Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Guidelines on the Management of Critically Ill Adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Clinical Characteristics and Outcome of Patients with Suspected COVID-19 in Emergency Department (RESILIENCY Study II)

Objectives: COVID-19 may show no peculiar signs and symptoms that may differentiate it from other infective or non-infective etiologies; thus, early recognition and prompt management are crucial to improve survival. The aim of this study was to describe clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients compared to those with other infective or non-infective etiologies. Methods: We performed a prospective study from March 2020 to February 2021. All patients hospitalized for suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were prospectively recruited. All patients were evaluated according to a predefined protocol for diagnosis of suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary endpoint was evaluation of clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics associated or not with COVID-19 etiology at time of hospitalization in an emergency department. Results: A total of 1036 patients were included in the study: 717 (69%) patients with confirmed COVID-19 and 319 (31%) without COVID-19, hospitalized for other causes. The main causes of hospitalization among non-COVID-19 patients were acute heart failure (44%) and bacterial pneumonia (45.8%). Overall, 30-day mortality was 9% among the COVID-19 group and 35% in the non-COVID-19 group. Multivariate analysis showed variables (fever > 3 days, dry cough, acute dyspnea, lymphocytes < 1000 × 10³/µL, and ferritin > 250 ng/mL) independently associated with COVID-19 etiology. A decision tree was elaborated to early detect COVID-19 patients in the emergency department. Finally, Kaplan–Meier curves on 30-day survival in COVID-19 patients during the first wave (March–May 2020, n = 289 patients) and the second wave (October–February 2021, n = 428 patients) showed differences between the two study periods (p = 0.021). Conclusions: Patients with confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 may show peculiar characteristics at time of hospitalization that could help physicians to distinguish from other infective or non-infective etiologies. Finally, a different 30-day mortality rate was observed during different periods of the pandemic.

A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Online Survey on the Treatment of COVID-19-ARDS: High Variance in Standard of Care in German ICUs

INTRODUCTION

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has recently dominated scientific literature. Incomplete understanding and a lack of data concerning the pathophysiology, epidemiology, and optimal treatment of the disease has resulted in conflicting recommendations. Adherence to existing guidelines and actual treatment strategies have thus far not been studied systematically. We hypothesized that capturing the variance in care would lead to the discovery of aspects that need further research and-in case of proven benefits of interventions not being performed-better communication to care providers.

METHODS

This article is based on a quantitative and qualitative cross-sectional mixed-methods online survey among intensive-care physicians in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic by the CEOsys (COVID-19 Evidence Ecosystem) network, endorsed by the German Interdisciplinary Association for Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (DIVI) conducted from December 3 to 31 December 2020.

RESULTS

We identified several areas of care with an especially high variance in treatment among hospitals in Germany. Crucially, 51.5% of the participating ICUs (n = 205) reported using intubation as a last resort for respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients, while 21.8% used intubation early after admission. Furthermore, 11.5% considered extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in awake patients. Finally, 72.3% of respondents used the ARDS-network-table to titrate positive end-expiratory-pressure (PEEP) levels, with 36.9% choosing the low-PEEP table and 41.8% the high-PEEP table.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that significant differences exist between reported treatment strategies and that adherence to published guidelines is variable. We describe necessary steps for future research based on our results highlighting significant clinical variability in care.

Impact of Systemic Corticosteroids on Mortality in Older Adults With Critical COVID-19 Pneumonia

Background

The most susceptible population group to critical and fatal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is older adults. In SARS-CoV-2 infection, the host immune response is thought to play a key role in the pathophysiological effects of lung damage. Therefore, corticosteroid therapy could modulate inflammation-mediated pulmonary injury and thereby reduce progression to severe respiratory failure and death. The aim of this study was to analyse the safety and clinical efficacy of corticosteroid therapy in older adults with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Method

We reviewed the clinical records of confirmed COVID-19 patients aged 75 years or older admitted to our hospital over a three months period (March 1, to May 31, 2020). A total of 143 patients were included in the study cohort. From 2 April, 2020, in accordance with World Health Organization (WHO) guidance on COVID-19, our hospital protocol added corticosteroid for COVID-19 treatment. We compared in-hospital mortality among patients with critical COVID-19 who received corticosteroids therapy and those who did not.

Results

88 patients (61.5%) were treated with corticosteroids, and 55 patients (38.4%) were not. Both groups were similar in baseline characteristics. The median age was 85 years (IQR, 82–89), and 61.5% (88/143) were male. In-hospital mortality was lower in the corticosteroid group (68.2%) compared with patients in the non-corticosteroid group (81.8%). Treatment with corticosteroids was an independent survival factor (HR=0.61; 95% CI, 0.41–0.93; P=0.006).

Conclusions

In critically ill older adults with COVID-19 pneumonia, the use of corticosteroid treatment resulted in lower mortality without severe adverse events.

High sedation needs of critically ill COVID-19 ARDS patients-A monocentric observational study

BACKGROUND

Therapy of severely affected coronavirus patient, requiring intubation and sedation is still challenging. Recently, difficulties in sedating these patients have been discussed. This study aims to describe sedation practices in patients with 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective monocentric analysis of sedation regimens in critically ill intubated patients with respiratory failure who required sedation in our mixed 32-bed university intensive care unit. All mechanically ventilated adults with COVID-19-induced ARDS requiring continuously infused sedative therapy admitted between April 4, 2020, and June 30, 2020 were included. We recorded demographic data, sedative dosages, prone positioning, sedation levels and duration. Descriptive data analysis was performed; for additional analysis, a logistic regression with mixed effect was used.

RESULTS

In total, 56 patients (mean age 67 (±14) years) were included. The mean observed sedation period was 224 (±139) hours. To achieve the prescribed sedation level, we observed the need for two or three sedatives in 48.7% and 12.8% of the cases, respectively. In cases with a triple sedation regimen, the combination of clonidine, esketamine and midazolam was observed in most cases (75.7%). Analgesia was achieved using sufentanil in 98.6% of the cases. The analysis showed that the majority of COVID-19 patients required an unusually high sedation dose compared to those available in the literature.

