Search

Purpose At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 was often compared to seasonal influenza. We aimed to compare the outcome of hospitalized patients with cancer infected by SARS-CoV-2 or seasonal influenza including intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation and in-hospital mortality. Methods We analyzed claims data of patients with a lab-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 or seasonal influenza infection admitted to one of 85 hospitals of a German-wide hospital network between January 2016 and August 2021. Results 29,284 patients with COVID-19 and 7442 patients with seasonal influenza were included. Of these, 360 patients with seasonal influenza and 1625 patients with COVID-19 had any kind of cancer. Cancer patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit than cancer patients with seasonal influenza (29.4% vs 24.7%; OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.00–1.73 p p = .09). 34.9% of cancer patients with COVID-19 and 17.9% with seasonal influenza died (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.81–3.32 p Conclusion Among cancer patients, SARS-CoV-2 was associated with a higher risk for in-hospital mortality than seasonal influenza. These findings underline the need of protective measurements to prevent an infection with either COVID-19 or seasonal influenza, especially in this high-risk population.

Introduction: In the early stages of the global COVID-19 pandemic hospital admissions for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) decreased substantially. As health systems have become more experienced in dealing with the pandemic, and as the proportion of the population vaccinated rises, it is of interest to determine whether the prevalence of AIS hospitalization and outcomes from hospitalization have returned to normal. Patients and methods: In this observational, retrospective cohort study, we compared the prevalence and outcomes of AIS during the first four waves of the pandemic to corresponding pre-pandemic periods in 2019 using administrative data collected from a nationwide network of 76 hospitals that manages 7% of all in-hospital cases in Germany. Results: We included 25,821 AIS cases in the study period (2020/2021) and used 26,295 AIS cases as controls (2019). Compared to pre-pandemic numbers, mean daily AIS admissions decreased only during wave 1 (from 39.6 to 34.1; p Conclusion: In Germany, the COVID-19 pandemic seems to have had a larger effect on nationwide in-hospital AIS care during the early pandemic stages, in which AIS case numbers decreased and case fatality rose. This may reflect a nationwide “learning curve” within health care systems in providing AIS care in times of a pandemic.

Aims Utilizing administrative data may facilitate risk prediction in heart failure inpatients. In this short report, we present different machine learning models that predict in-hospital mortality on an individual basis utilizing this widely available data source. Methods and results Inpatient cases with a main discharge diagnosis of heart failure hospitalized between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2018 in one of 86 German Helios hospitals were examined. Comorbidities were defined by ICD-10 codes from administrative data. The data set was randomly split into 75/25% portions for model development and testing. Five algorithms were evaluated: logistic regression [generalized linear models (GLMs)], random forest (RF), gradient boosting machine (GBM), single-layer neural network (NNET), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost). After model tuning, the receiver operating characteristics area under the curves (ROC AUCs) were calculated and compared with DeLong’s test. A total of 59 074 inpatient cases (mean age 77.6 ± 11.1 years, 51.9% female, 89.4% NYHA Class III/IV) were included and in-hospital mortality was 6.2%. In the test data set, calculated ROC AUCs were 0.853 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.842–0.863] for GLM, 0.851 (95% CI 0.840–0.862) for RF, 0.855 (95% CI 0.844–0.865) for GBM, 0.836 (95% CI 0.823–0.849) for NNET, and 0.856 (95% CI 9.846–0.867) for XGBoost. XGBoost outperformed all models except GBM. Conclusion Machine learning-based processing of administrative data enables the creation of well-performing prediction models for in-hospital mortality in heart failure patients.

Purpose The COVID-19 pandemic has led to global changes in healthcare systems. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects on surgical care of patients. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of routine data from the largest hospital group in Germany (68 acute hospitals). Included were inpatients who underwent cholecystectomy between March 19, 2020 (beginning of the first lockdown in Germany) and September 22, 2020. These patients were compared with those treated in the same interval in 2019. Results In the 2020 study period, 4035 patients met the inclusion criteria (2019: 4526 patients). During the first lockdown, there was a significant reduction in the number of cholecystectomies performed (51.1% decrease). More patients with a higher risk profile underwent urgent operations, which were accompanied by a significant increase in conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy. The patients were treated as inpatients for a longer duration than 2019, and the mortality rate increased significantly to 1.3% (2019: 0.1%). The complication rate also showed a significant increase. After the end of the first lockdown, daily admission rates normalized very quickly. However, it was not possible to fully address the backlog of operations. Conclusion There is still a “patient stagnation” 6 months after the first German lockdown. Extrapolated to the national level, this corresponds to almost 21,000 fewer cholecystectomies performed in Germany in 2020. It remains to be seen whether surgical rates will return to pre-pandemic levels and whether complications will arise in the future due to the lack of operations.

