Hubbry Logo
Life supportLife supportMain
Open search
Life support
Community hub
Life support
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Life support
Life support
Life support
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Life support
Endotracheal tube of an emergency ventilator system
SpecialtyEmergency medicine, intensive care medicine

Life support comprises the treatments and techniques performed in an emergency in order to support life after the failure of one or more vital organs. Healthcare providers and emergency medical technicians are generally certified to perform basic and advanced life-support procedures; however, basic life support is sometimes provided at the scene of an emergency by family members or bystanders before emergency services arrive. In the case of cardiac injuries, cardiopulmonary resuscitation is initiated by bystanders or family members 25% of the time.[1] Basic life-support techniques, such as performing CPR on a victim of cardiac arrest, can double or even triple that patient's chance of survival.[2] Other types of basic life support include relief from choking (which can be done by using the Heimlich maneuver), staunching of bleeding by direct compression and elevation above the heart (and if necessary, pressure on arterial pressure points and the use of a manufactured or improvised tourniquet), first aid, and the use of an automated external defibrillator.

The purpose of basic life support (abbreviated BLS) is to save lives in a variety of different situations that require immediate attention. These situations can include, but are not limited to, cardiac arrest, stroke, drowning, choking, accidental injuries, violence, severe allergic reactions, burns, hypothermia, birth complications, drug addiction, and alcohol intoxication. The most common emergency that requires BLS is cerebral hypoxia, a shortage of oxygen to the brain due to heart or respiratory failure. A victim of cerebral hypoxia may die within 8–10 minutes without basic life-support procedures. BLS is the lowest level of emergency care, followed by advanced life support and critical care.[3]

Bioethics

[edit]

As technology continues to advance within the medical field, so do the options available for healthcare. Out of respect for the patient's autonomy, patients and their families are able to make their own decisions about life-sustaining treatment or whether to hasten death.[4] When patients and their families are forced to make decisions concerning life support as a form of end-of-life or emergency treatment, ethical dilemmas often arise. When a patient is terminally ill or seriously injured, medical interventions can save or prolong the life of the patient. Because such treatment is available, families are often faced with the moral question of whether or not to treat the patient. Much of the struggle concerns the ethics of letting someone die when they can be kept alive versus keeping someone alive, possibly without their consent.[5] Between 60 and 70% of seriously ill patients will not be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want to limit treatments, including life-support measures. This leaves these difficult decisions up to loved ones and family members.

Patients and family members who wish to limit the treatment provided to the patient may complete a do not resuscitate (DNR) or do not intubate (DNI) order with their doctor. These orders state that the patient does not wish to receive these forms of life support. Generally, DNRs and DNIs are justified for patients who might not benefit from CPR, who would result in permanent damage from CPR or patients who have a poor quality of life prior to CPR or intubation and do not wish to prolong the dying process.

Another type of life support that presents ethical arguments is the placement of a feeding tube. Decisions about hydration and nutrition are generally the most ethically challenging when it comes to end-of-life care. In 1990, the US Supreme Court ruled that artificial nutrition and hydration are not different from other life-supporting treatments. Because of this, artificial nutrition and hydration can be refused by a patient or their family. A person cannot live without food and water, and because of this, it has been argued that withholding food and water is similar to the act of killing the patient or even allowing the person to die.[6] This type of voluntary death is referred to as passive euthanasia.[7]

In addition to patients and their families, doctors also are confronted with ethical questions. In addition to patient life, doctors have to consider medical resource allocations. They have to decide whether one patient is a worthwhile investment of limited resources versus another.[5] Current ethical guidelines are vague since they center on moral issues of ending medical care but disregard discrepancies between those who understand possible treatments and how the patient's wishes are understood and integrated into the final decision. Physicians often ignore treatments they deem ineffective, causing them to make more decisions without consulting the patient or representatives. However, when they decide against medical treatment, they must keep the patient or representatives informed even if they discourage continued life support. Whether the physician decides to continue to terminate life-support therapy depends on their own ethical beliefs. These beliefs concern the patient's independence, consent, and the efficacy and value of continued life support.[8] In a prospective study conducted by T J Predergast and J M Luce from 1987 to 1993, when physicians recommended withholding or withdrawing life support, 90% of the patients agreed to the suggestion and only 4% refused. When the patient disagreed with the physician, the doctor complied and continued support with one exception. If the doctor believed the patient was hopelessly ill, they did not fulfill the surrogate's request for resuscitation.[9] In a survey conducted by Jean-Louis Vincent MD, PhD in 1999, it was found that of European intensivists working in the Intensive Care Unit, 93% of physicians occasionally withhold treatment from those they considered hopeless. Withdrawal of treatment was less common. For these patients, 40% of the physicians gave large doses of drugs until the patient died. All of the physicians were members of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.[10]

Case studies

[edit]

Sawatzky vs. Riverview Health Center Inc., November 1998

[edit]

Mr. Sawatsky had Parkinson's disease and had been a patient at the Riverview Health Centre, Manitoba, Canada since May 28, 1998. When he was admitted to the hospital, the attending physician decided that if he went into cardiac arrest, he should not be resuscitated. Mrs. Sawatsky opposed the decision and the doctor complied. Later, the doctor decided that the patient needed a cuffed tracheotomy tube, which Mrs. Sawatsky opposed. In response, the hospital applied to have a Public Trustee become the patient's legal guardian and the Trustee consented to the operation. In late October, without consulting another physician or the patient's wife, the physician again made a "do not resuscitate" order after the patient developed pneumonia. Mrs. Sawatzky went to court for an interim order to remove the DNR. The "do not resuscitate" order was withdrawn.[11]

In the case law to date in 1988, the courts decided that a decision to withhold or withdraw treatment was only for the physician to make, not the courts. However, the Manitoba court decided that given the scarcity of related cases and how none of them considered the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it would try the case. Previous courts had held that physicians should not be bound by law to provide treatment that they did not believe the patient would want. Otherwise, the physician would be acting against his conscience and his duty as a physician. However, if the patient disagreed, they can sue the physician for negligence. To avoid this, Justice Beard ruled in favor of the patient. Resuscitation is not controversial and only requires CPR, which would be performed by the first qualified person on the scene. Even if resuscitation was an ethical dilemma, it was minor given that the doctor had allowed resuscitation for several months already. In contrast with related cases in which patients were comatose, Mrs. Sawatzky provided evidence that her husband was able to communicate and believed that he could recover, but the doctor disagreed. The uncertainty of recovery pushed the Court to order the physician to allow resuscitation. Where rulings discuss end of life issues, the question is more, "Is continued life a benefit to this person" instead of, "Is it possible to treat this person". These questions are beyond the scope of the medical profession and can be answered philosophically or religiously, which is also what builds our sense of justice. Both philosophy and religion value life as a basic right for humans, rather than as the ability to contribute to society, and purposely encompasses all people. Mr. Sawatzky fell under the umbrella, so the judge ruled in his favor.[12]

Airedale NHS Trust v. Bland (1993)

[edit]

The Airedale NHS Trust v. Bland case was an English House of Lords decision for a 17-year-old comatose survivor of the Hillsborough disaster. He had been artificially fed and hydrated via life support for about three years, but he had not shown any improvement while in his persistent vegetative state. His parents challenged the therapeutic life support at the High Court and wanted permission to end life support for their son. The Court decided that his "existence in a persistent vegetative state is not a benefit to the patient," but the statement did not cover the innate value of human life. The court interpreted the sanctity of life as only applicable when life could continue in the way that the patient would have wanted to live their life. If the quality of life did not fall within what the patient valued as a meaningful life, then sanctity of life did not apply. The accuracy of a proxy's decision about how to treat a patient is influenced by what the patient would have wanted for themselves. However, just because the patient wanted to die did not mean the courts would allow physicians to assist and medically kill a patient. This part of the decision was influenced by the case Rodriguez (1993) in which a British Columbian woman with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis could not secure permission for assisted suicide.[13]

Techniques

[edit]

There are many therapies and techniques that may be used by clinicians to achieve the goal of sustaining life. Some examples include:

These techniques are applied most commonly in the Emergency Department, Intensive Care Unit and Operating Rooms. As various life-support technologies have improved and evolved they are used increasingly outside of the hospital environment. For example, a patient who requires a ventilator for survival is commonly discharged home with these devices. Another example includes the now-ubiquitous presence of automated external defibrillators in public venues which allow lay people to deliver life support in a prehospital environment.

The ultimate goals of life support depend on the specific patient situation. Typically, life support is used to sustain life while the underlying injury or illness is being treated or evaluated for prognosis. Life-support techniques may also be used indefinitely if the underlying medical condition cannot be corrected, but a reasonable quality of life can still be expected.

[edit]
  • Dialysis center for patients with severe chronic kidney disease
    Dialysis center for patients with severe chronic kidney disease
  • Hemodialysis machine Bellco Formula
    Hemodialysis machine Bellco Formula
  • An iron lung
    An iron lung
  • Ventilator "Evita4" on an ICU
    Ventilator "Evita4" on an ICU

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Life support

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Life support refers to medical treatments and technologies that use mechanical or artificial means to maintain essential physiological functions, such as respiration, circulation, or renal filtration, in patients whose vital organs have failed or are imminently failing, thereby preventing immediate absent such intervention. These systems, including mechanical ventilators for lung support and for kidney replacement, emerged prominently after as intensive care units evolved, enabling short-term stabilization of critically ill patients to allow potential recovery or bridge to transplantation. While life support has dramatically improved survival rates in conditions like and multi-organ failure, its application often raises profound ethical dilemmas regarding futility, patient autonomy, and the distinction between prolonging life versus extending dying processes, particularly when neurological recovery is absent. Historically, early forms such as the for victims in the 1950s demonstrated the feasibility of external respiratory support, paving the way for modern invasive techniques amid controversies over and in irreversible cases. Advances in (ECMO) and continuous have expanded capabilities, yet empirical data underscore that prolonged dependence frequently correlates with poor long-term outcomes, informing guidelines that prioritize evidence-based withdrawal in prognostically dire scenarios to align with causal realities of underlying .