CONCLUSION

The global pandemic continues to affect patients severely requiring ventilation and sedation, but optimal sedation strategies are still lacking. The findings of our observation suggest unusual high dosages of sedatives in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. Prescribed sedation levels appear to be achievable only with several combinations of sedatives in most critically ill patients suffering from COVID-19-induced ARDS and a potential association to the often required sophisticated critical care including prone positioning and ECMO treatment seems conceivable.

The Role of Alveolar Edema in COVID-19

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread over the world for more than one year. COVID-19 often develops life-threatening hypoxemia. Endothelial injury caused by the viral infection leads to intravascular coagulation and ventilation-perfusion mismatch. However, besides above pathogenic mechanisms, the role of alveolar edema in the disease progression has not been discussed comprehensively. Since the exudation of pulmonary edema fluid was extremely serious in COVID-19 patients, we bring out a hypothesis that severity of alveolar edema may determine the size of poorly-ventilated area and the blood oxygen content. Treatments to pulmonary edema (conservative fluid management, exogenous surfactant replacements and ethanol–oxygen vapor therapy hypothetically) may be greatly helpful for reducing the occurrences of severe cases. Given that late mechanical ventilation may cause mucus (edema fluid) to be blown deep into the small airways, oxygen therapy should be given at the early stages. The optimal time and blood oxygen saturation (SpO₂) threshold for oxygen therapy are also discussed.

Increase in SARS-CoV-2 infected biomedical waste among low middle-income countries: environmental sustainability and impact with health implications

Studies have shown that severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly infectious disease, with global deaths rising to about 360,438 as of 28 May 2020. Different countries have used various approaches such as lockdown, social distancing, maintenance of personal hygiene, and increased establishment of testing and isolation centers to manage the pandemic. Poor biomedical waste (BMW) management, treatment, and disposal techniques, especially SARS-CoV-2 infected BMW, may threaten the environmental and public health in most developing countries and, by extension, impact the economic status of individuals and the nation at large. This may increase the potential for the transmission of air/blood body fluid-borne pathogens, increase the growth of microorganisms, risk of mutagenesis, and upsurge of more virulent strain. In contrast, uncontrolled substandard burning could increase the potential spread of nosocomial infection and environmental exposure to toxic organic compounds, heavy metals, radioactive, and genotoxic bio-aerosols which might be present in the gaseous, liquid, and solid by-products. The paucity of understanding of pathophysiology and management of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has also necessitated the need to put in place appropriate disposal techniques to cater for the sudden increase in the global demand for personal protective equipment (PPE) and pharmaceutical drugs to manage the pandemic and to reduce the risk of preventable infection by the waste. Therefore, there is a need for adequate sensitization, awareness, and environmental monitoring of the impacts of improper handling of SARS-CoV-2 infected BMWs. Hence, this review aimed to address the issues relating to the improper management of increased SARS-CoV-2 infected BMW in low middle-income countries (LMICs).

Evaluation of Positive End-Expiratory Pressure Strategies in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019-Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Background: Different positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) strategies are available for subjects with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. We aimed to evaluate three conventional PEEP strategies on their effects on respiratory mechanics, gas exchanges, and hemodynamics. Methods: This is a prospective, physiologic, multicenter study conducted in China. We recruited 20 intubated subjects with ARDS and confirmed COVID-19. We first set PEEP by the ARDSnet low PEEP-fraction of inspired oxygen (FIO2) table. After a recruitment maneuver, PEEP was set at 15, 10, and 5 cm H2O for 10 min, respectively. Among these three PEEP levels, best-compliance PEEP was the one providing the highest respiratory system compliance; best-oxygenation PEEP was the one providing the highest PaO2 (partial pressure of arterial oxygen)/FIO2. Results: At each PEEP level, we assessed respiratory mechanics, arterial blood gas, and hemodynamics. Among three PEEP levels, plateau pressure, driving pressure, mechanical power, and blood pressure improved with lower PEEP. The ARDSnet low PEEP-FIO2 table and the best-oxygenation strategies provided higher PEEP than the best-compliance strategy (11 ± 6 cm H2O vs. 11 ± 3 cm H2O vs. 6 ± 2 cm H2O, p = 0.001), leading to higher plateau pressure, driving pressure, and mechanical power. The three PEEP strategies were not significantly different in gas exchange. The subgroup analysis showed that three PEEP strategies generated different effects in subjects with moderate or severe ARDS (n = 12) but not in subjects with mild ARDS (n = 8). Conclusions: In our cohort with COVID-19-induced ARDS, the ARDSnet low PEEP/FIO2 table and the best-oxygenation strategies led to higher PEEP and potentially higher risk of ventilator-induced lung injury than the best-compliance strategy. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04359251.

Extracorporeal Support Prognostication-Time to Move the Goal Posts?

Advances in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) technology are associated with expanded indications, increased utilization and improved outcome. There is growing interest in developing ECMO prognostication scores to aid in bedside decision making. To date, the majority of available scores have been limited to mostly registry-based data and with mortality as the main outcome of interest. There continues to be a gap in clinically applicable decision support tools to aid in the timing of ECMO cannulation to improve patients' long-term outcomes. We present a brief review of the commonly available adult and pediatric ECMO prognostication tools, their limitations, and future directions.

What we learned in the past year in managing our COVID-19 patients in intensive care units?