The impact of COVID-19 on urgent and involuntary inpatient admissions, as well as coercive measures, has not been assessed so far. A retrospective study was performed analyzing claims data for inpatient psychiatric admissions between 2018 and 2020 (total n = 64,502) from a large German Hospital network. Whilst the total number of urgent admissions decreased in 2020 (12,383) as compared to 2019 (13,493) and 2018 (13,469), a significant increase in the percentage of urgent admissions was observed in 2020 (62.9%) as compared to 2019 (60.6%) and 2018 (59.7%). Compared to this study period, Odds ratio (OR) for proportion were 0.87 (0.84, 0.91) and 0.91 (0.87, 0.95) for 2018 and 2019, respectively (both p

Aims Digital health technologies have the potential to improve patient care sustainably. A digital capturing of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) could facilitate patients’ surveillance and endpoint assessment within clinical trials especially in heart failure (HF) patients. However, data regarding the availability of digital infrastructure and patients’ willingness to use digital health solutions are scarce. Therefore, we conducted a survey as part of a digital-based HF registry. Methods and results The Helios Heart registry (H2-registry) has been introduced as a prospective registry being based on digitally augmented processes throughout the whole trial conduction from patients’ selection to data collection and follow-up (FU). Patient-reported outcome measures are captured paper-based at recruitment, but patients are offered two digital solutions for FU. Overall, 125 patients (mean age 67.8 years, 34.4% female) were included in the single-centre run-in phase of 16 weeks. Of them, 52.0% were not interested in any digital contact as part of the FU. If digital PROM capturing was conceivable, a web-based solution (70.0%) was preferred to an application-based approach (30.0%). Discrepancies occurred regarding the availability of email accounts and smartphones. Patients in the non-digital group were older (72.0 years vs. 63.2 years, P Conclusions Our survey illustrated difficulties of implementing a digital FU to record PROMs in a contemporary HF cohort in particular among older patients. Further research is required to specify reasons in case of patients’ unwillingness and to better tailor digital health solutions to patients’ specific needs.

Aims Several reports indicate lower rates of emergency admissions in the cardiovascular sector and reduced admissions of patients with chronic diseases during the Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim of this study was therefore to evaluate numbers of admissions in incident and prevalent atrial fibrillation and flutter (AF) and to analyse care pathways in comparison to 2019.Methods A retrospective analysis of claims data of 74 German Helios hospitals was performed to identify consecutive patients hospitalized with a main discharge diagnosis of AF. A study period including the start of the German national protection phase (13 March 2020 to 16 July 2020) was compared to a previous year control cohort (15 March 2019 to 18 July 2019), with further sub-division into early and late phase. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were calculated. Numbers of admission per day (A/day) for incident and prevalent AF and care pathways including readmissions, numbers of transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE), electrical cardioversion (CV), and catheter ablation (CA) were analysed.Results During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a significant decrease in total AF admissions both in the early (44.4 vs. 77.5 A/day, IRR 0.57 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54–0.61], P Conclusion During the COVID-19 pandemic, AF admission rates declined significantly, with a more pronounced reduction in incident than in prevalent AF. Overall AF care was maintained during early and late pandemic phases with only minor changes, namely less frequent use of TEE. Confirmation of these findings in other study populations and identification of underlying causes are required to ensure optimal therapy in patients with AF during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to changes in health care utilization for different acute cardiovascular diseases. Whether hospitalization rates and in-hospital mortality were affected by the pandemic in patients with acute symptomatic heart failure (HF) was investigated in this study. METHODS AND RESULTS: Administrative data provided by 67 German Helios hospitals were examined for patients with a main discharge diagnosis of HF using ICD codes. Urgent hospital admissions per day were compared for a study period (13 March-21 May 2020) with control intervals in 2020 (1 January-12 March) and 2019 (13 March-21 May), resulting in a total of 13 484 patients excluding all patients with laboratory-proven COVID-19 infection. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated using Poisson regression. Generalized linear mixed models were used for univariable and multivariable analysis to identify predictors of in-hospital mortality. The number of admissions per day was lower in the study period compared to the same year [IRR 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.73, P < 0.01] and the previous year control group (IRR 0.73, 95% CI 0.70-0.76, P < 0.01). Age was similar throughout the intervals, but case severity increased in terms of distribution within New York Heart Association (NYHA) classes and comorbidities. Within the study period, 30-day rates for urgent hospital readmissions were higher compared to the same year but not the previous year control group. In-hospital mortality was 7.3% in the study period, 6.1% in the same year (P = 0.03) and 6.0% in the previous year control group (P = 0.02). In multivariable analysis, age, NYHA class and other predictors of fatal outcome were identified but hospitalization during the study period was not independently associated with mortality. CONCLUSION: Our data showed a significant reduction of urgent hospital admissions for HF with increased case severity and concomitant in-hospital mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. Identifying causes of reduced inpatient treatment rates is essential for the understanding and valuation with regard to future optimal management of patients with HF.