Definition and Fundamentals

Core Concepts and Mechanisms

Life support encompasses medical interventions that artificially replicate or augment essential physiological processes to preserve life when endogenous organ functions fail, thereby preventing immediate mortality from conditions such as acute respiratory distress, circulatory collapse, or renal shutdown. These systems operate on the principle of restoring homeostasis— the dynamic equilibrium of internal variables like oxygen saturation, blood pH, and fluid balance—through targeted causal interventions that bypass impaired anatomy or physiology. Empirically, such support extends survival windows for potential recovery, as evidenced by its application in intensive care units where untreated organ failure correlates with mortality rates exceeding 50% in multi-organ scenarios, though outcomes depend on underlying etiology and timely reversal of primary insults. At the mechanistic core, life support targets vital subsystems: respiratory support via delivers controlled tidal volumes (typically 6-8 mL/kg ideal body weight) under positive pressure to facilitate alveolar , countering by generating a that drives oxygen into and out of the bloodstream, akin to natural diaphragmatic contraction but externally imposed. Circulatory mechanisms, such as (ECMO), employ pumps and oxygenators to maintain and systemic , directly addressing pump failure by circulating blood at flows of 3-5 L/min while minimizing on blood cells. Renal interventions like utilize and across semipermeable membranes to remove uremic toxins and excess fluid, replicating glomerular filtration rates of approximately 100-125 mL/min in functional kidneys. These processes integrate feedback loops, such as alarms for peak pressures exceeding 30 cmH2O to avert , ensuring interventions align with physiological tolerances. Fundamentally, these mechanisms derive from causal models of , where failure modes—like shunt fractions in lungs leading to venous admixture or reduced cardiac preload causing tissue hypoperfusion—are quantified and countered; for instance, ventilation strategies minimize dead space ventilation (normally 150 mL per breath) to optimize PaO2/FiO2 ratios above 200 mmHg in . Success hinges on minimizing iatrogenic harm, as excessive (PEEP) beyond 10-15 cmH2O can induce volutrauma, underscoring the empirical calibration required to balance support with native recovery potential.

Empirical Basis and Causal Principles

Life support systems address vital organ by artificially sustaining physiological processes essential for cellular , such as oxygenation, elimination, circulation, and waste removal, thereby averting immediate death from metabolic derangements. In , empirically demonstrates efficacy in (ARDS), where hospital mortality rates range from 40% with invasive support, reflecting improved outcomes compared to historical untreated rates exceeding 80%, attributable to strategies like low ventilation that reduce -induced . Causally, ventilation exploits the across alveolar-capillary membranes to facilitate diffusive ; recruits collapsed alveoli, enhancing ventilation-perfusion matching and maintaining partial pressures of oxygen above 60 mmHg to support aerobic metabolism, while expiratory phases expel CO2 to prevent . For circulatory support, (ECMO) provides empirical survival benefits in refractory , with in-hospital mortality around 62%, influenced by factors like support duration exceeding three days correlating with poorer due to complications such as . The causal mechanism involves veno-arterial ECMO diverting deoxygenated blood from the venous system, oxygenating it externally via a membrane lung, and returning it to the arterial circulation, bypassing dysfunctional to preserve end-organ and mitigate hypoxic tissue damage. In renal failure, empirically sustains patients awaiting transplantation or recovery, comprising 69% of replacement therapies globally and extending survival in end-stage renal disease by managing uremic toxins, though long-term mortality remains high at approximately 15-20% annually due to comorbidities. Causally, dialysis employs and across a to replicate glomerular , removing , , and excess electrolytes while correcting acid-base imbalances, thus preventing hyperkalemia-induced arrhythmias and from nitrogenous waste accumulation. These interventions collectively rest on the principle that timely restoration of interrupts the cascade from to , though empirical outcomes underscore variability tied to underlying and timely initiation.

Historical Development

Pre-20th Century Origins

The earliest documented attempts at mechanical ventilation trace to the , when anatomist described in his 1555 work De Humani Corporis Fabrica a method of inserting a into the trachea of a recently deceased animal and using bellows to inflate the lungs, thereby restoring visible movement in the chest and heart. This experiment demonstrated the causal link between lung inflation and circulation, predating formal understanding of oxygenation but establishing as a means to mimic natural respiration. By the , organized efforts to revive victims spurred practical applications of artificial respiration in . In , the Society for the Recovery of Drowned Persons in advocated bellows-driven inflation, drawing on Vesalius's principles, though direct mouth-to-mouth or manual methods like rolling the body over a barrel were also employed amid debates over efficacy. These techniques, promoted by reanimation societies across the continent, emphasized restoring pulmonary function to sustain vital signs, reflecting an empirical recognition that interrupted halted circulation—a precursor to systematic life support. In the , negative-pressure devices emerged as rudimentary ventilators, applying external suction to expand the chest without invasive tubes. French physician Jean-Antoine Woillez constructed a barrel-shaped cabinet in that enclosed the body and used a to create intermittent negative pressure, simulating spontaneous for patients with respiratory . Such apparatuses, though cumbersome and limited to short-term use, laid groundwork for later negative-pressure systems by exploiting the inverse causal relationship between thoracic pressure and lung volume. These pre-20th century innovations, rooted in anatomical experimentation and crisis-driven necessity, prioritized respiratory restoration over multisystem support, as other organ failures lacked viable mechanical interventions until electrical and chemical advances.

20th Century Milestones

The development of negative-pressure ventilators marked an early 20th-century breakthrough in respiratory life support, with Philip Drinker and Louis Shaw inventing the iron lung in 1928 at to assist breathing in patients paralyzed by respiratory failure, such as those with . This device, which enclosed the body in a sealed chamber and used rhythmic pressure changes to expand and contract the lungs, was first successfully applied to an eight-year-old girl at in October 1928, saving her life and demonstrating the feasibility of mechanical respiratory support. During , advances in positive-pressure emerged, initially for surgical but adapted for prolonged support amid epidemics; the 1940s saw devices like the cuirass ventilator and early endotracheal intubation techniques enable better control of ventilation parameters. In parallel, renal life support progressed with Willem Kolff constructing the first functional dialyzer in 1943 in Nazi-occupied , using a rotating drum of tubing to filter blood and remove waste, laying the groundwork for despite initial limited successes until postwar refinements. A pivotal circulatory milestone occurred on May 6, 1953, when John H. Gibbon Jr. performed the first successful open-heart using his heart-lung machine at Jefferson Medical College Hospital, bypassing the heart and lungs in an 18-year-old patient with an , enabling direct cardiac repair and transforming surgical capabilities. By the mid-1950s, volume-cycled positive-pressure ventilators like the Engström model improved intensive care, supporting patients with controlled tidal volumes and reducing reliance on negative-pressure devices. The late 20th century saw (ECMO) emerge as an advanced multisystem support, with Robert H. Bartlett and colleagues pioneering its clinical use in the early to oxygenate outside the body for severe respiratory or cardiac failure, building on heart-lung machine principles but extended for prolonged therapy. These innovations collectively established the technological foundations for modern intensive care units, shifting life support from rudimentary aids to integrated systems capable of sustaining vital functions during acute crises.

Post-2000 Innovations

Since the early 2000s, (ECMO) has seen substantial technological refinements, including the introduction of centrifugal pumps and oxygenators that reduced and improved efficiency, enabling longer durations of support with lower complication rates. Portable and miniaturized ECMO systems emerged around 2009, facilitating ambulation and inter-hospital transport, as demonstrated in trials during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic where ECMO supported severe cases with survival rates up to 75% in selected cohorts. These devices, such as the Cardiohelp system approved in 2011, incorporated integrated monitoring to minimize clotting risks, marking a shift from stationary to mobile applications in critical care. In mechanical ventilation, post-2000 developments emphasized lung-protective strategies and advanced modes like neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA), introduced in the mid-2000s, which synchronizes breaths with diaphragmatic electrical activity to reduce ventilator-induced lung injury and time by up to 50% in randomized trials. Proportional assist ventilation (PAV), refined in the , amplifies patient effort proportionally to enhance comfort and efficiency, supported by evidence from studies showing decreased sedation needs and shorter ICU stays. techniques, building on 1990s foundations, incorporated helmet interfaces and high-flow systems by the early , reducing rates in (ARDS) by 20-30% per meta-analyses. Circulatory support innovations included the transition to continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), with the HeartMate II receiving FDA approval in 2008 as a bridge-to-transplant and option, offering 2-year survival rates exceeding 70% compared to prior pulsatile models. The SynCardia total , implanted in over 1,800 patients since its 2010 commercialization, provided biventricular replacement with pneumatic drivers, achieving 79% bridge-to-transplant success in registry data. These devices incorporated smaller profiles and bearings to mitigate , though hemocompatibility challenges persist. Renal life support advanced through continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) enhancements, such as auto-priming circuits and multi-pump platforms introduced in the 2000s, which stabilized in septic AKI patients by maintaining 24-hour filtration without frequent interruptions. By the 2010s, biocompatible membranes and automated dosing systems in devices like the NxStage System One reduced downtime via parallel priming, improving dose delivery to 25-35 mL/kg/hour as per KDIGO guidelines. These innovations correlated with a 10-15% drop in CRRT-related mortality in observational cohorts, though randomized evidence on long-term outcomes remains limited.

