TY - JOUR A1 - Werner, Anne A1 - Popp, Maria A1 - Fichtner, Falk A1 - Holzmann-Littig, Christopher A1 - Kranke, Peter A1 - Steckelberg, Anke A1 - Lühnen, Julia A1 - Redlich, Lisa Marie A1 - Dickel, Steffen A1 - Grimm, Clemens A1 - Moerer, Onnen A1 - Nothacker, Monika A1 - Seeber, Christian T1 - COVID-19 intensive care — Evaluation of public information sources and current standards of care in German intensive care units: a cross sectional online survey on intensive care staff in Germany JF - Healthcare N2 - Backround: In February 2021, the first formal evidence and consensus-based (S3) guidelines for the inpatient treatment of patients with COVID-19 were published in Germany and have been updated twice during 2021. The aim of the present study is to re-evaluate the dissemination pathways and strategies for ICU staff (first evaluation in December 2020 when previous versions of consensus-based guidelines (S2k) were published) and question selected aspects of guideline adherence of standard care for patients with COVID-19 in the ICU. Methods: We conducted an anonymous online survey among German intensive care staff from 11 October 2021 to 11 November 2021. We distributed the survey via e-mail in intensive care facilities and requested redirection to additional intensive care staff (snowball sampling). Results: There was a difference between the professional groups in the number, selection and qualitative assessment of information sources about COVID-19. Standard operating procedures were most frequently used by all occupational groups and received a high quality rating. Physicians preferred sources for active information search (e.g., medical journals), while nurses predominantly used passive consumable sources (e.g., every-day media). Despite differences in usage behaviour, the sources were rated similarly in terms of the quality of the information on COVID-19. The trusted organizations have not changed over time. The use of guidelines was frequently stated and highly recommended. The majority of the participants reported guideline-compliant treatment. Nevertheless, there were certain variations in the use of medication as well as the criteria chosen for discontinuing non-invasive ventilation (NIV) compared to guideline recommendations. Conclusions: An adequate external source of information for nursing staff is lacking, the usual sources of physicians are only appropriate for the minority of nursing staff. The self-reported use of guidelines is high. KW - COVID-19 KW - implementation KW - guideline usage KW - guideline adherence KW - intensive care KW - Germany KW - ICU staff Y1 - 2022 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-281865 SN - 2227-9032 VL - 10 IS - 7 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Weibel, Stephanie A1 - Pace, Nathan L. A1 - Schaefer, Maximilian S. A1 - Raj, Diana A1 - Schlesinger, Tobias A1 - Meybohm, Patrick A1 - Kienbaum, Peter A1 - Eberhart, Leopold H. J. A1 - Kranke, Peter T1 - Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anesthesia: An abridged Cochrane network meta-analysis JF - Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine N2 - Objective In this abridged version of the recently published Cochrane review on antiemetic drugs, we summarize its most important findings and discuss the challenges and the time needed to prepare what is now the largest Cochrane review with network meta-analysis in terms of the number of included studies and pages in its full printed form. Methods We conducted a systematic review with network meta-analyses to compare and rank single antiemetic drugs and their combinations belonging to 5HT₃-, D₂-, NK₁-receptor antagonists, corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics used to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anesthesia. Results 585 studies (97 516 participants) testing 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations were included. The studies’ overall risk of bias was assessed as low in only 27% of the studies. In 282 studies, 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs lowered the risk of vomiting at least 20% compared to placebo. In the ranking of treatments, combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs. Single NK1 receptor antagonists were as effective as other drug combinations. Of the 10 effective single drugs, certainty of evidence was high for aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, and ondansetron, while moderate for fosaprepitant and droperidol. For serious adverse events (SAEs), any adverse event (AE), and drug-class specific side effects evidence for intervention effects was mostly not convincing. Conclusions There is high or moderate evidence for at least seven single drugs preventing postoperative vomiting. However, there is still considerable lack of evidence regarding safety aspects that does warrant investigation. KW - systematic review, KW - antiemetics KW - network meta-analysis KW - postoperative nausea and vomiting KW - vomiting Y1 - 2021 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-259470 VL - 14 IS - 3 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Wahlen, Bianca M. A1 - Roewer, Norbert A1 - Kranke, Peter T1 - Use of local anaesthetics and adjuncts for spinal and epidural anaesthesia and analgesia at German and Austrian University Hospitals: an online survey to access current standard