Additional file 1: Table S1. ICD-10-GM-codes used to calculate Elixhauser comorbidity score (according to Moore et al. [29]). Table S2. Baseline characteristics total dataset, training and testing cohort. Table S3. DeLong’s test for pairwise comparison of ROC AUCs. Table S4. Performance metrics (model testing). Figure S1. SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) analysis for variable importance

Males have a higher risk for an adverse outcome of COVID-19. The aim of the study was to analyze sex differences in the clinical course with focus on patients who received intensive care. Research was conducted as an observational retrospective cohort study. A group of 23,235 patients from 83 hospitals with PCR-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 between 4 February 2020 and 22 March 2021 were included. Data on symptoms were retrieved from a separate registry, which served as a routine infection control system. Males accounted for 51.4% of all included patients. Males received more intensive care (ratio OR = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.51–1.71) and mechanical ventilation (invasive or noninvasive, OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.73–2.01). A model for the prediction of mortality showed that until the age 60 y, mortality increased with age with no substantial difference between sexes. After 60 y, the risk of death increased more in males than in females. At 90 y, females had a predicted mortality risk of 31%, corresponding to males of 84 y. In the intensive care unit (ICU) cohort, females of 90 y had a mortality risk of 46%, equivalent to males of 72 y. Seventy-five percent of males over 90 died, but only 46% of females of the same age. In conclusion, the sex gap was most evident among the oldest in the ICU. Understanding sex-determined differences in COVID-19 can be useful to facilitate individualized treatments.