Technical Components and Methods

Respiratory Life Support Systems

Respiratory life support systems maintain gas exchange in patients with inadequate spontaneous breathing, primarily through mechanical ventilation that delivers positive airway pressure to inflate the lungs and facilitate carbon dioxide removal. Unlike physiological negative-pressure breathing, these systems use intermittent positive-pressure ventilation (IPPV), where pressurized gas is forced into the airways during inspiration. This approach ensures controlled tidal volumes and respiratory rates, critical for conditions like acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) or neuromuscular failure. Mechanical ventilators consist of key components including a gas supply system for delivering oxygen-enriched air, pneumatic mixing valves to adjust FiO2, and circuits with unidirectional valves, and sensors monitoring , flow, and volume. Modern devices integrate microprocessors for automated adjustments and alarms for deviations in parameters like or . Invasive systems require endotracheal or tracheostomy to secure the airway, while (NIV) uses interfaces like full-face masks or nasal pillows for conditions such as exacerbations. Ventilation modes vary by control mechanism: volume-controlled modes deliver a set regardless of pressure, suitable for patients with compliant , whereas pressure-controlled modes limit peak pressure to prevent , adjusting volume based on . Hybrid modes like pressure-regulated volume control combine volume assurance with pressure limits to maintain target . Assist-control modes synchronize with patient efforts, reducing , while augments spontaneous breaths with variable pressure. Protective strategies, such as low s of 6 mL/kg predicted body weight and plateau pressures below 30 cmH2O, minimize ventilator-induced (VILI) in ARDS. Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) maintains alveolar recruitment to improve oxygenation, typically set at 5-15 cmH2O, though excessive levels risk hemodynamic compromise via reduced venous return. Respiratory rates of 12-20 breaths per minute and FiO2 titrated to SpO2 88-95% optimize outcomes, guided by gas analysis. Despite efficacy, complications include (VAP), occurring in up to 25% of intubated patients, barotrauma from overdistension, and diaphragmatic from disuse. For severe refractory to conventional ventilation, (ECMO) provides respiratory support by oxygenating blood externally, though it is resource-intensive and primarily adjunctive. High-frequency oscillatory ventilation, oscillating gas at supraphysiologic rates with low tidal volumes, has been trialed but showed no mortality benefit over conventional methods in randomized trials. Ongoing advancements focus on closed-loop systems using for real-time lung monitoring to personalize settings.

Circulatory and Cardiac Support

Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) encompasses devices that augment or replace the heart's pumping function to maintain systemic , coronary flow, and end-organ oxygenation in cases of acute or chronic cardiac failure, , or post-cardiotomy stunning. These systems operate on principles of counterpulsation or direct flow generation, reducing myocardial workload while enhancing diastolic pressure and , with applications as bridge-to-recovery, bridge-to-decision, or bridge-to-transplant. from registries and trials indicates variable efficacy, influenced by patient selection, device type, and complications like or , though advancements have improved short-term survival in cases. Temporary MCS devices provide short-term hemodynamic stabilization, typically for hours to weeks. The (IABP), introduced clinically in the 1960s, uses ECG- or pressure-triggered counterpulsation: a balloon in the inflates during to boost coronary by 20-30% and deflates during to lower by up to 15%, increasing modestly (0.5-1 L/min). It is deployed via femoral access for high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions or weaning from , but randomized trials like IABP-SHOCK II (2012) showed no mortality benefit in , limiting its routine use. options like the microaxial pump (e.g., Impella CP providing up to 4 L/min flow) or TandemHeart offer greater support by unloading the left ventricle directly, with inserted retrogradely across the to eject blood from the LV into the . Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) delivers full circulatory and respiratory support by draining , oxygenating it externally, and returning it arterially, achieving flows of 3-5 L/min to sustain organ perfusion in profound shock. Initiated in the for postcardiotomy failure, its use surged during the for refractory cases, but the ECMO-CS trial (2023) found no 30-day mortality reduction (46.8% vs. 48.3% in controls) when added to standard care for severe , highlighting risks of limb ischemia, , and left ventricular distension without venting. Survival to discharge ranges from 40-60% in selected cohorts, per Extracorporeal Life Support data, but overall in-hospital mortality exceeds 50% due to underlying disease severity. Durable MCS, such as left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), supports chronic end-stage via continuous-flow pumps (e.g., HeartMate 3, FDA-approved 2017) that propel blood from the LV apex to the at 4-10 L/min, reducing pulmonary pressures and enabling destination therapy. First-generation pulsatile LVADs emerged in the 1980s, with pneumatic models like the HeartMate XVE approved in 2001 for bridge-to-transplant; continuous-flow iterations improved reliability, yielding 1-year survival of 84% and 2-year rates of 70-78% in INTERMACS registry data (2010-2020). Right ventricular assist devices (RVADs) or biventricular systems address biventricular failure, while total artificial hearts replace both ventricles entirely, used rarely (e.g., SynCardia, supporting <1% of MCS patients) due to infection and thromboembolism risks exceeding 20-30% annually. Outcomes reflect causal trade-offs: enhanced quality of life for survivors but persistent adverse events like driveline infections (15-20% incidence) necessitate multidisciplinary management.

Renal and Metabolic Interventions

Renal replacement therapy (RRT) serves as a critical intervention in life support for patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) in intensive care units, where up to 14% of critically ill individuals require it to manage uremia, fluid overload, and electrolyte disturbances. Modalities include intermittent hemodialysis (IHD), performed several hours per session every other day, and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), such as continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH), hemodialysis (CVVHD), or hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF), which operate 24 hours a day at slower rates to enhance hemodynamic stability in unstable patients. CRRT predominates in many ICUs, particularly in the United States, due to its capacity to avoid rapid shifts in volume and solutes that could precipitate hypotension, though randomized trials indicate no overall survival advantage over IHD. Timing of RRT initiation remains debated, with evidence from trials like the AKIKI and STARRT-AKI studies showing that accelerated strategies—starting at stage 2 AKI without urgent indications—do not reduce 90-day mortality compared to delayed approaches awaiting complications like hyperkalemia or refractory acidosis. CRRT facilitates precise control of acid-base balance and cytokine removal in sepsis-associated AKI, but meta-analyses reveal comparable renal recovery rates to IHD, with some data suggesting potential long-term dialysis dependence risks varying by modality. Complications include circuit clotting, hypothermia, and nutrient losses, necessitating anticoagulation and supplementation protocols. Metabolic interventions complement renal support by addressing derangements in electrolytes, glucose, and acid-base status that can independently threaten life in supported patients. In ICU settings, hypokalemia, hypomagnesemia, and hyperkalemia require targeted repletion or restriction, often guided by serial monitoring to prevent arrhythmias; for instance, potassium levels below 3.5 mEq/L correlate with increased mortality risk in critically ill cohorts. Continuous insulin infusions maintain euglycemia (target 140-180 mg/dL) to mitigate hyperglycemia-induced organ stress, while sodium bicarbonate corrects severe metabolic acidosis (pH <7.2) only if hemodynamically tolerated, as empirical use lacks mortality benefits in randomized assessments. RRT itself modulates metabolic parameters by diffusive and convective clearance, but adjunctive therapies like phosphate binders or citrate anticoagulation influence calcium and coagulation homeostasis. Nutritional metabolic support via enteral or parenteral routes prevents catabolism in prolonged life support, with guidelines recommending 1.3 g/kg/day protein and energy matching measured expenditure via indirect calorimetry to avoid refeeding syndrome or overfeeding-related complications like hepatic steatosis. In renal failure contexts, adjusted formulations limit potassium and phosphorus while preserving adequacy, as underfeeding exacerbates muscle wasting and immune dysfunction in these vulnerable populations. Overall, these interventions sustain physiological equilibria absent organ function, though outcomes hinge on underlying disease severity rather than isolated modality choices.

Multisystem and Advanced Therapies

In critical care, multisystem life support therapies target multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), a condition involving derangement of two or more organ systems requiring extracorporeal interventions to sustain vital functions and bridge to recovery. These approaches integrate technologies such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for cardiopulmonary support, continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) for renal failure, and liver detoxification systems, often delivered as multiple organ support therapy (MOST). Such therapies address the interconnected nature of organ failures, where, for instance, acute kidney injury (AKI) occurs in up to 70% of ECMO patients due to hemodynamic instability and inflammation. ECMO serves as a foundational modality in multisystem failure, with veno-venous (VV-ECMO) configurations supporting severe respiratory failure and veno-arterial (VA-ECMO) addressing combined cardiac and pulmonary collapse, achieving blood flows up to 4 L/min. In patients with MODS, ECMO mortality ranges from 47% to 61%, with adjunct therapies like molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS) liver dialysis accelerating hepatic recovery and improving weaning success without added complications. The EOLIA trial demonstrated ECMO's mortality reduction from 39% to 22% in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores below 11, though efficacy diminishes in higher SOFA cases indicative of advanced multisystem involvement. Combined ECMO and CRRT is frequently employed for concurrent cardiopulmonary and renal support, with CRRT doses of 35 mL/kg/h mitigating fluid overload and uremia; however, integration into the ECMO circuit raises infection risk (relative risk 1.65) and requires optimized connections to prevent pressure drops. Retrospective data show comparable safety and efficacy between integrated and parallel setups, though outcomes vary by etiology, with higher mortality in sepsis-associated MODS. Advanced integrated systems like the ADVanced Organ Support (ADVOS) device employ recirculating albumin dialysis to simultaneously target liver, kidney, and acid-base derangements, removing water-soluble toxins, albumin-bound substances, and adjusting pH from 7.2 to 9.0. In a 2020 cohort of 34 patients with median SOFA score 17, ADVOS reduced bilirubin by 17%, creatinine by 7.1%, blood urea nitrogen by 17.6%, and ammonia by 16.4%, while improving pH in severe acidosis (from 7.19 to 7.40) and managing lactate levels averaging 10.4 mmol/L; 28-day survival was 50%, with minimal complications beyond three unrelated bleeds. Despite these advances, evidence for multisystem therapies remains constrained by limited randomized trials, with benefits largely observational and serving as bridges to recovery or transplantation rather than definitive cures. Complications including bleeding, thrombosis, and nutrient loss persist, alongside high costs and resource demands, underscoring the need for precise patient selection via biomarkers and SOFA scoring. Modular extracorporeal platforms enable tailored combinations, but optimal timing and standardization await further validation.