Coronavirus disease 2019 is a pandemic, was first recognized at Wuhan province, China in December 2019. The disease spread quickly across the globe, spreading stealthily from human to human through both symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. A multisystem disease which appears to primarily spread via bio aerosols, it has exhibited a wide clinical spectrum involving multiple organ systems with the respiratory system pathology being the prime cause of morbidity and mortality. Initially unleashing a huge destructive trail at Wuhan China, Lombardy Italy and New York City, it has now spread to all parts of the globe and has actively thrived and mutated into new forms. Health care systems and Governments responded initially with panic, with containment measures giving way to mitigation strategies. The global medical and scientific community has come together and responded to this huge challenge. Professional medical societies quickly laid out "expert" guidelines which were conservative in their approach. Many drugs were re formulated and tested quickly with the help of national and international collaborative groups, helping carve out effective treatment strategies and help build a good scientific foundation for evidence-based medicine. Out of the darkness of chaos, we now have an orderly approach to manage this disease both from a public health preventive and therapeutic standpoint. With preventive measures such as masking and social distancing to the development of highly effective and potent vaccines, the public health success of such measures has been tempered by behavioral responses and resource mobilization. From a therapy standpoint, we now have drugs that were promising but now proven ineffective, and those that are effective when given early during viral pathogenesis or later when immune dysregulation has established, and the goal is to help reign in the destructive cascade. It has been a fascinating journey for mankind and our work here recapitulates the evolution of various aspects of critical care and other inpatient practices which continue to evolve.

Management of ARDS - What Works and What Does Not

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a clinically and biologically heterogeneous disorder associated with a variety of disease processes that lead to acute lung injury with increased non-hydrostatic extravascular lung water, reduced compliance, and severe hypoxemia. Despite significant advances, mortality associated with this syndrome remains high. Mechanical ventilation remains the most important aspect of managing patients with ARDS. An in-depth knowledge of lung protective ventilation, optimal PEEP strategies, modes of ventilation and recruitment maneuvers are essential for ventilatory management of ARDS. Although, the management of ARDS is constantly evolving as new studies are published and guidelines being updated; we present a detailed review of the literature including the most up-to-date studies and guidelines in the management of ARDS. We believe this review is particularly helpful in the current times where more than half of the acute care hospitals lack in-house intensivists and the burden of ARDS is at large.

Non-invasive respiratory support paths in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: proposal of an algorithm

COVID-19 related Acute Respiratory Failure, may be successfully treated with Conventional Oxygen therapy, High Flow Nasal Cannula, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure or Bi-level Positive-Pressure ventilation. Despite the accumulated data in favor of the use of different Non-invasive Respiratory therapies in COVID-19 related Acute Respiratory Failure, it is not fully understood when start, escalate and de-escalate the best respiratory supportive option for the different timing of the disease. Based on the current published experience with Non-invasive Respiratory therapies in COVID-19 related Acute Respiratory Failure, we propose an algorithm in deciding when to start, when to stop and when to wean different NIRT. This strategy may help clinicians in better choosing NIRT during this second COVID-19 wave and beyond.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving high flow nasal cannula therapy prior to mechanical ventilation in COVID-19 respiratory failure: A prospective observational study

Background

Treatment strategies for acute hypoxic respiratory failure secondary to coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) had significant variation early in the pandemic. We sought to determine if patients treated with high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) prior to mechanical ventilation had differing outcomes compared to those treated only with conventional oxygen.

Methods

This was a prospective, observational study of patients with COVID-19 admitted to a tertiary care medical center with a diagnosis of acute hypoxic respiratory failure. Adult patients with a positive polymerase chain reaction test for COVID-19 who required mechanical ventilation were included.

Results

A total of 91 patients met the inclusion criteria for our study. The mean age was 68.4 years (standard deviation [SD] ± 12) and 58% were male. The mean initial partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratio was 152 (SD ± 65) and was not significantly different between the HFNC group and the conventional oxygen strategy group (P = 0.95). The observed mortality rate was 30% in the HFNC group versus 52% in the conventional oxygen strategy group (P = 0.05). The multivariate odds ratio of mortality for patients on HFNC was 0.375 compared to a conventional oxygen strategy (95% confidence interval 0.122-1.151, P = 0.09).

Conclusions

While HFNC appears to be safe as the initial treatment strategy for COVID-19 associated respiratory failure, HFNC did not result in a statistically significant difference in mortality compared to a conventional oxygen strategy. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

High throughput surface plasmon resonance imaging method for clinical detection of presence and strength of binding of IgM, IgG and IgA antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 during CoViD-19 infection

•

Surface Plasmon Resonance imaging is an unprecedented technology for high throughput screening of antibody profiling of CoViD19 patients.

•

Fingerprinting of isotypes IgM, IgG and IgA can be performed for 384 patients in one run.

•

Severity of the disease correlates well with the total anti-RBD of SARS-CoV-2 concentration in CoViD19 patients

•

Affinity equilibrium constant (K_D) of the polyclonal antibody binding was directly proportional to the off-rate (k_d) simplifying the screening.

•

Screening of the strength of binding of anti RBD antibodies was possible in high throughput and in one run together with the isotype analysis in the LSA SPR imager.

•

An affinity maturation effect was shown for patients recovering from CoViD19.

•

A tool is now available to test the quality of the immune reaction of individuals to SARS-CoV-2 and its mutants in vaccination programs.

Surface Plasmon Resonance imaging (SPRi) was used to determine the presence and strength of binding of IgG, IgM and IgA against the Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 in sera of 102 CoViD-19 and non-CoViD-19 patients. The SPRi assay simultaneously measures the antibody isotype levels and the strength of binding to the RBD of ultimate 384 patient samples in one run. It turns out that during the course of the disease, the IgG levels and strength of binding increased while generally the IgM and IgA levels go down. Recovered patients all show high strength of binding of the IgG type to the RBD protein. The anti-RBD immunoglobulins SPRi assay provides additional insights in the immune status of patients recovering from CoViD-19. This new high throughput method can be applied for the assessment of the quality of the immune reaction of healthy individuals to SARS-CoV-2 and its mutants in vaccination programs.•

Surface Plasmon Resonance imaging is an unprecedented technology for high throughput screening of antibody profiling of CoViD19 patients.

•

Fingerprinting of isotypes IgM, IgG and IgA can be performed for 384 patients in one run.

•

An affinity maturation effect was shown for patients recovering from CoViD19.

