Medizinische Klinik-Intensivmedizin Und Notfallmedizin最新文献

The therapeutic target of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO₂R) is the elimination of carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the blood across a gas exchange membrane without influencing oxygenation to a clinically relevant extent. In acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), ECCO₂R has been used to reduce tidal volume, plateau pressure, and driving pressure ("ultraprotective ventilation"). Despite achieving these goals, no benefits in outcome could be shown. Thus, in ARDS, the use of ECCO₂R to achieve ultraprotective ventilation can no longer be recommended. Furthermore, ECCO₂R has also been used to avoid intubation or facilitate weaning in obstructive lung failure as well as to avoid mechanical ventilation in patients during bridging to lung transplantation. Although these goals can be achieved in many patients, the effects on outcome still remain unclear due to lack of evidence. Despite involving less blood flow, smaller cannulas, and smaller gas exchange membranes compared with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, ECCO₂R bears a comparable risk of complications, especially bleeding. Trials to define indications and analyze the risk-benefit balance are needed prior to implementation of ECCO₂R as a standard therapy. Consequently, until then, ECCO₂R should be used in clinical studies and experienced centers only. This article is freely available.

Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) describes the use of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) to restore blood circulation in patients during refractory cardiac arrest. So far, ECPR is not the standard of care but has become part of clinical routine for select patients in many places. As ECPR is a highly invasive support option associated with considerable risks for fatal complications, premature use in patients who may have return of spontaneous circulation should be avoided. However, the selection criteria for ECPR are still evolving, as the search for evidence is ongoing. Recent randomized controlled trials of different ECPR strategies support its use within integrated systems built around highly specialized ECPR centers. The ECPR caseload is an important predictor of patient survival, and continuous training is key for evidence-based quality of care. Typical complications after ECPR include vascular injury or malposition of cannulas, thrombotic complications, hemolysis, and bleeding events that require early detection and interdisciplinary management. When provided by highly specialized and well-trained expert teams in dedicated ECPR centers within integrated pre-hospital and intra-hospital emergency care systems, ECPR may improve survival in select patients with refractory cardiac arrest. This article is freely available.

Anticoagulation is an essential component of optimal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) management. Unfractionated heparin is still the anticoagulant of choice in most centers due to longstanding familiarity with the agent. Disadvantages include alterations in drug responses due to its capability to bind multiple heparin-binding proteins that compete with antithrombin and the potential for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. In such cases, direct thrombin inhibitors are the treatment of choice but pose difficulties in monitoring due to the limited experience and target ranges for non-aPTT-guided management (aPTT: activated partial thromboplastin time). The current trend toward low-dose anticoagulation, especially for venovenous ECMO, is supported by data associating bleeding complications with mortality but not thromboembolic events, which include circuit thrombosis. However, only prospective data will provide appropriate answers to how to individualize anticoagulation, transfusions, and bleeding management which is currently only supported by expert opinion. Empiric therapy for ECMO patients based on laboratory coagulation alone should always be critically questioned. In summary, only collaboration and future studies of coagulation management during ECMO will help us to make this life-saving therapy that has become part of daily life of the intensivist even safer and more effective. Until then, a fundamental understanding of coagulation and bleeding management, as well as pearls and pitfalls of monitoring, is essential to optimize anticoagulation during ECMO. This article is freely available.

Background: The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has increased substantially. With modern trials supporting its efficacy, ECMO has become an important tool in the management of severe ARDS.

Objectives: The objectives of this paper are to discuss ECMO physiology and configurations used for patients with ARDS, review evidence supporting the use of ECMO for ARDS, and discuss aspects of management during ECMO.

Conclusion: Current evidence supports the use of ECMO, combined with an ultra-lung-protective approach to mechanical ventilation, in patients with ARDS who have refractory hypoxemia or hypercapnia with severe respiratory acidosis. Furthermore, data suggest that center volume and experience are important factors in the care of patients receiving ECMO. The use of extracorporeal technologies in expanded patient populations and the optimal management of patients during ECMO remain areas of investigation. This article is freely available.

Mortality in infarct-related as well as heart failure-associated cardiogenic shock remains high, reaching 40-50% depending on the etiology and severity of cardiogenic shock. Percutaneous active mechanical circulatory support devices including veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) and microaxial left ventricular mechanical circulatory support devices are rapidly evolving in their use. However, evidence of VA-ECMO therapy has only recently emerged and showed no benefit for mortality, with an associated higher complication rate. Evidence for microaxial left ventricular mechanical circulatory support devices such as the Impella pump (Abiomed, Danvers/MA, USA) is limited. The current article aims to give an overview of the basics of VA-ECMO therapy and microaxial left ventricular mechanical circulatory support devices, the current evidence, ongoing trials, patient selection, and potential complications. This article is freely available.