Clinical Contexts and Applications

Acute Care and Emergencies

In acute care settings such as intensive care units (ICUs) and emergency departments, life support systems are employed to temporarily sustain vital organ functions in patients experiencing sudden, life-threatening failures due to conditions like trauma, sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), cardiogenic shock, or acute kidney injury (AKI). These interventions bridge the gap until native organ recovery or definitive treatment, with mechanical ventilation serving as the cornerstone for respiratory support in over 30% of ICU admissions involving mechanical ventilation for acute failure. Outcomes vary by underlying pathology, but in-hospital mortality for invasively ventilated patients often exceeds 50% in severe cases, influenced by multiorgan dysfunction. Mechanical ventilation provides immediate respiratory support by delivering positive pressure to oxygenate blood and remove carbon dioxide in patients with acute hypoxemic or hypercapnic failure, commonly initiated via endotracheal intubation in emergencies like ARDS or post-cardiac arrest. Protective strategies, such as low tidal volumes (6 mL/kg ideal body weight), reduce ventilator-induced lung injury, as evidenced by trials showing decreased mortality from 40% to 31% with this approach. For refractory cases where conventional ventilation fails to maintain oxygenation (PaO2/FiO2 <80 mmHg), veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) oxygenates blood externally, achieving survival rates of approximately 60% in adults with severe acute respiratory failure. Circulatory life support targets acute cardiac or combined cardiopulmonary collapse, with veno-arterial ECMO (VA-ECMO) providing both oxygenation and hemodynamic augmentation in profound shock unresponsive to vasopressors or intra-aortic balloon pumps. VA-ECMO supports cardiac output up to 4-5 L/min, but randomized trials like ECMO-CS indicate no significant short-term mortality benefit over optimal medical therapy alone in rapidly deteriorating cardiogenic shock, with 30-day survival around 47-50%. Complications including bleeding (30-40% incidence due to anticoagulation) and limb ischemia necessitate vigilant monitoring, underscoring ECMO's role as a salvage therapy rather than first-line. Renal replacement therapy (RRT) addresses AKI emergencies characterized by refractory hyperkalemia (>6.5 mEq/L), severe (pH <7.15), or uremic complications, often via continuous modalities like continuous veno-venous (CVVH) to avoid hemodynamic in critically ill patients. Initiation is guided by life-threatening indications rather than early prophylactic use, as the STARRT-AKI trial demonstrated no 90-day mortality reduction with accelerated RRT (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.92-1.15) compared to delayed strategies. In resource-equipped settings, RRT sustains balance and fluid removal, with hospital survival in AKI requiring RRT ranging from 50-60%, though long-term dialysis dependence affects 10-20% of survivors. Multisystem integration, such as combining ECMO with RRT, is common in sepsis-induced failures, reflecting the causal interplay of organ derangements where timely intervention targets reversible insults like hypoperfusion.

Chronic and Long-Term Use

Chronic life support systems sustain patients with irreversible organ failure, such as end-stage respiratory or renal disease, where acute interventions transition to indefinite dependency. These include prolonged for chronic and or for end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Unlike short-term applications, chronic use often involves home-based or settings, with survival influenced by underlying , comorbidities, and access to multidisciplinary support. In respiratory support, home invasive mechanical ventilation (HIMV) or non-invasive alternatives address chronic respiratory failure from conditions like , , or severe (COPD). Median survival on HIMV exceeds 19 years in select cohorts, though outcomes vary by daily usage duration, with longer application predicting extended time-to-death. Home mechanical ventilation () improves quality of life and symptom control in obesity and neuromuscular disorders, but prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) beyond 21 days carries high risks of diaphragm dysfunction, , and 5-year survival rates as low as 13% in ventilator-dependent patients. Renal life support via dialysis predominates for ESRD, with over 500,000 U.S. patients reliant on maintenance or as of recent data. Five-year survival stands at approximately 35% overall, lower (25%) in diabetic patients, though median survival for incident patients improved to 47 months by 2013 from 37 months in 2003, reflecting a 19.7% mortality reduction from 2009 to 2019. Home dialysis modalities, including short daily , enhance health-related and feasibility for comorbid patients requiring concurrent ventilation. Long-term use entails complications like infections, nutritional deficits, and psychological burden, necessitating integrated care to mitigate futility. Home-based systems for ventilation and dialysis enable deinstitutionalization, reducing costs and improving , though prevalence data indicate millions globally depend on such supports, with U.S. funding long-term services for over 5 million annually, many involving organ replacement therapies.

Resource-Limited Settings

In resource-limited settings, such as low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), rural areas, and disaster zones, the delivery of life support faces profound constraints including shortages of advanced equipment, unreliable electricity, limited trained personnel, and inadequate , leading to significantly higher mortality rates for conditions requiring intensive interventions. For instance, capacity remains insufficient in most LMICs, with many facilities lacking even basic ventilators, resulting in preventable deaths from that accounts for up to 54% of in-hospital cases progressing to acute respiratory distress. Studies indicate that invasive in these contexts yields poorer outcomes compared to high-income settings, with survival rates influenced by factors like delayed access and suboptimal weaning protocols; in northern , for example, ICU patients on ventilators experienced mortality driven by comorbidities and resource gaps rather than ventilation itself. Respiratory support adaptations emphasize (BLS) and manual methods over sophisticated machines, as advanced ventilators like those used in ICUs are often unavailable or non-functional due to maintenance issues. Emergency , critical for trauma or , is hampered by shortages of endotracheal tubes and monitoring tools, prompting reliance on improvised techniques such as bag-valve-mask ventilation sustained by minimally staff, though this increases risks of and aspiration. Circulatory support is similarly constrained, with defibrillators and vasopressors scarce, shifting focus to compression-only CPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrests, where outcomes are dismal without rapid transport to equipped centers—BLS programs in remote LMIC areas have shown modest improvements in layperson response but falter without follow-up . Renal interventions, including dialysis, are rare outside urban hubs, with conservative fluid management and peritoneal alternatives used in chronic cases, but mortality exceeds 50% due to unaddressed . Efforts to mitigate these challenges include low-cost innovations like portable, battery-operated ventilators developed for LMICs and task-shifting to non-physician providers for protocolized care, as outlined in global critical care frameworks prioritizing early recognition and triage over prolongation. The World Health Organization advocates for scalable BLS protocols in austere environments, emphasizing training in high-burden conditions like sepsis and trauma, though implementation varies due to funding shortages. Multisystem support often defaults to palliative measures when futility arises from resource exhaustion, with ethical triage guided by prognostic scores adapted for local epidemiology, revealing systemic disparities where geo-economic factors predict ventilation success more than patient physiology. Peer-reviewed analyses underscore that while protective ventilation strategies (e.g., low tidal volumes) can be applied when equipment exists, broader survival hinges on infrastructure investments rather than isolated tech transfers.