Coinfections in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19: A Descriptive Study from the United Arab Emirates

Purpose

Microbial coinfections in COVID-19 patients carry a risk of poor outcomes. This study aimed to characterize the clinical and microbiological profiles of coinfections in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

A retrospective review of the clinical and laboratory records of COVID-19 patients with laboratory-confirmed infections with bacteria, fungi, and viruses was conducted. Only adult COVID-19 patients hospitalized at participating health-care facilities between February 1 and July 31, 2020 were included. Data were collected from the centralized electronic system of Dubai Health Authority hospitals and Sheikh Khalifa General Hospital Umm Al Quwain.

Results

Of 29,802 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 392 (1.3%) had laboratory-confirmed coinfections. The mean age of patients with coinfections was 49.3±12.5 years, and a majority were male (n=330 of 392, 84.2%). Mean interval to commencement of empirical antibiotics was 1.2±3.6) days postadmission, with ceftriaxone, azithromycin, and piperacillin-tazobactam the most commonly used. Median interval between admission and first positive culture (mostly from blood, endotracheal aspirates, and urine specimens) was 15 (IQR 8-25) days. Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Escherichia coli were predominant in first positive cultures, with increased occurrence of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Acinetobacter baumannii, Candida auris, and Candida parapsilosis in subsequent cultures. The top three Gram-positive organisms were Staphylococcus epidermidis, Enterococcus faecalis, and Staphylococcus aureus. There was variability in levels of sensitivity to antibiotics and isolates harboring mecA, ESBL, AmpC, and carbapenemase-resistance genes were prevalent. A total of 130 (33.2%) patients died, predominantly those in the intensive-care unit undergoing mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Conclusion

Despite the low occurrence of coinfections among patients with COVID-19 in our setting, clinical outcomes remained poor. Predominance of Gram-negative pathogens, emergence of Candida species, and prevalence of isolates harboring drug-resistance genes are of concern.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Significance of Oral Health Management in the Era of "the New Normal with COVID-19"

More than a year ago, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization, with the world approaching its fourth wave. During this period, vaccines were developed in a much shorter period than thought possible, with the initiation of the pertinent vaccination. However, oral cavities have come under renewed scrutiny worldwide because saliva, a mixture of salivary secretions, pharyngeal secretions, and gingival crevicular fluid, have not only been shown to contain infective viral loads, mediating the route of SARS-CoV-2 transmission via droplet, aerosol, or contagion, but also used as a sample for viral RNA testing with a usefulness comparable to the nasopharyngeal swab. The oral cavity is an important portal for ingress of SARS-CoV-2, being an entryway to the bronchi, alveoli, and rest of the lower respiratory tract, causing inflammation by viral infection. Moreover, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, a host receptor for SARS-CoV-2, coupled with proteases responsible for viral entry have been found to be expressed on the tongue and other oral mucosae, suggesting that the oral cavity is the site of virus replication and propagation. Furthermore, there is a possibility that the aspiration of oral bacteria (such as periodontal pathogens) along with saliva into the lower respiratory tract may be a complicating factor for COVID-19 because chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and diabetes are known COVID-19 comorbidities with a greater risk of disease aggravation and higher death rate. These comorbidities have a strong connection to chronic periodontitis and periodontal pathogens, and an oral health management is an effective measure to prevent these comorbidities. In addition, oral bacteria, particularly periodontal pathogens, could be proinflammatory stimulants to respiratory epithelia upon its exposure to aspirated bacteria. Therefore, it may be expected that oral health management not only prevents comorbidities involved in aggravating COVID-19 but also has an effect against COVID-19 progression. This review discusses the significance of oral health management in SARS-CoV-2 infection in the era of “the new normal with COVID-19” and COVID-19 prevention with reference to the hypothetical mechanisms that the authors and the other researchers have proposed.

Comparing Ventilation Parameters for COVID-19 Patients Using Both Long-Term ICU and Anesthetic Ventilators in Times of Shortage

In the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, many patients were treated in hospitals using mechanical ventilation. However, due to a shortage of ICU ventilators, hospitals worldwide needed to deploy anesthesia machines for ICU ventilation (which is off-label use). A joint guidance was written to apply anesthesia machines for long-term ventilation. The goal of this research is to retrospectively evaluate the differences in measurable ventilation parameters between the ICU ventilator and the anesthesia machine as used for COVID-19 patients. In this study, we included 32 patients treated in March and April 2020, who had more than 3 days of mechanical ventilation, either in the regular ICU with ICU ventilators (Hamilton S1), or in the temporary emergency ICU with anesthetic ventilators (Aisys, GE). The data acquired during regular clinical treatment was collected from the Patient Data Management Systems. Available ventilation parameters (pressures and volumes: PEEP, P_peak, P_insp, V_tidal), monitored parameters EtCO₂, SpO₂, derived compliance C, and resistance R were processed and analyzed. A sub-analysis was performed to compare closed-loop ventilation (INTELLiVENT-ASV) to other ventilation modes. The results showed no major differences in the compared parameters, except for P_insp. PEEP was reduced over time in the with Hamilton treated patients. This is most likely attributed to changing clinical protocol as more clinical experience and literature became available. A comparison of compliance between the 2 ventilators could not be made due to variances in the measurement of compliance. Closed loop ventilation could be used in 79% of the time, resulting in more stable EtCO₂. From the analysis it can be concluded that the off-label usage of the anesthetic ventilator in our hospital did not result in differences in ventilation parameters compared to the ICU treatment in the first 4 days of ventilation.