Background: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are increasingly used for prophylaxis and treatment of thromboembolic events. Incorrectly dosed DOAC treatment is associated with excess mortality.

Purpose: This article aims at raising awareness of DOAC overdosing and its causes as well as presenting a diagnostic and therapeutic work-up.

Material and methods: Based on a case presentation, a structured review of the current literature on DOAC overdosing was performed and treatment recommendations were extracted.

Results: In addition to wittingly or unwittingly increased DOAC intake, common causes of overdose are inadequate dose adjustment for concomitant medication or comorbidities. Global coagulation testing should be supplemented with DOAC-specific testing. Severe bleeding and the need for invasive diagnostics or urgent surgery represent indications for treating DOAC overdoses. Based on the cause of an DOAC overdose, active charcoal, endoscopic pill rescue, antagonization with idarucizumab or andexanet alfa and the targeted substitution of coagulation factors represent treatment options.

Conclusion: The sensitization of clinicians is important to ensure a timely diagnosis and adequate treatment of DOAC overdosing. This report provides an overview of current knowledge on diagnostics and treatment; however, further studies are necessary to improve the existing algorithms.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common problem in critically ill patients and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Since 2012, AKI has been defined according to the KDIGO (Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcome) guidelines. As some biomarkers are now available that can provide useful clinical information, a new definition including a new stage 1S has been proposed by an expert group of the Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI). At this stage, classic AKI criteria are not yet met, but biomarkers are already positive defining subclinical AKI. This stage 1S is associated with a worse patient outcome, regardless of the biomarker chosen. The PrevAKI and PrevAKI-Multicenter trial also showed that risk stratification with a biomarker and implementation of the KDIGO bundle (in the high-risk group) can reduce the rate of moderate and severe AKI. In the absence of a successful clinical trial, conservative management remains the primary focus of treatment. This mainly involves optimization of hemodynamics and an individualized (restrictive) fluid management. The STARRT-AKI trial has shown that there is no benefit from accelerated initiation of renal replacement therapy. However, delaying too long might be associated with potential harm, as shown in the AKIKI2 study. Prospective studies are needed to determine whether artificial intelligence will play a role in AKI in the future, helping to guide treatment decisions and improve outcomes.

Background: This study evaluates the implementation of postcardiac-arrest-sedation (PCAS) and -care (PRC) by prehospital emergency physicians in Germany.

Materials and methods: Analysis of a web-based survey from October to November 2022. Questions were asked about implementation, medications used, complications, motivation for implementing or not implementing PCAS, and measures and target parameters of PRC.

Results: A total of 500 emergency physicians participated in the survey. In all, 73.4% stated that they regularly performed PCAS (hypnotics: 84.7%; analgesics: 71.1%; relaxants: 29.7%). Indications were pressing against the respirator (88.3%), analgesia (74.1%), synchronization to respirator (59.5%), and change of airway device (52.6%). Reasons for not performing PCAS (26.6%) included unconscious patients (73.7%); concern about hypotension (31.6%), re-arrest (26.3%), and worsening neurological assessment (22.5%). Complications of PCAS were observed by 19.3% of participants (acute hypotension [74.6%]); (re-arrest [32.4%]). In addition to baseline monitoring, PRC included 12-lead-electrocardiogram (96.6%); capnography (91.6%); catecholamine therapy (77.6%); focused echocardiography (20.6%), lung ultrasound (12.0%) and abdominal ultrasound (5.6%); induction of hypothermia (13.6%) and blood gas analysis (7.4%). An etCO₂ of 35-45 mm Hg was targeted by 40.6%, while 9.0% of participants targeted an S_pO₂ of 94-98% and 19.2% of participants targeted a systolic blood pressure of ≥ 100 mm Hg.

Conclusions: Prehospital PRC in Germany is heterogeneous and deviations from its target parameters are frequent. PCAS is frequent and associated with relevant complications. The development of preclinical care algorithms for PCAS and PRC within preclinical care seems urgently needed.

The use of extracorporeal circulatory support, both for cardiogenic shock and during resuscitation, still presents many unanswered questions. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for such a resource-intensive treatment must be clearly defined, considering that these criteria are directly associated with the type and location of treatment. For example, it is worth questioning the viability of an extracorporeal resuscitation program in areas where it is impossible to achieve low-flow times under 60 min due to local limitations. Additionally, the best approach for further treatment, including whether it is necessary to regularly relieve the left ventricle, must be explored. To find answers to some of these questions, large-scale, multicenter, randomized studies and registers must be performed. Until then this treatment must be carefully considered before use.