Ethical and Philosophical Dimensions

Sanctity of Life Doctrine

The sanctity of life doctrine asserts that human life is inherently sacred and possesses irreducible moral value, rendering intentional killing of innocent persons impermissible under any circumstances. This principle, historically derived from theology viewing as a divine gift, extends to by prohibiting direct harm or destruction of life, while emphasizing duties to preserve and nurture it. In medical contexts, it underscores that life's value remains constant regardless of age, cognitive capacity, or physical condition, rejecting utilitarian assessments that subordinate human worth to subjective metrics. Applied to life support systems, the doctrine mandates the use of interventions—such as or dialysis—that sustain vital functions when they offer reasonable benefit without imposing disproportionate burdens, distinguishing "ordinary" means (essential and non-onerous) from "extraordinary" ones (experimental or excessively painful with minimal gain). It opposes withdrawing such support if the act foreseeably causes death, equating it in intent to , though it permits forgoing treatments in terminal cases where death is imminent and independent of the intervention. This stance contrasts with , which demands all possible prolongation irrespective of futility, by allowing proportionality based on clinical efficacy rather than absolute prolongation. For instance, in cases involving persistent vegetative states, proponents argue against cessation of nutrition and hydration as these constitute basic care, not artificial support, preserving life's continuity unless infection or natural decline intervenes. The faces contention in secular , where quality-of-life paradigms—prioritizing absence of suffering or functional —often prevail, enabling decisions to withhold or withdraw support based on perceived low value of impaired . Critics of sanctity, including some legal scholars, contend it hinders patient-centered care by enforcing uniform preservation, potentially prolonging futile suffering amid resource constraints; however, adherents counter that quality judgments introduce discriminatory devaluation, historically linked to , and erode objective boundaries. Empirical data from end-of-life studies indicate that sanctity-aligned policies correlate with higher treatment continuation rates in religious institutions, reducing rates but raising costs, as seen in jurisdictions upholding inviolability principles post-1970s shifts toward . Despite academic trends favoring quality assessments—potentially influenced by secular —the persists in informing guidelines for faith-based providers, emphasizing causal responsibility: omission of feasible support equates to in death when to forgo life preservation is present. Patient autonomy in the context of life support refers to the ethical and legal right of competent individuals to make informed decisions about accepting, refusing, or withdrawing interventions such as , dialysis, or artificial nutrition, even if those decisions hasten death. This principle, rooted in respect for persons, holds that physicians must obtain voluntary before initiating life-sustaining treatments, disclosing material risks, benefits, alternatives, and the option to forgo care. Competent patients retain the authority to revoke at any time, underscoring that continued treatment without ongoing agreement constitutes a violation of . Informed consent processes for life support must account for the acuity of critical illness, where patients may experience impaired cognition due to hypoxia, , or , potentially limiting capacity. Assessments of capacity evaluate understanding, appreciation, reasoning, and voluntariness, with temporary incapacity (e.g., from ) not negating prior refusals once restored. For incapacitated patients, advance directives—such as living wills specifying refusal of specific interventions like ventilators or feeding tubes—provide evidence of prior wishes, legally binding in most jurisdictions when clearly documented and applicable to the current scenario. Absent directives, apply substituted judgment, prioritizing the patient's known values over objective . The U.S. in Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health (1990) affirmed a constitutional right to refuse life-sustaining treatment under the , but upheld 's requirement for "clear and convincing evidence" of the patient's intent before surrogates could withdraw artificial nutrition from Nancy Cruzan, who had been in a persistent since a 1983 automobile accident. This ruling balanced with state interests in preserving life, prompting widespread adoption of advance directives; by 2023, over 40% of U.S. adults reported having one, though execution rates vary by demographics and remain below 50% in many populations. Ethically, prevails over beneficence when treatments prolong suffering without restoring meaningful function, as no moral distinction exists between withholding and withdrawing support once initiated. Challenges arise in reconciling with non-maleficence, particularly when families or providers perceive refusal as irrational; however, empirical studies indicate that most patients who refuse life support do so after weighing quality-of-life burdens, with regret rates under 5% post-decision. In resource-constrained ICUs, may conflict with , but ethical consensus prioritizes individual over utilitarian overrides absent emergencies. Documentation of discussions mitigates disputes, as courts generally defer to contemporaneous refusals over retrospective interpretations.

Futility and Proportionality Assessments

Medical futility in life support refers to interventions, such as or extracorporeal support, that empirical data demonstrate are unlikely to improve the patient's underlying condition or achieve physiologically defined goals. Quantitative futility is characterized by a very low probability of success, typically less than 1% based on outcome studies for similar cases, while qualitative futility pertains to treatments that may sustain basic physiological functions but fail to restore , independence, or commensurate with the burdens imposed. These distinctions guide clinicians in determining whether continuing life support merely prolongs the dying process without meaningful benefit. Proportionality assessments extend beyond strict futility by evaluating the balance between a treatment's potential benefits—such as extended survival with restored function—and its burdens, including pain, dependency on invasive devices, and emotional strain on families. Under the principle of proportionality, life-sustaining measures are obligatory only when the means employed bear a reasonable relation to the ends pursued, such as averting imminent death with prospect of recovery; otherwise, they may be forgone as disproportionate. In practice, this involves integrating clinical prognosis, patient values (where ascertainable), and resource implications, often formalized in protocols requiring multidisciplinary input. Assessments occur primarily in intensive care settings, where approximately 80% of deaths involve withdrawal of life support deemed nonbeneficial, informed by tools like scoring systems (e.g., or SOFA) and outcome databases. The Society of Critical Care Medicine defines potentially inappropriate interventions as those unlikely to yield net benefit, advocating policies that prioritize physiologic goals over indefinite prolongation of organ failure. However, empirical challenges undermine reliability: most predictive studies suffer from small sample sizes and selection biases, yielding insufficient statistical power for confident futility judgments, which can lead to either overtreatment prolonging or undertreatment denying potential recoveries. Subjectivity compounds these issues, as no universal consensus exists on thresholds for futility, with physicians' predictions of mortality often overestimating death rates by 20-30% in borderline cases, influenced by institutional norms or personal biases toward resource conservation. Conflicts arise when surrogates demand continuation despite clinical consensus on futility, prompting policies in some hospitals that include consultations and second opinions to resolve disputes without unilateral physician override. Causal analysis reveals that premature futility declarations risk causal errors, such as overlooking reversible factors, while prolonged disproportionate support can exacerbate iatrogenic harm, underscoring the need for transparent, data-driven criteria over intuitive judgments.

Foundational Cases and Rulings

In the United States, the Supreme Court's decision in (March 31, 1976) marked a pivotal for withdrawing life-sustaining treatment from incompetent patients. , aged 21, entered a persistent following induced by alcohol and barbiturates on April 14, 1975, requiring and artificial nutrition. Her parents petitioned to disconnect the after physicians deemed recovery futile, but the hospital refused without court approval. The court ruled 7-0 that Quinlan possessed a to under the Fourteenth Amendment, extending to refusal of extraordinary treatment, and authorized her guardian to exercise substituted judgment based on her inferred wishes and best interests, rejecting claims of by omission. The was removed on May 22, 1976; Quinlan breathed independently thereafter but remained unconscious until her death from pneumonia on June 11, 1985. This ruling shifted emphasis from preserving biological life to respecting patient dignity and autonomy, influencing subsequent state laws on advance directives and proxy decision-making. The U.S. Supreme Court's Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health (June 25, 1990) further clarified evidentiary standards for surrogate decisions on life support. Nancy Beth Cruzan, 25, suffered anoxic brain injury in a 1983 car accident, entering a persistent vegetative state sustained by a gastrostomy tube for hydration and nutrition. Her parents, as guardians, sought withdrawal after two years, citing her prior statements against prolonged dependency, but Missouri law required "clear and convincing evidence" of the patient's wishes. In a 5-4 decision, the Court upheld Missouri's standard as consistent with due process, affirming states' interests in preserving life and preventing erroneous terminations while recognizing competent adults' liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical intervention under the Fourteenth Amendment. The ruling did not mandate proxy authority absent such evidence but prompted Cruzan's coworkers to testify to her views, leading a state court to authorize tube removal on December 14, 1990; she died 12 days later. This case reinforced burdens of proof in futility disputes and spurred the 1990 Patient Self-Determination Act, mandating hospitals to inform patients of refusal rights. In the United Kingdom, the House of Lords' ruling in Airedale NHS Trust v. Bland (February 4, 1993) established precedents for discontinuing artificial nutrition and hydration in permanent vegetative states. Anthony Bland, 17, sustained irreversible brain damage in the 1989 Hillsborough Stadium disaster, remaining in a persistent vegetative state for over three years without awareness or recovery potential, fed via nasogastric tube. The Trust sought judicial declaration to withhold feeding and antibiotics, arguing no therapeutic benefit and that continuation violated best interests under common law. Unanimously, the Lords held that while intentionally shortening life remains unlawful, withdrawing futile sustenance—deemed a medical omission rather than act—is permissible when treatment offers no benefit and burdens outweigh advantages, distinguishing it from euthanasia by emphasizing the underlying pathology as the cause of death. Tube feeding ceased on February 22, 1993, with Bland dying of starvation 13 days later on March 3. The decision prioritized objective medical assessments over sanctity-of-life absolutism, influencing guidelines like the British Medical Association's on withholding treatment and affirming physicians' discretion absent patient directives. These cases collectively delineated boundaries between state interests in life preservation and individual rights against invasive prolongation, emphasizing evidence-based futility determinations over indefinite maintenance. Quinlan and Cruzan highlighted surrogate roles in the U.S., while Bland underscored "" in jurisdictions without strong privacy rights, fostering protocols that balance empirical prognosis with ethical restraint against over-treatment. Subsequent rulings, such as those in the Terri Schiavo matter ( removed March 18, 2005, death March 31, 2005, after courts upheld spousal substituted ), built on these foundations amid familial discord but did not alter core tenets of evidentiary rigor and non-futility.61439-0/fulltext)

Withdrawal of Treatment Protocols

Withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment protocols standardize the discontinuation of interventions such as , dialysis, or vasopressors in intensive care units when continued support is deemed futile or contrary to patient preferences, emphasizing palliation over prolongation of dying. These protocols typically require multidisciplinary involvement, including physicians, nurses, specialists, and ethics committees, to confirm decision-making capacity or surrogate , review advance directives, and assess based on objective criteria like multi-organ failure scores. In the United States, such withdrawals are legally permissible under principles of and refusal, provided documentation demonstrates shared and proportionality between burdens and benefits. For mechanical ventilation withdrawal, a common sequence—known as terminal weaning—begins with reducing fractional inspired oxygen (FiO2) to 21% (room air equivalent), followed by stepwise decreases in (PEEP) by 5 cm H2O every 5 minutes until the minimum setting, while monitoring for distress. and analgesia, often with opioids like (starting at 0.5-2 mg/hour IV) and benzodiazepines like for anxiolysis, are administered preemptively and titrated to control symptoms such as dyspnea or agitation, without intent to hasten but to ensure comfort. Extubation may follow if appropriate, or the endotracheal tube can remain in place to minimize procedures; family presence and rituals are encouraged, with protocols advising against routine suctioning to avoid discomfort. Protocols distinguish withdrawal from euthanasia by framing discontinuation as allowing natural death from underlying disease rather than direct causation, though causally, removal of dependency-sustaining support leads to death within minutes to hours in ventilator cases. Individual ICUs are recommended to develop tailored protocols incorporating checklists for preparation, such as confirming code status (do-not-resuscitate orders) and preparing for post-withdrawal care logistics. Canadian consensus guidelines, published in 2016, outline preparation phases including explicit goal-setting, distress assessment via scales like the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, and pharmacologic management, reporting implementation reduced variability in practices across units. Empirical data from ICUs show median survival post-withdrawal of 1-2 hours for ventilated patients, with protocols correlating to higher family satisfaction scores (e.g., 80-90% in surveys) when communication is prioritized.30201-9/fulltext) Cross-institutional variations persist, with some protocols mandating consultation for disputed cases, and legal precedents reinforcing that physicians cannot be compelled to provide non-beneficial treatment. In resource-strained settings, protocols may integrate elements, but withdrawal decisions remain patient-centered, avoiding bias toward cost-saving absent futility.

