Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39070745›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2024

In-hospital mortality, comorbidities, and costs of one million mechanically ventilated patients in Germany: a nationwide observational study before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Christian Karagiannidis, Franz Krause, Claas Bentlage, Johannes Wolff, Thomas Bein, Wolfram Windisch, Reinhard Busse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Extracorporeal COCritical care (London, England) · 2026
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Die Anaesthesiologie · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Christian KaragiannidisDepartment of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Cologne-Merheim Hospital, ARDS and ECMO Center, Kliniken der Stadt Köln, Witten/Herdecke University Hospital, Cologne, Germany.
Franz KrauseGKV-Spitzenverband (National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Funds), Germany.
Claas BentlageGKV-Spitzenverband (National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Funds), Germany.
Johannes WolffGKV-Spitzenverband (National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Funds), Germany.
Thomas BeinRegensburg, Germany.
Wolfram WindischDepartment of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Cologne-Merheim Hospital, ARDS and ECMO Center, Kliniken der Stadt Köln, Witten/Herdecke University Hospital, Cologne, Germany.
Reinhard BusseTU Berlin, Department of Health Care Management, Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Even more than hospital care in general, intensive care and mechanical ventilation capacities and its utilization in terms of rates, indications, ventilation types and outcomes vary largely among countries. We analyzed complete and nationwide data for Germany, a country with a large intensive care sector, before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Analysis of administrative claims data, provided by the German health insurance, from all hospitals for all individual patients who were mechanically ventilated between 2019 and 2022. The data included age, sex, diagnoses, length of stay, procedures (e.g., form and duration of mechanical ventilation), outcome (dead vs. alive) and costs. We included all patients who were at least 18 years old at the time of discharge from January 1st, 2019 to December 31st, 2022. Patients were grouped according to year, age group and the form of mechanical ventilation. We further analyzed subgroups of patients being resuscitated and those being COVID-19 positive (vs. negative). Findings: During the four years, 1,003,882 patients were mechanically ventilated in 1395 hospitals. Rates per 100,000 inhabitants varied across age groups from 110 to 123 (18-59 years) to 1101-1275 (>80 years). The top main diagnoses were other forms of heart diseases, pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), ischemic heart diseases and cerebrovascular diseases. 43.3% (437,031/1,003,882) of all mechanically ventilated patients died in hospital with a remarkable increase in mortality with age and from 2019 to 2022 by almost 5%-points. The in-hospital mortality of ventilated COVID-19 patients was 53.7% (46,553/86,729), while it was 42.6% (390,478/917,153) in non-COVID patients. In-hospital mortality varied from 27.0% in non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) only to 53.4% in invasive mechanical ventilation only cases, 59.4% with early NIV failure, 68.6% with late NIV failure, to 74.0% in patients receiving VV-ECMO and 80.0% in VA-ECMO. 17.5% of mechanically ventilated patients had been resuscitated before, of whom 78.2% (153,762/196,750) died. Total expenditure was around 6 billion Euros per year, i.e. 0.17% of the German GDP. Interpretation: Mechanical ventilation was widely used, before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany, reaching more than 1000 patients per 100,000 inhabitants per year in the age over 80 years. In-hospital mortality rates in this nationwide and complete cohort exceeded most of the data known by far. Funding: This research did not receive any dedicated funding.

Indexed as

ARDSCOVIDMechncial ventilationMortalityNIV

Identifiers

PMID39070745
PMCPMC11281923

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.