Plasma from patients with bacterial sepsis or severe COVID-19 induces suppressive myeloid cell production from hematopoietic progenitors in vitro

Bacterial sepsis and severe COVID-19 share similar clinical manifestations and are both associated with dysregulation of the myeloid cell compartment. We previously reported an expanded CD14+ monocyte state, MS1, in patients with bacterial sepsis and validated expansion of this cell subpopulation in publicly available transcriptomics data. Here, using published datasets, we show that the gene expression program associated with MS1 correlated with sepsis severity and was up-regulated in monocytes from patients with severe COVID-19. To examine the ontogeny and function of MS1 cells, we developed a cellular model for inducing CD14+ MS1 monocytes from healthy bone marrow hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs). We found that plasma from patients with bacterial sepsis or COVID-19 induced myelopoiesis in HSPCs in vitro and expression of the MS1 gene program in monocytes and neutrophils that differentiated from these HSPCs. Furthermore, we found that plasma concentrations of IL-6, and to a lesser extent IL-10, correlated with increased myeloid cell output from HSPCs in vitro and enhanced expression of the MS1 gene program. We validated the requirement for these two cytokines to induce the MS1 gene program through CRISPR-Cas9 editing of their receptors in HSPCs. Using this cellular model system, we demonstrated that induced MS1 cells were broadly immunosuppressive and showed decreased responsiveness to stimulation with a synthetic RNA analog. Our in vitro study suggests a potential role for systemic cytokines in inducing myelopoiesis during severe bacterial or SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Prevalence of Low Level of Vitamin D Among COVID-19 Patients and Associated Risk Factors in India - A Hospital-Based Study

Background

The world is facing the most challenging pandemic in the 21st century. The developed and developing countries are facing the burden equally and no proven treatment options available. Recent studies suggest the plausibility of vitamin D therapy and prophylaxis for COVID-19, in the setting where the deficiency is more prevalent. Though evaluation of vitamin D status is not a routine in India, the present study focuses on the level of Vitamin d among COVID-19 patients.

Methods

The study was a hospital-based cross-sectional to find the status of vitamin D among COVID-19 patients in a tertiary care hospital, Patna, Bihar, India. The demographic, comorbidity data were taken, and the level of vitamin D was measured by a chemiluminescence-based immunoassay analyzer. The analysis compared the level of deficiency and insufficiency among different groups of COVID-19 patients. The role of DM and HTN as risk factors for mortality was compared.

Results

Among the total study participants (156), 42.31% were obese and 17.31% were severe as per clinical severity. The total prevalence of vitamin D deficiency was 58.97% and insufficiency was 89.1%. The prevalence was found high among male (61.02%), overweight (65.52%), and severe (62.96%) patients. The severity increases with advanced age (p<0.05) and important risk factors for mortality are DM, HTN, and advanced age.

Conclusion

The level of vitamin D can be assessed for the prognosis of COIVD-19 patients and help to modify the treatment protocol. Appropriate therapeutic/preventive intervention of vitamin D can alter the course and severity of COVID-19.

Dexamethasone in the Treatment of COVID-19: Primus Inter Pares?

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has rapidly spread globally, becoming a huge public health challenge. Even though the vast majority of patients are asymptomatic, some patients present with pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), septic shock, and death. It has been shown in several studies that the severity and clinical outcomes are related to dysregulated antiviral immunity and enhanced and persistent systemic inflammation. Corticosteroids have been used for the treatment of COVID-19 patients, as they are reported to elicit benefits by reducing lung inflammation and inflammation-induced lung injury. Dexamethasone has gained a major role in the therapeutic algorithm of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring supplemental oxygen or on mechanical ventilation. Its wide anti-inflammatory action seems to form the basis for its beneficial action, taming the overwhelming "cytokine storm". Amid a plethora of scientific research on therapeutic options for COVID-19, there are still unanswered questions about the right timing, right dosing, and right duration of the corticosteroid treatment. The aim of this review article was to summarize the data on the dexamethasone treatment in COVID-19 and outline the clinical considerations of corticosteroid therapy in these patients.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There are several reports of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who develop severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to guide clinical decision-making and future research.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and Scopus databases from 1 December 2019 to 10 January 2021 for observational studies or randomised clinical trials examining ECMO in adults with COVID-19 ARDS. We performed random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression, assessed risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist and rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Survival outcomes were presented as pooled proportions while continuous outcomes were presented as pooled means, both with corresponding 95% confidence intervals [CIs]. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were duration of ECMO therapy and mechanical ventilation, weaning rate from ECMO and complications during ECMO.

RESULTS

We included twenty-two observational studies with 1896 patients in the meta-analysis. Venovenous ECMO was the predominant mode used (98.6%). The pooled in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients (22 studies, 1896 patients) supported with ECMO was 37.1% (95% CI 32.3-42.0%, high certainty). Pooled mortality in the venovenous ECMO group was 35.7% (95% CI 30.7-40.7%, high certainty). Meta-regression found that age and ECMO duration were associated with increased mortality. Duration of ECMO support (18 studies, 1844 patients) was 15.1 days (95% CI 13.4-18.7). Weaning from ECMO (17 studies, 1412 patients) was accomplished in 67.6% (95% CI 50.5-82.7%) of patients. There were a total of 1583 ECMO complications reported (18 studies, 1721 patients) and renal complications were the most common.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients received venovenous ECMO support for COVID-19-related ARDS. In-hospital mortality in patients receiving ECMO support for COVID-19 was 37.1% during the first year of the pandemic, similar to those with non-COVID-19-related ARDS. Increasing age was a risk factor for death. Venovenous ECMO appears to be an effective intervention in selected patients with COVID-19-related ARDS. PROSPERO CRD42020192627.

Noninvasive Ventilatory Support of Patients with COVID-19 outside the Intensive Care Units (WARd-COVID)

Rationale: Treatment with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is frequent. Shortage of intensive care unit (ICU) beds led clinicians to deliver NIV also outside ICUs. Data about the use of NIV in COVID-19 is limited.

Objectives: To describe the prevalence and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 treated with NIV outside the ICUs. To investigate the factors associated with NIV failure (need for intubation or death).

Methods: In this prospective, single-day observational study, we enrolled adult patients with COVID-19 who were treated with NIV outside the ICU from 31 hospitals in Lombardy, Italy.

Results: We collected data on demographic and clinical characteristics, ventilatory management, and patient outcomes. Of 8,753 patients with COVID-19 present in the hospitals on the study day, 909 (10%) were receiving NIV outside the ICU. A majority of patients (778/909; 85%) patients were treated with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), which was delivered by helmet in 617 (68%) patients. NIV failed in 300 patients (37.6%), whereas 498 (62.4%) patients were discharged alive without intubation. Overall mortality was 25%. NIV failure occurred in 152/284 (53%) patients with an arterial oxygen pressure (Pa_O2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (Fi_O2) ratio <150 mm Hg. Higher C-reactive protein and lower Pa_O2/Fi_O2 and platelet counts were independently associated with increased risk of NIV failure.

