Scientific reports · 2025
Critical risks of haemoadsorption for COVID-19 patients and directions for future evaluations: a nationwide propensity score matched cohort study.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kloka Jan Andreas, Jasny Thomas, Old Oliver, Nürenberg-Goloub Elina, Scharf Christina, Meybohm Patrick, Supady Alexander, Zacharowski Kai, Friedrichson Benjamin
Аннотация
Haemoadsorption has been suggested as treatment adjunct for sepsis and septic shock, cardiac surgery, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Randomised clinical trials did not provide conclusive evidence for benefits and even suggest risks in COVID-19 patients. Retrospective observational cohort study based on hospital remuneration data from all COVID-19 patients treated in intensive care units in Germany between 01/01/2020 and 12/31/2021. Regression modelling was performed for 1:1 propensity score matching of 2058 patients. Two-sided probability values for group comparisons and regression models with spline functions controlling for non-linear relationships and medically relevant interaction variables were calculated. In-hospital mortality of patients supported with haemoadsorption was significantly higher compared to matched control patients (74.6% vs. 70.3%, p = 0.0299). Haemoadsorption was associated with coagulopathy (68.0% vs. 54.9%, p < 0.0001), cardiac arrhythmia (49.2% vs. 44.2%, p = 0.0272), and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR, 19.3% vs. 13.1%, p = 0.0002). Further, haemoadsorption increased the chance of death for COVID-19 patients without septic shock (odds ratio, OR [within a 95% confidence interval, CI]; 1.40 [1.05-1.86]) and did not improve survival of septic shock patients (1.19 [0.85-1.67]). Independent variables with a significant impact on mortality included the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO, 2.15 [1.68-2.76]) and CPR (1.60 [1.03-2.45]). The timing of the haemoadsorption therapy had no effect on patients´ outcomes. Due to inconclusive evidence for benefit and potential harm, haemoadsorption therapy should be limited to thoroughly designed clinical trials before introduced into clinical routine in the context of COVID-19.