practice N2 - Background: The present anonymous multicenter online survey was conducted to evaluate the application of regional anaesthesia techniques as well as the used local anaesthetics and adjuncts at German and Austrian university hospitals. Methods: 39 university hospitals were requested to fill in an online questionnaire, to determine the kind of regional anaesthesia and preferred drugs in urology, obstetrics and gynaecology. Results: 33 hospitals responded. No regional anaesthesia is conducted in 47% of the minor gynaecological and 44% of the urological operations; plain bupivacaine 0.5% is used in 38% and 47% respectively. In transurethral resections of the prostate and bladder no regional anaesthesia is used in 3% of the responding hospitals, whereas plain bupivacaine 0.5% is used in more than 90%. Regional anaesthesia is only used in selected major gynaecological and urological operations. On the contrary to the smaller operations, the survey revealed a large variety of used drugs and mixtures. Almost 80% prefer plain bupivacaine or ropivacaine 0.5% in spinal anaesthesia in caesarean section. Similarly to the use of drugs in major urological and gynaecological operations a wide range of drugs and adjuncts is used in epidural anaesthesia in caesarean section and spontaneous delivery. Conclusions: Our results indicate a certain agreement in short operations in spinal anaesthesia. By contrast, a large variety concerning the anaesthesiological approach in larger operations as well as in epidural analgesia in obstetrics could be revealed, the causes of which are assumed to be primarily rooted in particular departmental structures. KW - Anästhesiologie KW - anaesthetics KW - University Hospital Y1 - 2010 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-67847 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Sitter, Magdalena A1 - Schlesinger, Tobias A1 - Reinhold, Ann-Kristin A1 - Scholler, Axel A1 - Heymann, Christian von A1 - Welfle, Sabine A1 - Bartmann, Catharina A1 - Wöckel, Achim A1 - Kleinschmidt, Stefan A1 - Schneider, Sven A1 - Gottschalk, André A1 - Greve, Susanne A1 - Wermelt, Julius Z. A1 - Wiener, Roland A1 - Schulz, Frank A1 - Chappell, Daniel A1 - Brunner, Maya A1 - Neumann, Claudia A1 - Meybohm, Patrick A1 - Kranke, Peter T1 - COVID-19 in der geburtshilflichen Anästhesie: Prospektive Erfassung von SARS-CoV-2-Infektionen zum Zeitpunkt der Geburt sowie des peripartalen Verlaufs SARS-CoV-2-positiver Schwangerer JF - Der Anaesthesist N2 - Hintergrund Im Rahmen der Pandemie des SARS-CoV-2-Virus erlangte das Patientenkollektiv der Schwangeren früh Aufmerksamkeit. Initial wurde angesichts sich früh abzeichnender Krankheitsfälle bei jüngeren 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 Anästhesie zu Beginn der Pandemie sowie während der zweiten Infektionswelle in Deutschland. Methoden Über das COALA-Register (COVID-19 related Obstetric Anaesthesia Longitudinal Assessment-Registry) wurden sowohl von März bis Mai 2020 als auch von Oktober 2020 bis Februar 2021 in Deutschland und der Schweiz wöchentlich prospektiv Daten zu Verdachts- und bestätigten SARS-CoV-2-Fällen bei Schwangeren zum Zeitpunkt der Geburt erhoben. Betrachtet wurden die Verteilung dieser auf die Anzahl der Geburten, Zentren und Erhebungswochen sowie mütterliche Charakteristika und Krankheitsverläufe. Ergebnisse Neun Zentren haben im Verlauf 44 SARS-CoV-2-positive Schwangere zum Zeitpunkt der Geburt bei 7167 Geburten (0,6 %) gemeldet (3 Fälle auf 2270 Geburten (0,4 %) und 41 Fälle auf 4897 Geburten (0,8 %)). Berichtet wurden 2 schwere COVID-19-Verläufe (n = 1 mit Todesfolge nach ECMO, n = 1 mit ECMO überlebt). 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 Fällen zu Beginn der Pandemie zeitnah eingeschätzt werden. Es traten sporadisch Verdachtsfälle bzw. bestätigte Fälle auf. Aufgrund fehlender flächendeckender Testung muss aber von einer Dunkelziffer asymptomatischer Fälle ausgegangen werden. Während der zweiten Infektionswelle wurden 68 % asymptomatische Fälle gemeldet. Jedoch kann es bei jungen, gesunden Patientinnen ohne das Vorliegen typischer Risikofaktoren zu schwerwiegenden Verläufen kommen. KW - ECMO-Therapie KW - Geburtshilfe KW - Geburtshilfliche Intensivmedizin KW - COVID-19-Pademie KW - Infektionswellen Y1 - 2022 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-264878 SN - 1432-055X VL - 71 IS - 6 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Sitter, Magdalena A1 - Pecks, Ulrich A1 - Rüdiger, Mario A1 - Friedrich, Sabine A1 - Fill Malfertheiner, Sara A1 - Hein, Alexander A1 - Königbauer, Josefine T. A1 - Becke-Jakob, Karin A1 - Zöllkau, Janine A1 - Ramsauer, Babett A1 - Rathberger, Katharina A1 - Pontones, Constanza A. A1 - Kraft, Katrina A1 - Meybohm, Patrick A1 - Härtel, Christoph A1 - Kranke, Peter T1 - Pregnant and postpartum women requiring intensive care treatment for COVID-19 — first data from the CRONOS-registry JF - Journal of Clinical Medicine N2 - (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. KW - maternal critical care KW - COVID-19 KW - ARDS KW - SARS-CoV-2 KW - pregnancy KW - obstetrics Y1 - 2022 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-255257 SN - 2077-0383 VL - 11 IS - 3 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Sitter, Magdalena A1 - Fröhlich, Corinna A1 - Kranke, Peter A1 - Markus, Christian A1 - Wöckel, Achim A1 - Rehn, Monika