Conclusions: The use of NIV outside the ICUs was common in COVID-19, with a predominant use of helmet CPAP, with a rate of success >60% and close to 75% in full-treatment patients. C-reactive protein, Pa_O2/Fi_O2, and platelet counts were independently associated with increased risk of NIV failure.

Clinical trial registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04382235).

Increased usage of the high flow nasal cannula in COVID-19 cases in Japan -from the online questionnaire survey by the Japanese Respiratory Society

An online questionnaire survey was used to assess the application of noninvasive strategies in the management of COVID-19 patients. We found a marked increase in the proportion of facilities using high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy successfully in the 3rd epidemic wave as compared to the 1st wave (49% vs. 12%) and rare reports of associated nosocomial infection in the medical personnel. Furthermore, the proportion of facilities using HFNC as first-line therapy for half or more than half of their patients who did not respond to conventional oxygen therapy increased from 9% in the first to 33% in the second survey. Conversely, the rate of mechanical ventilation with intubation usage following conventional oxygen therapy failure decreased from 62% to 54%. These changes could be due to the limited medical resources available during the larger 3rd wave coupled with increased internal reports on the success of HFNC.

Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children Associated with COVID-19: An Interim Review

The pediatric population is relatively less affected by novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared with adults, both in numbers and severity. However, evolution of a new entity, named multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), has led to significant number of children being admitted to hospital, especially to intensive care units. Case definitions of MIS-C have been defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) separately. Autoantibodies and antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) are the key factors proposed in pathogenesis, leading to immune dysregulation, and cytokine storm. Three distinct clinical types are observed as follows: (1) fever and elevated inflammatory markers with no end-organ damage; (2) shock with severe myocardial dysfunction similar to toxic shock syndrome (TSS); and (3) with mucocutaneous features like Kawasaki's disease (KD). Cardiovascular and gastrointestinal symptoms are the predominant presentations. Inflammatory markers like C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, and interleukin (IL)-6 are raised along with high D-dimer and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Echocardiography may demonstrate low left ventricular ejection fraction (<50%) and/or coronary aneurysms. Reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is usually negative, with most having antibodies against the virus. KD, KD shock syndrome (KDSS), and toxic shock syndrome (TSS) are the important differential diagnoses to be considered. Immunomodulatory therapy is the cornerstone of the management. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is preferred, the next option being steroids. Supportive care, antiplatelet, and anticoagulation medications, when indicated, are also vital aspects of treatment plan. The prognosis is favorable with low mortality but meticulous cardiac monitoring and follow-up by a multidisciplinary team is very important. Being an evolving disease, future research may reveal different manifestations, newer diagnostic modalities, and better treatment options.

The protective effect of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Scottish healthcare workers

Background

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are believed to be at increased risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. It is not known to what extent the natural production of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 is protective against re-infection.

Methods

A prospective observational study of HCWs in Scotland (UK) from May to September 2020 was performed. The Siemens SARS-CoV-2 total antibody assay was used to establish seroprevalence in this cohort. Controls, matched for age and sex to the general local population, were studied for comparison. New infections (up to 2 December 2020) post antibody testing were recorded to determine whether the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies protects against re-infection.

Results

A total of 2063 health and social care workers were recruited for this study. At enrolment, 300 HCWs had a positive antibody test (14.5%). 11 out of 231 control sera tested positive (4.8%). HCWs therefore had an increased likelihood of a positive test (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.85–6.16; p<0.0001). Dentists were most likely to test positive. 97.3% of patients who had previously tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcriptase (RT)-PCR had positive antibodies. 18.7% had an asymptomatic infection. There were 38 new infections with SARS-CoV-2 in HCWs who were previously antibody negative, and one symptomatic RT-PCR-positive re-infection. The presence of antibodies was therefore associated with an 85% reduced risk of re-infection with SARS-CoV-2 (hazard ratio 0.15, 95% CI 0.06–0.35; p=0.026).

Conclusion

HCWs were three times more likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 than the general population. Almost all infected individuals developed an antibody response, which was 85% effective in protecting against re-infection with SARS-CoV-2.

In this study, healthcare workers were three times more likely to test positive for #SARSCoV2 than the general population. Almost all infected individuals developed an antibody response, and this was 85% effective in protecting against re-infection.https://bit.ly/3mLPUmk

Cardio-Pulmonary-Renal Consequences of Severe COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has rapidly spread worldwide and resulted in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The disease raised an unprecedented demand for intensive care support due to severe pulmonary dysfunction and multiorgan failure. Although the pulmonary system is the potential target of the COVID-19, recent reports have demonstrated that COVID-19 profoundly influences the cardiovascular system and the kidneys. Research studies on cadavers have shown that direct heart and kidney injury can be frequently seen in patients deceased due to COVID-19 infection. On the other hand, functional or structural dysfunction of the heart may deteriorate the renal function and vice versa. This concept is already known as the cardiorenal syndrome and may play a role in COVID-19. Proactive monitoring of micro- and macrohemodynamics could allow prompt correction of circulatory dysfunction and can be of pivotal importance in the prevention of acute kidney injury. Moreover, type and amount of fluid therapy and vasoactive drug support could help manage these patients either with or without mechanical ventilator support. This brief review outlines the current evidence regarding the COVID-19-related renal and cardiorenal complications and discusses potential hemodynamic management strategies.

COVID-19 ARDS is characterized by higher extravascular lung water than non-COVID-19 ARDS: the PiCCOVID study

Background

In acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), extravascular lung water index (EVLWi) and pulmonary vascular permeability index (PVPI) measured by transpulmonary thermodilution reflect the degree of lung injury. Whether EVLWi and PVPI are different between non-COVID-19 ARDS and the ARDS due to COVID-19 has never been reported. We aimed at comparing EVLWi, PVPI, respiratory mechanics and hemodynamics in patients with COVID-19 ARDS vs. ARDS of other origin.