Cross-Jurisdictional Differences

In the United States, competent patients possess a to refuse life-sustaining treatments such as or artificial nutrition, rooted in and interests, as affirmed by the in Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health (1990), which extended this to surrogates for incapacitated patients provided there is clear and convincing evidence of the patient's wishes. State laws vary, with most permitting surrogate via substituted or standards, though some like impose stringent evidentiary burdens to prevent abuse; court intervention is typically limited to disputes, emphasizing patient autonomy over mandatory prolongation. In the , withdrawal of life support is governed by and the , allowing discontinuation if deemed not in the patient's , even for incapacitated individuals; advance decisions are binding if valid and applicable, and since the 2018 ruling in NHS Trust v Fratock, court approval is unnecessary when physicians and families concur, shifting focus from judicial oversight to clinical consensus while prioritizing futility assessments. Japan lacks a dedicated , relying on non-binding 2007 Ministry of Health guidelines that endorse withholding or withdrawal through physician-family consensus for futile care, yet criminal risks persist—evidenced by convictions like the 1995 Tokai Case ( for via omission)—fostering conservative practices where active discontinuation remains rare compared to passive withholding. Korea's Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions Act (enacted 2016, effective 2018) restricts forgoing interventions like ventilation to terminally ill patients with enumerated conditions (e.g., advanced cancer), mandating consensus among two or more family members or advance directives registered nationally, with statutory immunity for compliant physicians but overriding physician orders possible in conflicts. Taiwan's framework, under the Hospice Palliative Care Act (2000, amended) and Patient Right to Autonomy Act (effective 2019), broadly authorizes refusal or withdrawal for , irreversible , or persistent via binding advance care planning, emphasizing patient autonomy with required physician disclosure and family involvement absent directives. In , common law permits withdrawal based on patient or surrogate consent reflecting prior wishes, akin to U.S. standards, but since the 2016 Medical Assistance in Dying legislation, eligible patients may elect clinician-administered discontinuation as part of , expanding options beyond mere refusal while maintaining safeguards against coercion. Australia's approaches differ by state and territory; for example, Victoria's Medical Treatment Planning and Decisions Act 2016 validates advance directives refusing life support, enabling binding refusal without court mandate, whereas influences territories, generally upholding but requiring clear documentation to avoid disputes.

Societal and Economic Implications

Cost-Benefit Analyses

Cost-benefit analyses of life support technologies, such as and dialysis, typically weigh financial expenditures against outcomes measured in survival duration, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and broader societal . In the United States, (ICU) stays involving average $4,000 to $10,000 per day, with prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) exceeding $50,000 per patient for extended durations, driven by equipment, staffing, and complications like infections. These costs escalate in , where 1 in 5 adults die following an ICU admission, accounting for approximately 25% of total U.S. healthcare spending concentrated on the 6% of the in their final year of life. Empirical evaluations often reveal variable cost-effectiveness depending on prognosis. A study of PMV patients estimated $55,460 per additional life-year gained and $82,411 per QALY when compared to withdrawal, assuming base-case and metrics; this threshold exceeds common benchmarks for cost-effectiveness (e.g., $50,000–$100,000 per QALY) in irreversible conditions. For elderly receiving support and aggressive care post-myocardial , cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from $38,000 to $44,000 per QALY in low-risk groups but climbed to $70,000–$84,000 in high-risk cohorts, highlighting diminished returns with comorbidities. In contrast, interventions enhancing ventilation efficiency, such as proportional-assist ventilation modes, demonstrated potential savings of about $7,000 per over 40 years with marginal QALY gains, proving cost-effective in 85% of simulations at a $50,000 per QALY threshold.
Study ContextCost per QALY GainedKey AssumptionsSource
Prolonged vs. withdrawal$82,411Base-case survival; U.S. ICU costs
support in post-MI elderly (high-risk)$70,000–$84,000Aggressive care; 1-year horizon
Proportional-assist vs. pressure-support ventilation<$50,000 (85% simulations)40-year horizon; reduced complications
Continued treatment in prolonged ICU staysEquivalent to Can $65,219 per life-yearIncremental from discontinuation; Canadian data
Societal analyses underscore opportunity costs, as resources diverted to futile prolongation—defined by low QALY yields in —strain systems, with end-of-life ICU care comprising up to 24.5% of lifetime medical spending in some cohorts. Beneficiary out-of-pocket expenses also surge, reaching $1,257 in the last month for those with intensive services versus $133 without. While reversible acute cases justify investment through higher QALY returns (e.g., 7.3 QALYs in severe ), chronic or futile applications often fail first-principles scrutiny, prioritizing marginal lifespan extension over quality or reallocation to higher-yield interventions. These findings, drawn from peer-reviewed economic models, emphasize prognosis-specific thresholds rather than blanket application.

Allocation During Crises

During medical crises such as pandemics, , or mass casualty events, demand for life support resources like mechanical and (ICU) beds often exceeds supply, necessitating protocols to allocate scarce interventions. These protocols aim to maximize overall survival by prioritizing patients with the highest likelihood of benefiting from treatment, typically assessed via clinical scoring systems such as the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment () score, which evaluates across multiple systems. Ethical frameworks underlying these decisions emphasize utilitarian principles, focusing on saving the most lives or life-years rather than strict , as evidenced by guidelines developed during the . In the United States, crisis standards of care (CSC) are activated when conventional and contingency measures fail, shifting to explicit where teams use exclusion criteria and scoring to deny or withdraw support from patients unlikely to survive to discharge. For instance, during the spring 2020 surge, simulations of ventilator allocation in hospitals indicated that rationing affected nearly one in four intubated patients over a 15-day period, with protocols reassigning ventilators from those with deteriorating prognoses to incoming patients with better expected outcomes. State-level guidelines, such as those in , incorporated SOFA scores combined with age adjustments, projecting higher survival rates under hybrid models at 75% resource scarcity compared to single-metric approaches. Withdrawal of treatment from non-improving patients was recommended to free resources, with legal safeguards like liability immunity for physicians following approved protocols. Internationally, similar principles applied during , with Italian protocols in prioritizing younger patients and those without comorbidities, leading to documented cases of denial based on age and frailty assessments. Ethical analyses of these approaches highlight trade-offs: while SOFA-based scoring correlates with short-term , incorporating age addresses long-term life-years saved, though critics note potential against the elderly without of net harm to overall outcomes. Procedural safeguards, including transparency in scoring criteria and appeals processes, are mandated to maintain , as opaque allocation erodes confidence in healthcare systems. Empirical modeling suggests that multiprinciple protocols balancing , age, and urgency outperform lotteries or first-come-first-served in simulated scenarios. Challenges in implementation include inter-rater variability in scoring and the psychological burden on clinicians, with studies recommending centralized committees to standardize decisions and mitigate bias. Post-crisis evaluations, such as those from U.S. departments, stress ongoing stockpiling and surge capacity planning to minimize future rationing needs, underscoring that remains a last resort grounded in evidence-based rather than social value judgments.

Long-Term Societal Effects

The widespread adoption of life support technologies, such as and dialysis, has contributed to extended , exacerbating global population aging. By sustaining patients through acute crises and chronic organ failure, these interventions have helped drive the proportion of individuals aged 65 and older from 10% of the in 2022 to projected levels exceeding 16% by 2050, with those aged 80 or older tripling to 426 million. This demographic inversion intensifies the prevalence of and frailty, as prolonged survival often shifts mortality from acute events to degenerative conditions like and , increasing disability-adjusted life years lost among the elderly. Empirical analyses indicate that such aging dynamics, amplified by life-prolonging medical technologies, correlate with reduced participation and higher dependency ratios, where fewer working-age individuals support a growing cohort of frail seniors. Economically, the sustained use of life support imposes substantial fiscal pressures on healthcare systems and broader economies. , Medicare expenditures for beneficiaries in their final year of life, frequently involving intensive life support like ventilators and ICU monitoring, account for approximately 25% of total program spending for those aged 65 and older, with median costs in the last six months reaching significant per-patient levels driven by prolonged interventions. Globally, population aging linked to these technologies is estimated to subtract 0.5 to 1.0 percentage points from annual GDP growth through elevated healthcare demands and diminished productivity, as resources are redirected toward sustaining low-quality extended lifespans rather than preventive or productive investments. Studies of prolonged , a common life support modality, reveal high post-discharge healthcare utilization and economic burdens, with survivors experiencing profound , , and recurrent admissions that strain public and private payers. On a societal level, reliance on life support fosters a medicalized approach to dying, altering cultural norms around mortality and roles while amplifying inequalities in access and outcomes. Long-term ventilator dependence correlates with persistent physical impairments, disorders, and diminished for survivors, often necessitating institutional care that disrupts traditional caregiving structures and increases burnout. Advances in these technologies, while averting immediate s, have been critiqued for prolonging the dying process in ways that heighten emotional distress for and shift s from home to settings, contributing to a societal desensitization to natural processes. This pattern exacerbates challenges during shortages, as seen in crises where life support prioritization reveals disparities favoring certain demographics, potentially eroding in equitable healthcare delivery. Overall, while enabling in , the long-term proliferation of life support underscores tensions between individual prolongation and collective , with empirical highlighting elevated like lost outweighing direct medical savings in many cases.