A1 - Bartmann, Catharina A1 - Frieauff, Eric A1 - Meybohm, Patrick A1 - Pecks, Ulrich A1 - Röder, Daniel T1 - ECMO-Therapie bei COVID-19-ARDS in der Schwangerschaft ermöglicht den Erhalt einer Schwangerschaft mit termingerechter Entbindung T1 - ECMO therapy for COVID-19 ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome) during pregnancy enables preservation of pregnancy and full-term delivery JF - Die Anaesthesiologie N2 - No abstract available. KW - ECMO-Therapie KW - COVID-19-ARDS KW - Schwangerschaft KW - ECMO therapy KW - COVID-19-ARDS KW - pregnancy Y1 - 2023 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-346762 VL - 72 IS - 3 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Schmid, Benedikt A1 - Kredel, Markus A1 - Ullrich, Roman A1 - Krenn, Katharina A1 - Lucas, Rudolf A1 - Markstaller, Klaus A1 - Fischer, Bernhard A1 - Kranke, Peter A1 - Meybohm, Patrick A1 - Zwißler, Bernhard A1 - Frank, Sandra T1 - 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 JF - Trials N2 - 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. KW - acute respiratory distress syndrome KW - solnatide KW - extravascular lung water KW - pulmonary edema KW - critical care Y1 - 2021 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-258783 VL - 22 IS - 1 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Schmid, Benedikt A1 - Eckert, Dominik A1 - Meixner, Andreas A1 - Pistner, Paul A1 - Malzahn, Uwe A1 - Berberich, Monika A1 - Happel, Oliver A1 - Meybohm, Patrick A1 - Kranke, Peter T1 - Conventional versus video-assisted laryngoscopy for perioperative endotracheal intubation (COVALENT) - a randomized, controlled multicenter trial JF - BMC Anesthesiology N2 - Background Data on the routine use of video-assisted laryngoscopy in peri-operative intubations are rather inconsistent and ambiguous, in part due to small populations and non-uniform outcome measures in past trials. Failed or prolonged intubation procedures are a reason for relevant morbidity and mortality. This study aims to determine whether video-assisted laryngoscopy (with both Macintosh-shaped and hyperangulated blades) is at least equal to the standard method of direct laryngoscopy with respect to the first-pass success rate. Furthermore, validated tools from the field of human factors will be applied to examine within-team communication and task load during this critical medical procedure. Methods In this randomized, controlled, three-armed parallel group design, multi-centre trial, a total of more than 2500 adult patients scheduled for perioperative endotracheal intubation will be randomized. In equally large arms, video-assisted laryngoscopy with a Macintosh-shaped or a hyperangulated blade will be compared to the standard of care (direct laryngoscopy with Macintosh blade). In a pre-defined hierarchical analysis, we will test the primary outcome for non-inferiority first. If this goal should be met, the design and projected statistical power also allow for subsequent testing for superiority of one of the interventions. Various secondary outcomes will account for patient safety considerations as well as human factors interactions within the provider team and will allow for further exploratory data analysis and hypothesis generation. Discussion This randomized controlled trial will provide a solid base of data in a field where reliable evidence is of major clinical importance. With thousands of endotracheal intubations performed every day in operating rooms around the world, every bit of performance improvement translates into increased patient safety and comfort and may eventually prevent significant burden of disease. Therefore, we feel confident that a large trial has the potential to considerably benefit patients and anaesthetists alike. Trial registration ClincalTrials.gov NCT05228288. Protocol version 1.1, November 15, 2021. KW - anaesthesiology KW - laryngoscopy KW - video-assisted laryngoscopy KW - intubation KW - airway management KW - patient safety KW - human factors Y1 - 2023 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-357207 VL - 23 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Schlesinger, Tobias A1 - Weißbrich, Benedikt A1 - Wedekink, Florian A1 - Notz, Quirin A1 - Herrmann, Johannes A1 - Krone, Manuel A1 - Sitter, Magdalena A1 - Schmid, Benedikt A1 - Kredel, Markus A1 - Stumpner, Jan A1 - Dölken, Lars A1 - Wischhusen, Jörg A1 - Kranke, Peter A1 - Meybohm, Patrick A1 - Lotz, Christpher T1 - Biodistribution and serologic response in SARS-CoV-2 induced ARDS: A cohort study JF - PLoS One N2 - 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. KW - viral load Y1 - 2020 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-231348 VL - 15, 2020 IS - 11 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Schlesinger, Tobias A1 - Weibel, Stephanie A1 - Steinfeldt, Thorsten A1 - Sitter, Magdalena A1 - Meybohm, Patrick A1 - Kranke, Peter T1 - Intraoperative management of combined general anesthesia and thoracic epidural analgesia: A survey among German anesthetists JF - Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica N2 - 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. KW - analgesics KW - enhanced recovery after surgery KW - multimodal treatments KW - perioperative care KW - epidural analgesia Y1 - 2021 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-258286 VL - 65 IS - 10 ER -