Methods

Between March and October 2020, in an observational study conducted in intensive care units from three university hospitals, 60 patients with COVID-19-related ARDS monitored by transpulmonary thermodilution were compared to the 60 consecutive non-COVID-19 ARDS admitted immediately before the COVID-19 outbreak between December 2018 and February 2020.

Results

Driving pressure was similar between patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS, at baseline as well as during the study period. Compared to patients without COVID-19, those with COVID-19 exhibited higher EVLWi, both at the baseline (17 (14–21) vs. 15 (11–19) mL/kg, respectively, p = 0.03) and at the time of its maximal value (24 (18–27) vs. 21 (15–24) mL/kg, respectively, p = 0.01). Similar results were observed for PVPI. In COVID-19 patients, the worst ratio between arterial oxygen partial pressure over oxygen inspired fraction was lower (81 (70–109) vs. 100 (80–124) mmHg, respectively, p = 0.02) and prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were more frequently used than in patients without COVID-19. COVID-19 patients had lower maximal lactate level and maximal norepinephrine dose than patients without COVID-19. Day-60 mortality was similar between groups (57% vs. 65%, respectively, p = 0.45). The maximal value of EVLWi and PVPI remained independently associated with outcome in the whole cohort.

Conclusion

Compared to ARDS patients without COVID-19, patients with COVID-19 had similar lung mechanics, but higher EVLWi and PVPI values from the beginning of the disease. This was associated with worse oxygenation and with more requirement of prone positioning and ECMO. This is compatible with the specific lung inflammation and severe diffuse alveolar damage related to COVID-19. By contrast, patients with COVID-19 had fewer hemodynamic derangement. Eventually, mortality was similar between groups.

Trial registration number and date of registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04337983). Registered 30 March 2020—Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04337983.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-021-03594-6.

Low flow nasal oxygen supplementation in addition to non-rebreathing mask: An alternative to high flow nasal cannula oxygenation for acute hypoxemic COVID-19 patients in resource limited settings

Approximately 14% COVID-19 patients, develop acute hypoxic respiratory failure. A high flow nasal cannula device might be preferred to obtain an oxygen saturation above 90% in these cases. In resource limited settings, where high flow nasal cannula is not an option, additional low flow oxygen therapy through nasal prongs could be added to non-rebreathing mask with a reservoir bag. The possible mechanisms of the improved oxygenation could be: 1. improved oxygen-air mixing in large airways, 2. increased oxygen concentration inside the non-rebreathing mask, 3. decrease in rebreathing of carbon-dioxide from the non-rebreathing mask. This method of oxygen supplementation is easy to assemble, cost-effective and helpful in management of acute hypoxemic COVID-19 patients, whenever there is crisis of high flow nasal cannula machine. Its effectiveness needs to be assessed by a randomized controlled trial.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pneumonia and Acute Pancreatitis in a Young Girl

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pneumonia and acute pancreatitis are rarely reported in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We present the case of a 13-year-old girl who presented with nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain for the last two days, along with a cough for the last week. She had a fever and tachycardia. Lung examination revealed reduced breath sounds, and abdominal examination showed tenderness in the epigastrium. COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction was positive, and her serum chemistry revealed elevated serum amylase and lipase. Abdominal computed tomography revealed diffuse inflammation of the pancreas with peripancreatic edema, and chest X-ray demonstrated diffuse infiltrates and pneumonic patches in both lungs. Her initial management included bowel rest, intravenous fluids, intravenous remdesivir, and azithromycin with supplemental oxygen based on the provisional diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia and acute pancreatitis. Her abdominal symptoms started improving, and dexamethasone was added to her regimen due to her worsened respiratory condition. She was symptom-free on day seven except for a mild cough. She was discharged on day eight with follow-up.

Coalescence of co-infection and antimicrobial resistance with SARS-CoV-2 infection: The blues of post-COVID-19 world

In viral respiratory infections, bacterial co-pathogens are widely known to co-infect, and they significantly increase the morbidity and mortality rate. During the influenza season, the advent of 2019-nCoV (novel coronavirus) has led to the widespread use of oral and intravenous antibiotics and inhibitors of neuraminidase enzyme. Owing to causes such as extended intubation, the ubiquitous use of intrusive catheters, and compromised host immunity, coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients are at heightened risk of secondary bacterial and fungal infections, leading to the difficulty in their treatment. Apart from the pandemic, the primary risk is a likely surge in multidrug resistance. In this work, we evaluated the coalescence of present co-infection alongside the COVID-19 and post-pandemic antimicrobial resistance due to high ongoing drug use for the treatment of COVID-19. We found that while there is currently limited evidence of bacterial infections in COVID-19, available proof supports the restricted use of antibiotics from an antibiotic stewardship viewpoint, primarily upon entry. Paramount attempts should be made to collect sputum and blood culture samples as well as pneumococcal urinary antigen monitoring in order to endorse stringent antibiotic usage. For antimicrobial stewardship, inflammatory markers like procalcitonin have been added, but such biomarkers are typically upraised in COVID-19. Antimicrobials cannot be completely removed in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) and once they enter the water environment, possesses a great risk of inducing resistance to drugs in microbes. Hence, their prescription and administrations should be regulated and alternate solutions such as vaccines, preventive measures and personal hygiene should be given top priority. It is imperative to establish an antimicrobial strategy discrete to COVID-19, as this pandemic has caused an outbreak of numerous other associated diseases and has the potential to drive microbial resistance. Coordinated plans are essential for this at the citizen, health-care and policy levels.