Ongoing Debates and Criticisms

Euthanasia and Assisted Dying Challenges

In jurisdictions permitting or assisted dying, such as the and , the practice has extended to patients reliant on life support systems like , often involving a combination of followed by withdrawal or active pharmacological intervention to ensure . A 2000 study of Dutch cases reported clinical complications in 18% of euthanasia procedures and 7% of physician-assisted suicides, including failures to induce unconsciousness or death requiring additional interventions, which raise concerns about reliability and unintended suffering in ventilator-dependent patients. These complications persist despite protocols, as evidenced by ongoing reports of procedural difficulties in end-of-life cases involving respiratory support. Empirical data from permissive regions indicate expansion beyond initial criteria, encompassing ventilator-dependent individuals with chronic conditions, including neuromuscular disorders like amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). In , euthanasia cases rose sevenfold from 2002 to 2021, comprising 2.4% of all deaths by the latter year, with increasing involvement of non-cancer diagnoses and life-prolonged states where withdrawal alone might not suffice. Similarly, Canada's Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) program, legalized in 2016, saw rapid growth, surpassing Belgian rates in some provinces by 2023, including cases of patients with disabilities or ventilator dependency deemed intolerable, prompting critiques of normalized pressure on vulnerable groups. Such trends challenge safeguards against , as longitudinal analyses reveal "diagnosis creep" toward broader eligibility without corresponding evidence of prevented abuse. Healthcare providers face significant ethical and psychological burdens, with professional bodies like the deeming active incompatible with the healer's role due to risks of inadequate control and societal erosion of trust in . Among ventilator-dependent patients, such as those with injuries or , requests for occur infrequently—less than 2% in one cohort of over 75 cases—but provoke distress when blurring into withdrawal protocols, as both can causally precipitate death through . In , post-2022 legalization, nurses reported heightened needs for training amid conflicting duties, underscoring implementation gaps in resource-strapped intensive care settings. These challenges are compounded by debates over validity in prolonged dependency, where isolation or dependency dynamics may impair autonomous , as highlighted in ethical analyses of quadriplegic and patient requests.

Slippery Slope and Empirical Outcomes

The argument in the context of life support contends that routine withdrawal of treatment—often framed as respecting patient autonomy or avoiding futile care—logically progresses to endorsing active interventions like , as distinctions between omission and commission blur over time, eroding protections for vulnerable patients. This causal sequence is attributed to shifting norms where initial passive allowances normalize hastening death, potentially incentivizing expansions under resource pressures or broadened interpretations of suffering. Empirical observations from jurisdictions permitting such practices support elements of this progression, particularly in how criteria have widened beyond to encompass chronic, psychiatric, and even socioeconomic distress. In the , where was tolerated pre-2002 legalization for unbearable suffering in competent adults and later formalized, annual cases escalated from 1.9% of total deaths in 1990 to 4.4% by 2017, reaching 9,068 in 2023 and 9,958 in 2024—over 5% of deaths—with rising proportions involving non-cancer diagnoses, psychiatric conditions (e.g., 121 cases solely on grounds in 2023), and . This expansion, including allowances for advance directives in incapacity, illustrates criterion broadening, as initial safeguards against non-voluntary acts yielded to interpretations permitting for "completed life" without physical . Canada's Medical Assistance in Dying () regime, introduced in for those with reasonably foreseeable , expanded in 2021 to non-terminal grievous conditions, driving provisions from 1,018 in to 13,994 in 2023 (about 4.7% of ), with 96% involving clinician-administered and growing Track 2 cases for chronic issues like disabilities or poverty-related isolation. Reports highlight instances where patients cited inadequate housing or social factors alongside medical ones, raising concerns over amid healthcare strains, though official data emphasize voluntariness. Belgium mirrors these patterns post-2002 legalization, with euthanasia rising to 2,966 cases in 2023 (2.4% of deaths) and notable increases in psychiatric (27 cases in 2014 to higher recent figures) and dementia applications, including a 78% uptick in cognitive/psychiatric disorders in 2023-2024 data. While safeguards mandate unbearable suffering and consultation, trends show extensions to minors (first pediatric case in 2014) and non-terminal states, contradicting assurances of stasis and evidencing a slide toward broader eligibility. Outcomes include heightened scrutiny of compliance failures, with commissions reviewing cases for protocol adherence amid demographic shifts toward elderly applicants. These developments, while not uniformly non-voluntary, demonstrate empirical normalization and quantitative growth beyond original intents, fueling debates on whether life support withdrawal protocols—prevalent in these systems—serve as precursors by habituating end-of-life termination. Counterarguments from some analyses claim no unchecked slide, citing stable proportions of contested cases, yet raw increases and eligibility shifts underscore risks to causal integrity in distinguishing supportive care from lethal options.

Technological and Predictive Advances

(ECMO) systems have seen advancements including portable configurations and integration of for real-time management, improving deployment in diverse settings and reducing complications in critically ill patients. These developments enable ultraprotective strategies during ECMO support, where tidal volumes as low as 2-4 mL/kg are targeted to minimize ventilator-induced injury, with 58% of patients in surveyed centers achieving such parameters. Advanced respiratory monitoring technologies, such as electrical impedance tomography, further optimize ventilation by assessing recruitment and aeration non-invasively, facilitating precise adjustments in ECMO-dependent cases. Artificial intelligence applications in intensive care units (ICUs) enhance life support through that forecast patient deterioration and outcomes, with models demonstrating significant reductions in in-hospital mortality rates by enabling early interventions. For instance, AI-driven early warning systems analyze and electronic health records to predict adverse events, outperforming traditional scoring systems like in accuracy for post-24-hour ICU survival projections. Generative AI tools assist in outcome prediction for from , incorporating multimodal data to guide decisions on continuing or withdrawing support. Despite these gains, AI predictive models in critical care face obstacles including data biases from institutional datasets and the need for prospective validation to ensure generalizability across populations. Empirical studies indicate that while AI improves diagnostic accuracy and in ICUs, over-reliance without oversight risks erroneous predictions, particularly in heterogeneous cohorts. Ongoing research emphasizes hybrid human-AI decision frameworks to balance technological precision with causal clinical judgment in life support scenarios.

