No abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of extracorporeal cytokine reduction by CytoSorb (CytoSorbents, Monmouth Junction, NJ) on COVID-19–associated vasoplegic shock. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled pilot study. SETTING: Eight ICUs at three sites of the tertiary-care university hospital Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin. PATIENTS: COVID-19 patients with vasoplegic shock requiring norepinephrine greater than 0.2 µg/kg/min, C-reactive protein greater than 100 mg/L, and indication for hemodialysis. INTERVENTIONS: Randomization of 1:1 to receive CytoSorb for 3–7 days or standard therapy. To account for inadvertent removal of antibiotics, patients in the treatment group received an additional dose at each adsorber change. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary endpoint was time until resolution of vasoplegic shock, estimated by Cox-regression. Secondary endpoints included mortality, interleukin-6 concentrations, and catecholamine requirements. The study was registered in the German Registry of Clinical Trials (DRKS00021447). From November 2020 to March 2021, 50 patients were enrolled. Twenty-three patients were randomized to receive CytoSorb and 26 patients to receive standard of care. One patient randomized to cytokine adsorption was excluded due to withdrawal of informed consent. Resolution of vasoplegic shock was observed in 13 of 23 patients (56.5%) in the CytoSorb and 12 of 26 patients (46.2%) in the control group after a median of 5 days (interquartile range [IQR], 4–5 d) and 4 days (IQR, 3–5 d). The hazard ratio (HR) for the primary endpoint, adjusted for the predefined variables age, gender, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation-therapy, or time from shock onset to study inclusion was HR, 1.23 (95% CI, 0.54–2.79); p = 0.63. The mortality rate was 78% in the CytoSorb and 73% in the control group (unadjusted HR, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.61–2.23]; p = 0.64). The effects on inflammatory markers, catecholamine requirements, and the type and rates of adverse events were similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In severely ill COVID-19 patients, CytoSorb did not improve resolution of vasoplegic shock or predefined secondary endpoints.

Background Emergency department (ED) consultations are on the rise, and frequently consultations by non-urgent patients have been held accountable. Self-referred walk-in (SRW) consulters supposedly represent a predominantly less urgent patient population. The EMACROSS study aimed to explore consultation determinants and motives in SRW patients with respiratory symptoms. Methods Multicenter survey of adult ED patients with respiratory complaints in eight emergency departments in central Berlin, Germany. Secondary hospital records data including diagnoses was additionally assessed. Characteristics of SRW and non-SRW patients were compared. Determinants of SRW consultation were evaluated by binary logistic regression. Consultation motives were analyzed descriptively. As a supplemental approach, network analysis (lasso-regularized mixed graphical model) was performed to explore connections between consultation determinants, consultation features and motives. Results Between June 2017 and November 2018, n = 472 participants were included, the median age was 55 years (range 18–96), 53.2% of patients were male and n = 185 cases (39.2%) were SRW consulters. The SRW group showed lower proportions of potentially severe (pneumonia and respiratory failure, p < 0.001, χ2 test) and chronic pulmonary conditions. Determinants of SRW consultation identified by logistic regression were younger age (p < 0.001), tertiary education (p = 0.032), being a first-generation migrant (p = 0.002) or tourist (p = 0.008), having no regular primary care provider (p = 0.036) and no chronic pulmonary illness (p = 0.017). The area under the curve (AUC) for the model was 0.79. Personal distress and access problems in ambulatory care were stated most frequently as consultation motives in the SRW group; network analysis showed the scarcity of associations between demographic and medical SRW determinants and motives triggering the actual decision to consult. Conclusions As to “who” consults, this study identified demographic and medical predictors of SRW utilization. The said markers seem only remotely connected to “why” people decide for SRW visits. To alleviate ED crowding by addressing frequent SRW consultation motives, interventions focused on the ability for symptom self-assessment and at better-accessible alternative care seem sensible. Trial registration German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00011930); date: 2017/04/25.