Wolfram Windisch1, Steffen Weber-Carstens, Stefan Kluge, Rolf Rossaint, Tobias Welte, Christian Karagiannidis. 1. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Kliniken der Stadt Köln gGmbH, University of Witten/Herdecke; Surgical Intensive Care, Department of Anesthesiology, Charité University Medical Center, Berlin; Department of Intensive Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf; Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Aachen, RWTH Aachen University; Director of Patient Care at MHH, The German Center for Lung Research, University Medical School Hanover (MHH), Hanover.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The reported high mortality of COVID-19 patients in intensive care has given rise to a debate over whether patients with this disease are being intubated too soon and might instead benefit from more non-invasive ventilation. METHODS: This review is based on articles published up to 12 June 2020 that were retrieved by a selective literature search on the topic of invasive and non-invasive ventilation for respiratory failure in COVID-19. Guideline recommendations and study data on patients with respiratory failure in settings other than COVID-19 are also considered, as are the current figures of the intensive care registry of the German Interdisciplinary Association for Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin). RESULTS: The high mortality figures among patients receiving invasive ventilation that have been reported in studies from abroad cannot be uncritically applied to the current situation in Germany. Study data on ventilation specifically in COVID-19 patients would be needed to do justice to the special pathophysiology of this disease, but such data are lacking. Being intubated too early is evidently associated with risks for the patient, but being intubated too late is as well. A particularly im - portant consideration is the potential harm associated with prolonged spontaneous breathing, with or without non-invasive assistance, as any increase in respiratory work can seriously worsen respiratory failure. On the other hand, it is clearly unacceptable to intubate patients too early merely out of concern that the medical staff might become infected with COVID-19 if they were ventilated non-invasively. CONCLUSION: Nasal high flow, non-invasive ventilation, and invasive ventilation with intubation should be carried out in a stepwise treatment strategy, under appropriate intensive-care monitoring and with the observance of all relevant anti-infectious precautions. Germany is better prepared that other countries to provide COVID-19 patients with appropriate respiratory care, in view of the high per capita density of intensive-care beds and the availability of a nationwide, interdisciplinary intensive care registry for the guidance and coordination of intensive care in patients who need it.
BACKGROUND: The reported high mortality of COVID-19patients in intensive care has given rise to a debate over whether patients with this disease are being intubated too soon and might instead benefit from more non-invasive ventilation. METHODS: This review is based on articles published up to 12 June 2020 that were retrieved by a selective literature search on the topic of invasive and non-invasive ventilation for respiratory failure in COVID-19. Guideline recommendations and study data on patients with respiratory failure in settings other than COVID-19 are also considered, as are the current figures of the intensive care registry of the German Interdisciplinary Association for Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin). RESULTS: The high mortality figures among patients receiving invasive ventilation that have been reported in studies from abroad cannot be uncritically applied to the current situation in Germany. Study data on ventilation specifically in COVID-19patients would be needed to do justice to the special pathophysiology of this disease, but such data are lacking. Being intubated too early is evidently associated with risks for the patient, but being intubated too late is as well. A particularly im - portant consideration is the potential harm associated with prolonged spontaneous breathing, with or without non-invasive assistance, as any increase in respiratory work can seriously worsen respiratory failure. On the other hand, it is clearly unacceptable to intubate patients too early merely out of concern that the medical staff might become infected with COVID-19 if they were ventilated non-invasively. CONCLUSION: Nasal high flow, non-invasive ventilation, and invasive ventilation with intubation should be carried out in a stepwise treatment strategy, under appropriate intensive-care monitoring and with the observance of all relevant anti-infectious precautions. Germany is better prepared that other countries to provide COVID-19patients with appropriate respiratory care, in view of the high per capita density of intensive-care beds and the availability of a nationwide, interdisciplinary intensive care registry for the guidance and coordination of intensive care in patients who need it.
Authors: Giacomo Bellani; John G Laffey; Tài Pham; Fabiana Madotto; Eddy Fan; Laurent Brochard; Andres Esteban; Luciano Gattinoni; Vesna Bumbasirevic; Lise Piquilloud; Frank van Haren; Anders Larsson; Daniel F McAuley; Philippe R Bauer; Yaseen M Arabi; Marco Ranieri; Massimo Antonelli; Gordon D Rubenfeld; B Taylor Thompson; Hermann Wrigge; Arthur S Slutsky; Antonio Pesenti Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: M Westhoff; B Schönhofer; P Neumann; J Bickenbach; T Barchfeld; H Becker; R Dubb; H Fuchs; H J Heppner; U Janssens; T Jehser; O Karg; E Kilger; H-D Köhler; T Köhnlein; M Max; F J Meyer; W Müllges; C Putensen; D Schreiter; J H Storre; W Windisch Journal: Pneumologie Date: 2015-12-09
Authors: Sara C Auld; Mark Caridi-Scheible; James M Blum; Chad Robichaux; Colleen Kraft; Jesse T Jacob; Craig S Jabaley; David Carpenter; Roberta Kaplow; Alfonso C Hernandez-Romieu; Max W Adelman; Greg S Martin; Craig M Coopersmith; David J Murphy Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2020-09 Impact factor: 9.296
Authors: Wiebke Brücker; Amir Abbas Mahabadi; Annette Hüschen; Jan Becker; Sebastian Daehnke; Stefan Möhlenkamp Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2022-05 Impact factor: 3.005
Authors: Timo Mayerhöfer; Sebastian J Klein; Andreas Peer; Fabian Perschinka; Georg F Lehner; Julia Hasslacher; Romuald Bellmann; Lukas Gasteiger; Markus Mittermayr; Stephan Eschertzhuber; Simon Mathis; Anna Fiala; Dietmar Fries; Armin Kalenka; Eva Foidl; Walter Hasibeder; Raimund Helbok; Lukas Kirchmair; Birgit Stögermüller; Christoph Krismer; Tatjana Heiner; Eugen Ladner; Claudius Thomé; Christian Preuß-Hernandez; Andreas Mayr; Agnes Pechlaner; Miriam Potocnik; Bruno Reitter; Jürgen Brunner; Stefanie Zagitzer-Hofer; Alexandra Ribitsch; Michael Joannidis Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2021-10-18 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Kapil G Zirpe; Anand M Tiwari; Sushma K Gurav; Abhijit M Deshmukh; Prasad B Suryawanshi; Prajkta P Wankhede; Upendrakumar S Kapse; Abhaya P Bhoyar; Afroz Z Khan; Ria V Malhotra; Pranoti H Kusalkar; Kaustubh J Chavan; Seema A Naik; Rahul B Bhalke; Ninad N Bhosale; Sonika V Makhija; Venkata N Kuchimanchi; Amol S Jadhav; Kedar R Deshmukh; Gaurav S Kulkarni Journal: Indian J Crit Care Med Date: 2021-05
Authors: Barbara Bonnesen; Jens-Ulrik Stæhr Jensen; Klaus Nielsen Jeschke; Alexander G Mathioudakis; Alexandru Corlateanu; Ejvind Frausing Hansen; Ulla Møller Weinreich; Ole Hilberg; Pradeesh Sivapalan Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2021-12-02