References

  1. https://www.utmb.edu/policies_and_procedures/Home/Definition/303
  2. https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/HS/htm/HS.166.htm
  3. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/409306/
  4. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC522828/
  5. https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/ama-code-medical-ethics-opinions-care-end-life/2013-12
  6. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0310057X7700500313
  7. https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-021-03689-0
  8. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7958189/
  9. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/12362-life-support-measures
  10. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9188674/
  11. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK539742/
  12. https://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/critical-care-medicine/respiratory-failure-and-mechanical-ventilation/overview-of-mechanical-ventilation
  13. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41392-025-02127-9
  14. https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.4187/respcare.04716
  15. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK539907/
  16. https://annalsofintensivecare.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13613-022-01067-9
  17. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circulationaha.115.019143
  18. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41581-022-00542-7
  19. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5654453/
  20. https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/full/10.1164/rccm.201503-0421pp
  21. https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.4187/respcare.01420
  22. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10958804/
  23. https://aneskey.com/historical-perspective-on-the-development-of-mechanical-ventilation/
  24. https://hms.harvard.edu/news/lifesaving-breath
  25. https://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/medicine/iron-lung
  26. https://davita.com/treatment-options/articles/the-history-of-dialysis/
  27. https://jdc.jefferson.edu/jeffhistoryposters/1/
  28. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36750217/
  29. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2090730316000049
  30. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10036781/
  31. https://ject.edpsciences.org/articles/ject/pdf/forth/ject250018.pdf
  32. https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacadv.2022.100173
  33. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5467868/
  34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9477439/
  35. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.122.027251
  36. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa040186
  37. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006497123141565
  38. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6159848/
  39. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10226470/
  40. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034837625001639
  41. https://www.meddean.luc.edu/lumen/meded/medicine/pulmonar/lecture/vent_f.htm
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6212352/
  43. https://www.analog.com/en/resources/design-notes/the-basics-of-ventilator-systems.html
  44. https://www.thoracic.org/patients/patient-resources/managing-the-icu-experience/breathing-support-for-respiratory-failure.php
  45. https://medschool.cuanschutz.edu/docs/librariesprovider60/default-document-library/mechanical-ventilation-review.pdf?sfvrsn=4ea831b9_2
  46. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK560535/
  47. https://www.med.stanford.edu/content/dam/sm/criticalcare/documents/Advances_in_Mech_Ventilation.pdf
  48. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9524665/
  49. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4794944/
  50. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4971267/
  51. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK542233/
  52. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circinterventions.114.001258
  53. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39743425/
  54. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11315260/
  55. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.062949
  56. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.067087
  57. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9000165/
  58. https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.01.017
  59. https://healthcare.utah.edu/transplant/lvad-mcs/ventricular-assist-device-types
  60. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11546408/
  61. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883944125000632
  62. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6664494/
  63. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11029316/
  64. https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-022-03955-9
  65. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2000741
  66. https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-021-03600-x
  67. https://www.bjaed.org/article/S2058-5349%2817%2930092-6/fulltext
  68. https://journal.chestnet.org/article/S0012-3692%2820%2932844-0/fulltext
  69. https://annalsofintensivecare.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13613-025-01517-0
  70. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44231-023-00054-3
  71. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.166563
  72. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4310041/
  73. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6751850/
  74. https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-019-2657-5
  75. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamasurgery/fullarticle/406044
  76. https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-025-05271-4
  77. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11155504/
  78. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/medical-technology/articles/10.3389/fmedt.2022.909990/full
  79. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27863862/
  80. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7220977/
  81. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/2/241
  82. https://bmcanesthesiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12871-024-02818-w
  83. https://www.accjournal.org/journal/view.php?doi=10.4266/acc.2023.00115
  84. https://annalsofintensivecare.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13613-020-00714-3
  85. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1034/j.1600-0676.2002.00014.x
  86. https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-023-04316-w
  87. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762%2824%2900121-2/fulltext
  88. https://sccm.org/communications/critical-care-statistics
  89. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK576426/
  90. https://publications.ersnet.org/content/errev/23/133/379
  91. https://www.bjaed.org/article/S2058-5349%2824%2900001-5/fulltext
  92. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9859746/
  93. https://www.emra.org/emresident/article/ecmo-series-intro
  94. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/overview-of-the-management-of-acute-kidney-injury-aki-in-adults
  95. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4386097/
  96. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499861/
  97. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6389044/
  98. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0954611125003683
  99. https://www.resmedjournal.com/article/S0954-6111%2820%2930017-2/fulltext
  100. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10155047/
  101. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/11/9/2451
  102. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10057588/
  103. https://usrds-adr.niddk.nih.gov/2021/end-stage-renal-disease/6-mortality
  104. https://usrds-adr.niddk.nih.gov/2020/end-stage-renal-disease/5-mortality
  105. https://hometherapies.freseniusmedicalcare.com/home-hemodialysis/solo-hhd/
  106. https://www.kidney.org/kidney-topics/home-hemodialysis
  107. https://www.kff.org/medicaid/how-many-people-use-medicaid-long-term-services-and-supports-and-how-much-does-medicaid-spend-on-those-people/
  108. https://homedialysis.org/life-at-home/articles/dialysis-with-a-trach-or-vent
  109. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8828371/
  110. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844024067021
  111. https://patsjournal.org/clinical-characteristics-and-determinants-of-invasive-mechanical-ventilation-outcome-in-adult-intensive-care-unit-in-northern-ethiopia-a-resource-limited-setting/
  112. https://intjem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12245-024-00607-3
  113. https://cprcare.com/blog/bls-remote-resource-limited-settings
  114. https://annalsofglobalhealth.org/articles/10.5334/aogh.3377
  115. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7052346/
  116. https://extranet.who.int/emt/sites/default/files/BlueBook2021.pdf
  117. https://jtd.amegroups.org/article/view/30201/html
  118. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10087279/
  119. https://taylorandfrancis.com/knowledge/Medicine_and_healthcare/Medical_ethics/Sanctity_of_life/
  120. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-012-9369-0
  121. https://www.chausa.org/news-and-publications/publications/health-progress/archives/june-1993/care-of-the-dying-a-catholic-perspective
  122. https://peh-med.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1747-5341-9-5
  123. https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1334&context=jchlp
  124. https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/end-life-and-sanctity-life-commentary-1/2005-05
  125. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2043345/
  126. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11635538/
  127. https://code-medical-ethics.ama-assn.org/ethics-opinions/withholding-or-withdrawing-life-sustaining-treatment
  128. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK430827/
  129. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7923912/
  130. https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/limits-informed-consent-overwhelmed-patient-clinicians-role-protecting-patients-and-preventing/2016-09
  131. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459133/
  132. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/cardiovascular-medicine/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2022.897955/full
  133. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/497/261/
  134. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/advance-care-planning/advance-care-planning-advance-directives-health-care
  135. https://bmcnurs.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12912-024-02087-5
  136. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235201321730217X
  137. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16159066/
  138. https://depts.washington.edu/bhdept/ethics-medicine/bioethics-topics/detail/65
  139. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2187394/
  140. https://iahpc.org/policy-and-ethics/ethical-issues/essays-and-articles-on-ethics-in-palliative-care/the-ethics-of-foregoing-treatment-at-the-end-of-life/
  141. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7347467/
  142. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1089/jpm.2019.0626
  143. https://litfl.com/medical-futility/
  144. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307514462_Defining_Futile_and_Potentially_Inappropriate_Interventions_A_Policy_Statement_From_the_Society_of_Critical_Care_Medicine_Ethics_Committee
  145. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2955478/
  146. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199206043262310
  147. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5203684/
  148. https://journals.lww.com/ccejournal/fulltext/2022/07000/addressing_futility__a_practical_approach.5.aspx
  149. https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/supreme-court/1976/70-n-j-10-0.html
  150. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2495105/
  151. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1989/88-1503
  152. https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/airedale-nhs-trust-v-bland.php
  153. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11648606/
  154. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC557072/
  155. https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/full/10.1164/ajrccm.162.6.1-00
  156. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/-/scassets/files/org/landing/preparing-for-coronavirus/covid-withdrawal-from-ls-guidelines.pdf
  157. https://www.mypcnow.org/fast-fact/ventilator-withdrawal-protocol/
  158. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27059793/
  159. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3848674/
  160. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK564312/
  161. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7563900/
  162. https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/jul/30/uk-judges-will-no-longer-have-to-rule-in-vegetative-state-decisions-supreme-court
  163. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3265521/
  164. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-services-benefits/medical-assistance-dying.html
  165. https://end-of-life.qut.edu.au/assisteddying
  166. https://pjmhsonline.com/2018/april_june/pdf/950.pdf
  167. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2745076/
  168. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4218867/
  169. https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343%2800%2900591-X/fulltext
  170. https://journal.chestnet.org/article/S0012-3692%2817%2931774-9/fulltext
  171. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9674469/
  172. https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2017.0174
  173. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2752099
  174. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667258824000098
  175. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10466166/
  176. https://journal.chestnet.org/article/S0012-3692%2823%2903263-4/fulltext
  177. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2763953
  178. https://code-medical-ethics.ama-assn.org/learning-center/crisis-standards-care
  179. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2810189
  180. https://hcpf.colorado.gov/sites/hcpf/files/Crisis%2520Standards%2520of%2520Care%2520Triage%2520Standards-April%25202020.pdf
  181. https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.006
  182. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2005689
  183. https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/10.1164/rccm.202106-1453LE
  184. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2823%2900812-7/fulltext
  185. https://journal.chestnet.org/article/S0012-3692%2821%2902618-0/fulltext
  186. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666379121002330
  187. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9877846/
  188. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health
  189. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11986089/
  190. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/Series/Analytical-Series/aging-is-the-real-population-bomb-bloom-zucker
  191. https://www.kff.org/medicare/medicare-spending-at-the-end-of-life/
  192. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama-health-forum/fullarticle/2821204
  193. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/global-aging-the-almost-invisible-crisis-shaping-our-future/
  194. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6580672/
  195. https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/10.1513/AnnalsATS.201610-792OC
  196. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/03/coronavirus-survivors-recovery/
  197. https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/forefront.20171101.612681/
  198. https://journal.chestnet.org/article/S0012-3692%2815%2945836-2/fulltext
  199. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2802360
  200. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200002243420805
  201. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.10.16.24315619v1.full
  202. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15265161.2023.2265265
  203. https://code-medical-ethics.ama-assn.org/ethics-opinions/euthanasia
  204. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1016/j.pmrj.2011.09.001
  205. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953624011171
  206. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-law-medicine-and-ethics/article/empirical-slippery-slope-from-voluntary-to-nonvoluntary-euthanasia/E8AE3B99517348011C8E2652B78D040A
  207. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/20502877.2024.2338317
  208. https://spcare.bmj.com/content/14/e1/e867
  209. https://www.euthanasiecommissie.nl/site/binaries/site-content/collections/documents/2024/03/24/index/rte-annual-report-2024.pdf
  210. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/publications/health-system-services/annual-report-medical-assistance-dying-2023.html
  211. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0j1z14p57po
  212. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/17/canada-nonterminal-maid-assisted-death
  213. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.01.09.25320248v1
  214. https://www.alliancevita.org/en/2025/02/belgium-increase-euthanasia/
  215. https://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12888-017-1369-0
  216. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3364764/
  217. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2025/apr/comment-belgiums-euthanasia-trends-dispute-slippery-slope-argument
  218. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2833184
  219. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11857283/
  220. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/02676591241232270
  221. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/13/9/2541
  222. https://bmcmedinformdecismak.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12911-025-03048-x
  223. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12361121/
  224. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11161909/
  225. https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-024-04860-z
  226. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S305083712500030X
  227. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2836754
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.