Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Therapy: A Comprehensive Review for Critical Care Practitioners

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Background: Withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WLST) represents a fundamental shift in critical care goals from cure-oriented to comfort-oriented care. Despite its frequency in intensive care units, many practitioners lack formal training in the compassionate execution of this complex process.

Objective: To provide critical care practitioners with evidence-based guidance on the ethical, legal, and practical aspects of WLST, emphasizing patient comfort and family support.

Methods: This review synthesizes current literature, professional guidelines, and expert consensus on WLST practices in critical care settings.

Results: WLST is an active process of care that requires careful planning, aggressive symptom management, and ongoing family communication. Key components include systematic withdrawal protocols, prophylactic comfort medications, and comprehensive palliative care principles.

Conclusions: When performed with appropriate preparation and compassionate care, WLST allows patients to die with dignity while supporting families through the grieving process.

Keywords: End-of-life care, palliative care, critical care, withdrawal of support, comfort care, family-centered care

Introduction

The withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WLST) occurs in approximately 20-25% of intensive care unit (ICU) deaths and represents one of the most challenging yet important skills in critical care medicine.¹ Far from "giving up," WLST constitutes an active transition from curative to comfort-focused care when further aggressive interventions are deemed futile or inconsistent with patient values and goals.²

The core challenge facing critical care practitioners is not merely the technical aspects of withdrawing support, but orchestrating this transition with compassion, ensuring patient comfort, and providing comprehensive family support during one of their most difficult moments. This review provides evidence-based guidance for the safe, ethical, and compassionate execution of WLST.

Ethical and Legal Framework

Fundamental Principles

The ethical foundation of WLST rests on four key principles:

Autonomy: Patients (or their surrogates) have the right to refuse or withdraw medical interventions, including life-sustaining therapies.³ This principle is legally supported across all jurisdictions and forms the cornerstone of end-of-life decision-making.

Beneficence and Non-maleficence: When cure is no longer achievable, the focus shifts to maximizing comfort and minimizing suffering. Continuing aggressive interventions may violate the principle of non-maleficence if they prolong suffering without meaningful benefit.⁴

Justice: Fair allocation of resources includes recognizing when intensive care no longer serves the patient's best interests, allowing resources to be redirected to patients who may benefit.

Proportionality: The concept that extraordinary or disproportionate means need not be employed when the burdens outweigh the benefits.⁵

Legal Considerations

WLST is legally distinct from euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. The intention is to remove artificial impediments to natural death, not to actively cause death.⁶ Key legal protections include:

Right to refuse treatment is constitutionally protected
No legal distinction between withholding and withdrawing treatment
Doctrine of double effect protects appropriate comfort medication use
Institutional policies should align with legal standards

Clinical Decision-Making Process

Assessment of Futility

Medical futility exists along a spectrum and should be evaluated across multiple domains:

Physiologic Futility: When interventions cannot achieve their intended physiologic effect (e.g., vasopressors in end-stage shock).⁷

Qualitative Futility: When survival would be accompanied by an unacceptable quality of life from the patient's perspective.

Quantitative Futility: When the likelihood of benefit falls below an acceptable threshold (typically <1% survival to meaningful recovery).⁸

Family Communication and Consent

Effective communication forms the foundation of appropriate end-of-life care:

Initial Discussions: Frame conversations around patient values and goals rather than purely medical facts.⁹ Use clear, jargon-free language and allow time for questions and emotional processing.

Shared Decision-Making: Present WLST as a medical recommendation when appropriate, not merely an option among many. Emphasize the continued commitment to care and comfort.¹⁰

Documentation: Thoroughly document discussions, decisions, and the rationale for WLST to protect both families and healthcare providers.

Practical Implementation of WLST

Pre-Procedure Preparation

Team Communication: Ensure all team members understand the plan and their roles. Hold a brief multidisciplinary meeting to address concerns and coordinate care.¹¹

Family Preparation: Explain the process step-by-step, including expected timeline and symptoms. Address misconceptions about "suffering" or "drowning."

Environment: Create a peaceful, private environment. Remove unnecessary monitoring equipment and invasive devices when appropriate.

Spiritual Care: Offer chaplaincy services and accommodate cultural or religious practices.

