), or escalation to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n = 15). No significant clinical differences were identified between patients receiving different forms of ventilatory support for COVID-19. Prevalence of preterm delivery was significantly higher in women receiving invasive respiratory treatments. Four women died of COVID-19 and six fetuses were stillborn. (4) Conclusions: Our cohort shows that progression of COVID-19 is rare in pregnant and postpartum women treated in the ICU. Preterm birth rate is high and COVID-19 requiring respiratory support increases the risk of poor maternal and neonatal outcome.}, language = {en} } @article{SchlesingerWeibelSteinfeldtetal.2021, author = {Schlesinger, Tobias and Weibel, Stephanie and Steinfeldt, Thorsten and Sitter, Magdalena and Meybohm, Patrick and Kranke, Peter}, title = {Intraoperative management of combined general anesthesia and thoracic epidural analgesia: A survey among German anesthetists}, series = {Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica}, volume = {65}, journal = {Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica}, number = {10}, doi = {10.1111/aas.13971}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-258286}, pages = {1490-1496}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Background Evidence concerning combined general anesthesia (GA) and thoracic epidural analgesia (EA) is controversial and the procedure appears heterogeneous in clinical implementation. We aimed to gain an overview of different approaches and to unveil a suspected heterogeneity concerning the intraoperative management of combined GA and EA. Methods This was an anonymous survey among Members of the Scientific working group for regional anesthesia within the German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI) conducted from February 2020 to August 2020. Results The response rate was 38\%. The majority of participants were experienced anesthetists with high expertise for the specific regimen of combined GA and EA. Most participants establish EA in the sitting position (94\%), prefer early epidural initiation (prior to skin incision: 80\%; intraoperative: 14\%) and administer ropivacaine (89\%) in rather low concentrations (0.2\%: 45\%; 0.375\%: 30\%; 0.75\%: 15\%) mostly with an opioid (84\%) in a bolus-based mode (95\%). The majority reduce systemic opioid doses intraoperatively if EA works sufficiently (minimal systemic opioids: 58\%; analgesia exclusively via EA: 34\%). About 85\% manage intraoperative EA insufficiency with systemic opioids, 52\% try to escalate EA, and only 25\% use non-opioids, e.g. intravenous ketamine or lidocaine. Conclusions Although, consensus seems to be present for several aspects (patient's position during epidural puncture, main epidural substance, application mode), there is considerable heterogeneity regarding systemic opioids, rescue strategies for insufficient EA, and hemodynamic management, which might explain inconsistent results of previous trials and meta-analyses.}, language = {en} } @article{LotzNotzKrankeetal.2020, author = {Lotz, Christopher and Notz, Quirin and Kranke, Peter and Kredel, Markus and Meybohm, Patrick}, title = {Unconventional approaches to mechanical ventilation - step-by-step through the COVID-19 crisis}, series = {Critical Care}, volume = {24}, journal = {Critical Care}, doi = {10.1186/s13054-020-02954-y}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-229868}, year = {2020}, abstract = {No abstract available.}, language = {en} } @article{ReisPoppSchmidetal.2021, author = {Reis, Stefanie and Popp, Maria and Schmid, Benedikt and Stegemann, Miriam and Metzendorf, Maria-Inti and Kranke, Peter and Meybohm, Patrick and Weibel, Stephanie}, title = {Safety and efficacy of intermediate- and therapeutic-dose anticoagulation for hospitalised patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis}, series = {Journal of Clinical Medicine}, volume = {11}, journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine}, number = {1}, issn = {2077-0383}, doi = {10.3390/jcm11010057}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-252285}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Background: COVID-19 patients are at high thrombotic risk. The safety and efficacy of different anticoagulation regimens in COVID-19 patients remain unclear. Methods: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intermediate- or therapeutic-dose anticoagulation to standard thromboprophylaxis in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 irrespective of disease severity. To assess efficacy and safety, we meta-analysed data for all-cause mortality, clinical status, thrombotic event or death, and major bleedings. Results: Eight RCTs, including 5580 patients, were identified, with two comparing intermediate- and six therapeutic-dose anticoagulation to standard thromboprophylaxis. Intermediate-dose anticoagulation may have little or no effect on any thrombotic event or death (RR 1.03, 95\% CI 0.86-1.24), but may increase major bleedings (RR 1.48, 95\% CI 0.53-4.15) in moderate to severe COVID-19 patients. Therapeutic-dose anticoagulation may decrease any thrombotic event or death in patients with moderate COVID-19 (RR 0.64, 95\% CI 0.38-1.07), but may have little or no effect in patients with severe disease (RR 0.98, 95\% CI 0.86-1.12). The risk of major bleedings may increase independent of disease severity (RR 1.78, 95\% CI 1.15-2.74). Conclusions: Certainty of evidence is still low. Moderately affected COVID-19 patients may benefit from therapeutic-dose anticoagulation, but the risk for bleeding is increased.