Summary Background Staphylococcus aureus remains a common cause of ventilator-associated pneumonia, with little change in incidence over the past 15 years. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of suvratoxumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the α toxin, in reducing the incidence of S aureus pneumonia in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) who are on mechanical ventilation. Methods We did a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 2 pilot trial at 31 hospitals in Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Portugal, Spain, and Switzerland. Eligible patients were in the ICU, aged ≥18 years, were intubated and on mechanical ventilation, were positive for S aureus colonisation of the lower respiratory tract, as assessed by quantitative PCR (qPCR) analysis of endotracheal aspirate, and had not been diagnosed with new-onset pneumonia. Patients were excluded if they had confirmed or suspected acute ongoing staphylococcal disease; had received antibiotics for S aureus infection for more than 48 h within 72 h of randomisation; had a Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score of 6 or higher; had an acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score of 25 or higher with a Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score of more than 5, or an acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score of at least 30 with a GCS score of 5 or less; had a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score of 9 or higher; or had active pulmonary disease that would impair the ability to diagnose pneumonia. Colonised patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), by use of an interactive voice or web response system, to receive either a single intravenous infusion of suvratoxumab 2000 mg, suvratoxumab 5000 mg, or placebo. Randomisation was done in blocks of size four, stratified by country and by whether patients had received systemic antibiotics for S aureus infection. Patients, investigators, and study staff involved in the treatment or clinical evaluation of patients were masked to patient assignment. The primary efficacy endpoint was the incidence of S aureus pneumonia at 30 days, as determined by a masked independent endpoint adjudication committee, in all patients who received their assigned treatment (modified intention-to-treat [ITT] population). Primary safety endpoints were the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events at 30 days, 90 days, and 190 days after treatment, and the incidence of treatment-emergent serious adverse events, adverse events of special interest, and new-onset chronic disease at 190 days after treatment. All primary safety endpoints were assessed in the modified ITT population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02296320 ) and the EudraCT database (2014-001097-34). Findings Between Oct 10, 2014, and April 1, 2018, 767 patients were screened, of whom 213 patients with confirmed S aureus colonisation of the lower respiratory tract were randomly assigned to the suvratoxumab 2000 mg group (n=15), the suvratoxumab 5000 mg group (n=96), or the placebo group (n=102). Two patients in the placebo group did not receive treatment after randomisation because their clinical conditions changed and they no longer met the eligibility criteria for dosing. As adjudicated by the data monitoring committee at an interim analysis, the suvratoxumab 2000 mg group was discontinued on the basis of predefined pharmacokinetic criteria. At 30 days after treatment, 17 (18%) of 96 patients in the suvratoxumab 5000 mg group and 26 (26%) of 100 patients in the placebo group had developed S aureus pneumonia (relative risk reduction 31·9% [90% CI −7·5 to 56·8], p=0·17). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events at 30 days were similar between the suvratoxumab 5000 mg group (87 [91%]) and the placebo group (90 [90%]). The incidence of treatment-emergent serious adverse events at 30 days were also similar between the suvratoxumab 5000 mg group (36 [38%]) and the placebo group (32 [32%]). No significant difference in the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events between the two groups at 90 days (89 [93%] in the suvratoxumab 5000 mg group vs 92 [92%] in the placebo group) and at 190 days (93 [94%] vs 93 [93%]) was observed. 40 (40%) patients in the placebo group and 50 (52%) in the suvratoxumab 5000 mg group had a serious adverse event at 190 days. In the suvratoxumab 5000 mg group, one (1%) patient reported at least one treatment-emergent serious adverse event related to treatment, two (2%) patients reported an adverse event of special interest, and two (2%) reported a new-onset chronic disease. Interpretation In patients in the ICU receiving mechanical ventilation with qPCR-confirmed S aureus colonisation of the lower respiratory tract, the incidence of S aureus pneumonia at 30 days was not significantly lower following treatment with 5000 mg suvratoxumab than with placebo. Despite these negative results, monoclonal antibodies still represent one promising therapeutic option to reduce antibiotic consumption that require further exploration and studies. Funding AstraZeneca, with support from the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking.

Background: After the first COVID-19 infection wave, a constant increase of pulmonary embolism (PE) hospitalizations not linked with active PCR-confirmed COVID-19 was observed, but potential contributors to this observation are unclear. Therefore, we analyzed associations between changes in PE hospitalizations and (1) the incidence of non-COVID-19 pneumonia, (2) the use of computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA), (3) volume depletion, and (4) preceding COVID-19 infection numbers in Germany.Methods: Claims data of Helios hospitals in Germany were used, and consecutive cases with a hospital admission between May 6 and December 15, 2020 (PE surplus period), were analyzed and compared to corresponding periods covering the same weeks in 2016–2019 (control period). We analyzed the number of PE cases in the target period with multivariable Poisson general linear mixed models (GLMM) including (a) cohorts of 2020 versus 2016–2019, (b) the number of cases with pneumonia, (c) CTPA, and (d) volume depletion and adjusted for age and sex. In order to associate the daily number of PE cases in 2020 with the number of preceding SARS-CoV-2 infections in Germany, we calculated the average number of daily infections (divided by 10,000) occurring between 14 up to 90 days with increasing window sizes before PE cases and modeled the data with Poisson regression.Results: There were 2,404 PE hospitalizations between May 6 and December 15, 2020, as opposed to 2,112–2,236 (total 8,717) in the corresponding 2016–2019 control periods (crude rate ratio [CRR] 1.10, 95% CI 1.05–1.15, P < 0.01). With the use of multivariable Poisson GLMM adjusted for age, sex, and volume depletion, PE cases were significantly associated with the number of cases with pneumonia (CRR 1.09, 95% CI 1.07–1.10, P < 0.01) and with CTPA (CRR 1.10, 95% CI 1.09–1.10, P < 0.01). The increase of PE cases in 2020 compared with the control period remained significant (CRR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02–1.12, P < 0.01) when controlling for those factors. In the 2020 cohort, the number of preceding average daily COVID-19 infections was associated with increased PE case incidence in all investigated windows, i.e., including preceding infections from 14 to 90 days. The best model (log likelihood −576) was with a window size of 4 days, i.e., average COVID-19 infections 14–17 days before PE hospitalization had a risk of 1.20 (95% CI 1.12–1.29, P < 0.01).Conclusions: There is an increase in PE cases since early May 2020 compared to corresponding periods in 2016–2019. This surplus was significant even when controlling for changes in potential modulators such as demographics, volume depletion, non-COVID-19 pneumonia, CTPA use, and preceding COVID-19 infections. Future studies are needed (1) to investigate a potential causal link for increased risk of delayed PE with preceding SARS-CoV-2 infection and (2) to define optimal screening for SARS-CoV-2 in patients presenting with pneumonia and PE.