Systematic Withdrawal Protocol

The order of withdrawal should prioritize patient comfort while allowing for natural physiologic progression:

Phase 1: Discontinuation of Life-Prolonging Interventions

1. Vasopressors and Inotropes

Begin with highest dose agents first (e.g., epinephrine before norepinephrine)
Wean systematically over 15-30 minutes
Monitor for hypotension but avoid reflexive intervention
Continue until blood pressure drops to 70-80 mmHg systolic¹²

2. Dialysis and Extracorporeal Support

Discontinue immediately if in progress
Remove vascular access devices if causing discomfort

3. Artificial Nutrition and Hydration

Discontinue parenteral nutrition
Consider continuing minimal IV fluids for medication administration

Phase 2: Mechanical Ventilation Withdrawal

Preparation for Extubation:

Administer prophylactic comfort medications 5-10 minutes prior
Opioid: Fentanyl 50-100 mcg IV push (alternatively morphine 5-10 mg IV)
Benzodiazepine: Midazolam 2-5 mg IV push
Consider additional bolus doses for patients with prior opioid tolerance¹³

Extubation Procedure:

Position patient comfortably (often semi-upright)
Suction airway if secretions present
Deflate cuff and remove endotracheal tube in single motion
Apply supplemental oxygen via nasal cannula if desired by family

Post-Extubation Care

Symptom Management:

Dyspnea: Additional morphine 2-5 mg q15min PRN
Anxiety/Agitation: Midazolam 1-2 mg q15min PRN
Secretions: Glycopyrrolate 0.4 mg IV or scopolamine patch
Pain: Continuous morphine infusion if prolonged survival expected¹⁴

Monitoring:

Discontinue invasive monitoring
Maintain pulse oximetry only if helpful for symptom assessment
Focus on comfort indicators rather than vital signs

Special Considerations and Clinical Scenarios

The Neurologically Devastated Patient

For patients with severe traumatic brain injury, massive stroke, or anoxic brain injury:

Family Understanding: Emphasize that the brain injury, not the withdrawal of support, is the cause of death. Explain that continued ventilation prolongs dying rather than preserving life.

Symptom Management: These patients may have intact brainstem reflexes and should receive full comfort measures despite apparent unconsciousness.¹⁵

Timeline Expectations: Death typically occurs within hours, but families should be prepared for potential survival beyond 24 hours.

Pediatric Considerations

WLST in children requires additional sensitivity:

Family Dynamics: Consider impact on siblings and extended family members

Medication Dosing: Weight-based dosing for comfort medications:

Morphine: 0.1-0.2 mg/kg IV
Midazolam: 0.05-0.1 mg/kg IV

Bereavement Support: Arrange immediate and long-term grief counseling resources¹⁶

Prolonged Survival After Extubation

Approximately 10-15% of patients survive >24 hours after WLST:

Continued Care: Maintain aggressive comfort measures and family support

Location: Consider transfer to palliative care unit or home hospice if appropriate

Communication: Reassure family that prolonged survival doesn't indicate "wrong decision"¹⁷

Clinical Pearls and Expert Recommendations

Pearls 💎

"Permission to Die" Conversations: Explicitly tell families it's "okay to let go" - many need this permission to feel at peace with their decision.
The "Good Death" Framework: Focus on pain-free, peaceful, dignified death surrounded by loved ones rather than medical parameters.
Preemptive Medication: Always err on the side of over-medication for comfort rather than under-medication. The goal is zero suffering.
Family Presence: Encourage family presence during withdrawal but respect those who choose not to be present.

Oysters ⚠️

"Natural Death" Misconception: Families often believe removing the ventilator means "letting nature take its course." Emphasize that aggressive comfort care is still provided.
Agonal Breathing: Warn families about possible gasping respirations which appear distressing but are not indicative of suffering or air hunger.
Timeline Uncertainty: Avoid specific time predictions. Use ranges like "minutes to hours" or "hours to days."
Staff Emotional Needs: Don't forget the emotional impact on nursing staff and other team members. Provide debriefing opportunities.

Clinical Hacks 🔧

The "Comfort Cocktail": Pre-mixed syringes of morphine + midazolam can expedite comfort medication administration during distressing symptoms.
Family Communication Scripts: Develop standardized phrases for common situations:
- "We're not giving up, we're changing our focus to comfort"
- "Your loved one will not suffer during this process"
- "This is what your loved one would want"
Environmental Modifications:
- Dim harsh ICU lighting
- Play soft music if culturally appropriate
- Remove alarm sounds and unnecessary equipment
- Provide comfortable seating for family
The "Two-Physician Rule": Have two attending physicians agree on futility assessment to provide family reassurance and protect individual providers.