}, language = {en} } @article{SchlesingerWeissbrichWedekinketal.2020, author = {Schlesinger, Tobias and Weißbrich, Benedikt and Wedekink, Florian and Notz, Quirin and Herrmann, Johannes and Krone, Manuel and Sitter, Magdalena and Schmid, Benedikt and Kredel, Markus and Stumpner, Jan and D{\"o}lken, Lars and Wischhusen, J{\"o}rg and Kranke, Peter and Meybohm, Patrick and Lotz, Christpher}, title = {Biodistribution and serologic response in SARS-CoV-2 induced ARDS: A cohort study}, series = {PLoS One}, volume = {15, 2020}, journal = {PLoS One}, number = {11}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0242917}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-231348}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Background The viral load and tissue distribution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remain important questions. The current study investigated SARS-CoV-2 viral load, biodistribution and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody formation in patients suffering from severe corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods This is a retrospective single-center study in 23 patients with COVID-19-induced ARDS. Data were collected within routine intensive care. SARS-CoV-2 viral load was assessed via reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). Overall, 478 virology samples were taken. Anti-SARS-CoV-2-Spike-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibody detection of blood samples was performed with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Results Most patients (91\%) suffered from severe ARDS during ICU treatment with a 30-day mortality of 30\%. None of the patients received antiviral treatment. Tracheal aspirates tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in 100\% of the cases, oropharyngeal swabs only in 77\%. Blood samples were positive in 26\% of the patients. No difference of viral load was found in tracheal or blood samples with regard to 30-day survival or disease severity. SARS-CoV-2 was never found in dialysate. Serologic testing revealed significantly lower concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing IgM and IgA antibodies in survivors compared to non-survivors (p = 0.009). Conclusions COVID-19 induced ARDS is accompanied by a high viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in tracheal aspirates, which remained detectable in the majority throughout intensive care treatment. Remarkably, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was never detected in dialysate even in patients with RNAemia. Viral load or the buildup of neutralizing antibodies was not associated with 30-day survival or disease severity.}, language = {en} } @article{NotzSchmalzingWedekinketal.2020, author = {Notz, Quirin and Schmalzing, Marc and Wedekink, Florian and Schlesinger, Tobias and Gernert, Michael and Herrmann, Johannes and Sorger, Lena and Weismann, Dirk and Schmid, Benedikt and Sitter, Magdalena and Schlegel, Nicolas and Kranke, Peter and Wischhusen, J{\"o}rg and Meybohm, Patrick and Lotz, Christopher}, title = {Pro- and Anti-Inflammatory Responses in Severe COVID-19-Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome—An Observational Pilot Study}, series = {Frontiers in Immunology}, volume = {11}, journal = {Frontiers in Immunology}, issn = {1664-3224}, doi = {10.3389/fimmu.2020.581338}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-212815}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Objectives The severity of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is largely determined by the immune response. First studies indicate altered lymphocyte counts and function. However, interactions of pro- and anti-inflammatory mechanisms remain elusive. In the current study we characterized the immune responses in patients suffering from severe COVID-19-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods This was a single-center retrospective study in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with confirmed COVID-19 between March 14th and May 28th 2020 (n = 39). Longitudinal data were collected within routine clinical care, including flow-cytometry of lymphocyte subsets, cytokine analysis and growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15). Antibody responses against the receptor binding domain (RBD) of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Spike protein were analyzed. Results All patients suffered from severe ARDS, 30.8\% died. Interleukin (IL)-6 was massively elevated at every time-point. The anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 was concomitantly upregulated with IL-6. The cellular response was characterized by lymphocytopenia with low counts of CD8+ T cells, natural killer (NK) and na{\"i}ve T helper cells. CD8+ T and NK cells recovered after 8 to 14 days. The B cell system was largely unimpeded. This coincided with a slight increase in anti-SARS-CoV-2-Spike-RBD immunoglobulin (Ig) G and a decrease in anti-SARS-CoV-2-Spike-RBD IgM. GDF-15 levels were elevated throughout ICU treatment. Conclusions Massively elevated levels of IL-6 and a delayed cytotoxic immune defense characterized severe COVID-19-induced ARDS. The B cell response and antibody production were largely unimpeded. No obvious imbalance of pro- and anti-inflammatory mechanisms was observed, with elevated GDF-15 levels suggesting increased tissue resilience.}, language = {en} } @article{NotzHerrmannSchlesingeretal.2021, author = {Notz, Quirin and Herrmann, Johannes and Schlesinger, Tobias and Helmer, Philipp and Sudowe, Stephan and Sun, Qian and Hackler, Julian and Roeder, Daniel and Lotz, Christopher and Meybohm, Patrick and Kranke, Peter and Schomburg, Lutz and Stoppe, Christian}, title = {Clinical Significance of Micronutrient Supplementation in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients with Severe ARDS}, series = {Nutrients}, volume = {13}, journal = {Nutrients}, number = {6}, issn = {2072-6643}, doi = {10.3390/nu13062113}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-241112}, year = {2021}, abstract = {The interplay between inflammation and oxidative stress is a vicious circle, potentially resulting in organ damage. Essential micronutrients such as selenium (Se) and zinc (Zn) support anti-oxidative defense systems and are commonly depleted in severe disease. This single-center retrospective study investigated micronutrient levels under Se and Zn supplementation in critically ill patients with COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and explored potential relationships with immunological and clinical parameters. According to intensive care unit (ICU) standard operating procedures, patients received 1.0 mg of intravenous Se daily on top of artificial nutrition, which contained various amounts of Se and Zn. Micronutrients, inflammatory cytokines, lymphocyte subsets and clinical data were extracted from the patient data management system on admission and after 10 to 14 days of treatment. Forty-six patients were screened for eligibility and 22 patients were included in the study. Twenty-one patients (95\%) suffered from severe ARDS and 14 patients (64\%) survived to ICU discharge. On admission, the majority of patients had low Se status biomarkers and Zn levels, along with elevated inflammatory parameters. Se supplementation significantly elevated Se (p = 0.027) and selenoprotein P levels (SELENOP; p = 0.016) to normal range. Accordingly, glutathione peroxidase 3 (GPx3) activity increased over time (p = 0.021). Se biomarkers, most notably SELENOP, were inversely correlated with CRP (r\(_s\) = -0.495), PCT (r\(_s\) = -0.413), IL-6 (r\(_s\) = -0.429), IL-1β (r\(_s\) = -0.440) and IL-10 (r\(_s\) = -0.461). Positive associations were found for CD8\(^+\) T cells (r(_s\) = 0.636), NK cells (r\(_s\) = 0.772), total IgG (r\(_s\) = 0.493) and PaO\(_2\)/FiO\(_2\) ratios (r\(_s\) = 0.504). In addition, survivors tended to have higher Se levels after 10 to 14 days compared to non-survivors (p = 0.075). Sufficient Se and Zn levels may potentially be of clinical significance for an adequate immune response in critically ill patients with severe COVID-19 ARDS.}, language = {en} } @article{HottenrottSchlesingerHelmeretal.2020, author = {Hottenrott, Sebastian and Schlesinger, Tobias and Helmer, Philipp and Meybohm, Patrick and Alkatout, Ibrahim and Kranke, Peter}, title = {Do small incisions need only minimal anesthesia? — anesthetic management in laparoscopic and robotic surgery}, series = {Journal of Clinical Medicine}, volume = {9}, journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine}, number = {12}, issn = {2077-0383}, doi = {10.3390/jcm9124058}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-220039}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Laparoscopic techniques have established themselves as a major part of modern surgery. Their implementation in every surgical discipline has played a vital part in the reduction of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Precise robotic surgery, as an evolution of this, is shaping the present and future operating theatre that an anesthetist is facing. While incisions get smaller and the impact on the organism seems to dwindle, challenges for anesthetists do not lessen and could even become more demanding than in open procedures. This review focuses on the pathophysiological effects of contemporary laparoscopic and robotic procedures and summarizes anesthetic challenges and strategies for perioperative management.}, language = {en} }