Objectives It has been suggested that pregnant women were affected more severely during the late wave, as opposed to the early wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim of our study was to compare the proportion of pregnant women among hospitalized women of childbearing age, their rate of intensive care (ICU) admission, need for mechanical ventilation and mortality during the waves. Methods The study is a retrospective analysis of claims data on women of childbearing age (16–49 years) admitted to 76 hospitals with a laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. The observation period was divided into first wave (7 March 2020 to 30 September 2020) and second wave (1 October to 17 April 2021). Co-morbidities derived from claims data were summarized in the Elixhauser Co-morbidity Index (ECI). Results A total of 1879 women were included, 532 of whom were pregnant. During the second wave, the proportion of pregnant women was higher (29.3% (484/1650) versus 21.0% (48/229), p

BackgroundAfter the first Covid-19 infection wave, a constant increase of pulmonary embolism (PE) hospitalizations not linked with active PCR-confirmed Covid-19 has been observed but potential contributors to this observation are unclear. Therefore, we analyzed associations between changes in PE hospitalizations and (1) the incidence of non-Covid-19 pneumonia, (2) the use of computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA), (3) volume depletion and (4) preceding Covid-19 infection numbers in Germany.MethodsClaims data of Helios hospitals in Germany were used and consecutive cases with a hospital admission between May 6 and December 15, 2020 (PE surplus period) were analyzed and compared to corresponding periods covering the same weeks in 2016–2019 (control period). We analyzed the number of PE cases in the target period with multivariable Poisson general linear mixed models (GLMM) including (a) cohorts of 2020 versus 2016– 2019, (b) the number of cases with pneumonia, (c) CTPA, and (d) volume depletion and adjusted for age and sex. In order to associate the daily number of PE cases in 2020 with the number of preceding SARS-CoV-2 infections in Germany, we calculated the average number of daily infections (divided by 10,000) occurring 14 up to 90 days with increasing window sizes before PE cases and modelled the data with Poisson regression.ResultsThere were 2,404 PE hospitalizations between May 6 and December 15, 2020 as opposed to 2,112 – 2,236 (total 8,717) in the corresponding 2016 – 2019 control periods. (crude rate ratio [CRR] 1.10, 95% CI 1.05 – 1.15, PPPPPConclusionsThere is an increase in PE cases since early May 2020 compared to corresponding periods in 2016 – 2019. This surplus was significant even when controlling for changes in potential modulators such as demographics, volume depletion, non-Covid-19 pneumonia, CTPA use and preceding Covid-19 infections. Future studies are needed (1) to investigate a potential causal link for increased risk of delayed PE with preceding SARS-CoV-2 infection, and (2) to define optimal screening for SARS-CoV-2 in patients presenting with pneumonia and PE.