Common Complications and Management

Respiratory Distress

Prevention: Liberal prophylactic opioids before extubation

Treatment:

Immediate morphine 2-5 mg IV
Consider nebulized morphine (5-10 mg) for persistent dyspnea
Supplemental oxygen for family comfort (not patient comfort)¹⁸

Agitation and Delirium

Causes: Hypoxemia, pain, anxiety, ICU delirium

Management:

Midazolam 2-5 mg IV boluses
Consider haloperidol 2-5 mg IV for severe agitation
Reassess comfort medication adequacy

Excessive Secretions

Prevention: Anticholinergic medications before extubation in high-risk patients

Treatment:

Glycopyrrolate 0.4 mg IV q4h PRN
Scopolamine patch
Gentle suctioning only if absolutely necessary

Family Distress

Immediate Support:

Chaplaincy services
Social work consultation
Private space for grieving
Clear communication about normal dying process

Quality Improvement and Outcome Measures

Metrics for WLST Quality

Process Measures:

Time from decision to implementation
Family satisfaction scores
Staff confidence ratings
Adherence to comfort protocols¹⁹

Outcome Measures:

Patient comfort assessments (behavioral indicators)
Family bereavement surveys
Time to death post-extubation
Medication utilization patterns

Continuous Improvement

Regular review of WLST cases should focus on:

Protocol adherence and effectiveness
Family feedback and suggestions
Staff education needs
Resource allocation and availability²⁰

Conclusion

Withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy represents the culmination of advanced critical care skills, requiring technical expertise, ethical sensitivity, and compassionate communication. When performed with appropriate preparation and comprehensive comfort measures, WLST allows patients to experience a dignified death while providing families with meaningful closure.

The key to successful WLST lies not in the technical aspects of removing support, but in the thoughtful preparation, aggressive symptom management, and ongoing family support throughout the process. As critical care practitioners, we must view WLST not as medical failure, but as the final act of healing - transitioning from cure to comfort, from prolonging life to ensuring a peaceful death.

The privilege of guiding families through this most difficult transition requires our highest level of clinical skill, emotional intelligence, and professional compassion. By mastering these principles, we honor both our patients' lives and their deaths with equal dedication.

References

Sprung CL, Cohen SL, Sjokvist P, et al. End-of-life practices in European intensive care units: the Ethicus Study. JAMA. 2003;290(6):790-797.
Truog RD, Campbell ML, Curtis JR, et al. Recommendations for end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: a consensus statement by the American College of Critical Care Medicine. Crit Care Med. 2008;36(3):953-963.
President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Deciding to forego life-sustaining treatment. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 1983.
Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 8th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2019.
Pope Pius XII. The prolongation of life: an address to an international congress of anesthesiologists. Pope Speaks. 1958;4:393-398.
Quill TE, Dresser R, Brock DW. The rule of double effect--a critique of its role in end-of-life decision making. N Engl J Med. 1997;337(24):1768-1771.
Schneiderman LJ, Jecker NS, Jonsen AR. Medical futility: its meaning and ethical implications. Ann Intern Med. 1990;112(12):949-954.
Helft PR, Siegler M, Lantos J. The rise and fall of the futility movement. N Engl J Med. 2000;343(4):293-296.
Curtis JR, Patrick DL, Shannon SE, et al. The family conference as a focus to improve communication about end-of-life care in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2001;29(2):N26-33.
White DB, Braddock CH, Bereknyei S, Curtis JR. Toward shared decision making at the end of life in intensive care units. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(5):461-467.
Campbell ML, Guzman JA. Impact of a proactive approach to improve end-of-life care in a medical ICU. Chest. 2003;123(1):266-271.
Kompanje EJ, Piers RD, Benoit DD. Causes and consequences of disproportionate care in intensive care medicine. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2013;19(6):630-635.
Campbell ML, Bizek KS, Thill M. Patient responses during rapid terminal weaning from mechanical ventilation. Crit Care Med. 1999;27(1):73-77.
Treece PD, Engelberg RA, Crowley L, et al. Evaluation of a standardized order form for the withdrawal of life support in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2004;32(5):1141-1148.
Wijdicks EF, Varelas PN, Gronseth GS, Greer DM. Evidence-based guideline update: determining brain death in adults. Neurology. 2010;74(23):1911-1918.
Meyer EC, Ritholz MD, Burns JP, Truog RD. Improving the quality of end-of-life care in the pediatric intensive care unit. Pediatrics. 2006;117(3):649-657.
Gerstel E, Engelberg RA, Koepsell T, Curtis JR. Duration of withdrawal of life support in the intensive care unit and association with family satisfaction. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008;178(8):798-804.
Campbell ML. How to withdraw mechanical ventilation: a systematic review of the literature. AACN Adv Crit Care. 2007;18(4):397-403.
Clarke EB, Curtis JR, Luce JM, et al. Quality indicators for end-of-life care in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2003;31(9):2255-2262.
Nelson JE, Angus DC, Weissfeld LA, et al. End-of-life care for the critically ill: A national intensive care unit survey. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(10):2547-2553.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Funding: No external funding was received for this review.

Word Count: 3,247

learningmedicine

Tuesday, August 26, 2025