BackgroundThere is discussion evolving around the emergence of different phenotypes of Covid-19-associated thromboembolic disease, i.e. acute pulmonary embolism vs pulmonary thrombosis and different phenotypes of in situ thrombosis. With this study, we wish to provide hospitalization, treatment and in-hospital outcome data for pulmonary embolism during the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic and a corresponding 2016 – 2019 control period.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of claims data of Helios hospitals in Germany. Consecutive cases with a hospital admission between January 1 and December 15, 2020 and pulmonary embolism as primary discharge diagnosis were analyzed and compared to a corresponding period covering the same weeks in 2016 – 2019.ResultsAs previously reported for other emergent medical conditions, there was a hospitalization deficit coinciding with the 1st pandemic wave. Beginning with the 12-week interval May 6 – July 28, there was a stable surplus of hospital admissions in 2020. During this surplus period (May 6 – December 15, 2020), there were 2,449 hospitalizations including 45 PCR-confirmed Covid-19 cases (1.8%) as opposed to 8,717 in 2016 – 2019 (IRR 1.12, 95% CI 1.07 – 1.18, PPP=0.28), the presence of thrombosis (46.1 vs 45.4%, P=0.55) and surgery (3.8 vs. 4.3%, P=0.33) were comparable, coagulopathy (3.3 vs 4.5%, P=0.01) and metastatic cancer (3.0 vs 4.0%, P=0.03) as contributing factors were less frequently observed during the 2020 surplus. Interventional treatments (thrombolytic therapy, thrombectomy or inferior vena cava filter placement) were less frequently used (4.7 vs 6.6%, OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58 − 0.89, P< 0.01). Similarly, intensive care (35.1 vs 38.8%, OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75 − 0.92, P< 0.01) and mechanical ventilation utilization (7.2 vs 8.1%, OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 – 1.04, P=0.14) as well as in-hospital-mortality rates (7.8 vs 9.8%, OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 − 0.90, P< 0.01) were lower in 2020 compared with 2016 – 2019. This was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (6.4 ±5.4 vs. 7.2 ±5.7 days, P< 0.01) during the 2020 surplus period.ConclusionsOnly a minority of cases were associated with PCR-confirmed Covid-19 but this does not rule out preceding or undetected SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although there is a shift towards milder disease course, the increased incidence of hospitalizations for pulmonary embolism requires immediate attention, close surveillance and further studies.

BackgroundWhile there are numerous reports that describe emergency care during the early Covid-19 pandemic, there is scarcity of data for later stages. This study analyzes hospitalization rates for 37 emergency-sensitive conditions in the largest German-wide hospital network during different pandemic phases.MethodsUsing claims data of 80 hospitals, consecutive cases between January 1 and November 17, 2020 were analyzed and compared to a corresponding period in 2019. Incidence-rate ratios (IRR) comparing the both periods were calculated using Poisson regression to model the number of hospitalizations per day.ResultsThere was a hospitalization deficit between March 12 and June 13, 2020 (coinciding with the 1st pandemic wave) with 32,807 hospitalizations as opposed to 39,379 in 2019 (IRR 0.83, 95% CI 0.82 – 0.85, Pnd wave), hospitalizations were reduced from 63,799 in 2019 to 59,910 in 2020, but this reduction was not that pronounced (IRR 0.94, 95% CI 0.93 – 0.95, Pst wave during which hospitalizations had been reduced for those conditions. In contrast, hospitalizations for sepsis, pneumonia, obstructive pulmonary disease, and intracranial injuries were reduced during the entire pandemic.ConclusionsThere was an overall reduction of hospitalizations for emergency-sensitive conditions in Germany during the Covid-19 pandemic with heterogeneous effects on different disease categories. The increase of hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction, aortic aneurism/dissection and pulmonary embolism is an alarming signal that requires attention and further studies.KEY MESSAGESWhat is already known on this subjectThere has been a reduction in emergency room visits and hospital admissions for several emergent medical and surgical conditions during the early Covid-19 pandemic (1st wave).What this study addsUsing claims data of 80 German-wide Helios hospitals, we found an overall reduction of hospitalizations for emergency-sensitive conditions in Germany during the Covid-19 pandemic until mid November 2020 with heterogeneous effects on different disease categories. While hospitalizations for sepsis, pneumonia, obstructive pulmonary disease, and intracranial injuries were reduced during the entire pandemic. There was an alarming increase of hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction, aortic aneurism/dissection and pulmonary embolism after the 1st wave.