Prone positioning in children with respiratory failure because of coronavirus disease 2019

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common manifestation of severe COVID-19. Prone positioning has been used successfully in adult patients with ARDS and has been shown to decrease mortality. The efficacy of prone positioning in pediatric ARDS is less clear. In this review, we discuss the physiologic principles and literature on prone positioning in adults and children relative to COVID-19.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are limited published data on prone positioning in respiratory failure because of COVID-19. The use of proning in nonintubated patients with COVID-19 may improve oxygenation and dyspnea but has not been associated with improved outcomes. Initial adult cohort studies of intubated patients undergoing prone positioning in severe ARDS related to COVID-19 have shown an improvement in mortality. Although the use of proning in children with severe COVID-19 is recommended, data supporting its use is scarce.

SUMMARY

Additional studies to evaluate the efficacy of prone positioning in pediatric ARDS are needed to provide evidence for or against this treatment strategy in children. Given the unknown evolution of this pandemic, collaborative research efforts across pediatric centers provides the greatest opportunity to develop a data driven-approach to make use of this potential therapy.

Invasive and noninvasive ventilation strategies for acute respiratory failure in children with coronavirus disease 2019

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 presents as symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease in susceptible patients. Severe pediatric COVID-19 disease is rare, limiting potential data accumulation on associated respiratory failure in children. Pediatric intensivists and pulmonologists managing COVID-19 patients look to adult guidelines and pediatric-specific consensus statements to guide management. The purpose of this article is to review the current literature and recommended strategies for the escalation of noninvasive and invasive respiratory support for acute respiratory failure associated with COVID-19 disease in children.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are no prospective studies comparing COVID-19 treatment strategies in children. Adult and pediatric ventilation management interim guidance is based on evidence-based guidelines in non-COVID acute respiratory distress syndrome, with considerations of (1) noninvasive positive pressure ventilation versus high-flow nasal cannula and (2) high versus lower positive end expiratory pressure strategies related to lung compliance and potential lung recruitability.

SUMMARY

Management of acute respiratory failure from COVID-19 requires individualized titration of noninvasive and invasive ventilation modalities with consideration of preserved or compromised pulmonary compliance. Research regarding best practices in the management of pediatric severe COVID-19 with respiratory failure is lacking and is acutely needed as the pandemic surges and vaccination of the pediatric population will be delayed compared to adults.

Outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in Covid-19 or influenza: A single-center registry study

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) is used to sustain blood oxygenation and decarboxylation in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). It is under debate if V-V ECMO is as appropriate for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) ARDS as it is for influenza. In this retrospective study, we analyzed all patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 or influenza A/B infection, ARDS and V-V ECMO, treated at our medical intensive care unit (ICU) between October 2010 and June 2020. Baseline and procedural characteristics as well as survival 30 days after ECMO cannulation were analyzed. A total of 62 V-V ECMO patients were included (15 with Covid-19 and 47 with influenza). Both groups had similar baseline characteristics at cannulation. Thirty days after ECMO cannulation, 13.3% of all patients with Covid-19 were discharged alive from our ICU compared to 44.7% with influenza (P = .03). Patients with Covid-19 had fewer ECMO-free days (0 (0-9.7) days vs. 13.2 (0-22.1) days; P = .05). Cumulative incidences of 30-day-survival showed no significant differences (48.6% in Covid-19 patients, 63.7% in influenza patients; P = .23). ICU treatment duration was significantly longer in ARDS patients with V-V ECMO for Covid-19 compared to influenza. Thirty-day mortality was higher in Covid-19, but not significant.

Critical Care Outreach Team During COVID-19: Ventilatory Support in the Ward and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, a critical care outreach team was implemented in our hospital to guarantee multidisciplinary patient assessment at admission and prompt ICU support in medical wards. In this paper, we report the activity plan results and describe the baseline characteristics of the referred subjects.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated data from 125 subjects referred to the critical care outreach team from March 22 to April 22, 2020. We considered subjects with a ceiling of care decision, with those deemed eligible assigned to level 3 care (ward subgroup), and those deemed ineligible admitted to the ICU (ICU subgroup). Quality indicators of the outreach team plan delivery included number of cardiac arrest calls, number of intubations in level 2 areas, and ineffective palliative support.

RESULTS

We enrolled 125 consecutive adult subjects with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. We did not report any emergency endotracheal intubations in the clinical ward. In the care ceiling subgroup, we had 2 (3.3%) emergency calls for cardiac arrest, whereas signs of ineffective palliative support were reported in 5 subjects (12.5%). Noninvasive forms of respiratory assistance were delivered to 40.0% of subjects in the ward subgroup (median 3 d [interquartile range (IQR) 2-5]), to 45.9% of subjects in the care ceiling subgroup (median 5 d [IQR 3-7]), and to 64.7% of subjects in the ICU subgroup (median 2.5 d [IQR 1-3]). Thirty of the 31 ward subjects (96.7%), 26 of the 34 ICU subjects, (76.4%), and 19 of the 61 ceiling of care subjects (31.1%) were discharged.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of a hospital and ICU surge, a multidisciplinary daily plan supported by a dedicated critical care outreach team was associated with a low rate of cardiac arrest calls, no emergency intubations in the ward, and appropriate palliative care support for subjects with a ceiling of care decision.

Relating Ventilatory Support and Drug Treatment Strategies to the Fundamental Pathophysiology in COVID-19 Illness

This article relates the current pathophysiologic and radiologic findings to the fundamental idea of acute lung epithelial infection, alveolar inflammation causing leak into the interstitial space, and subsequent secondary or concurrent endothelial infection and dysfunction. Understanding the mechanisms and timings of alveolar damage can better inform the types of ventilatory support required and timing of targeted pharmacotherapies.

Acute kidney injury in SARS-CoV2-related pneumonia ICU patients: a retrospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

While acute kidney injury (AKI) is frequent in severe SARS-CoV2-related pneumonia ICU patients, few data are still available about its risk factors.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study performed in four university affiliated hospitals in Paris. AKI was defined according to the KIDGO guidelines. Factors associated with AKI were picked up using multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression. Independent risk factors of day 28 mortality were assessed using Cox model.

RESULTS

379 patients (median age 62 [53,69], 77% of male) were included. Half of the patients had AKI (n = 195, 52%) including 58 patients (15%) with AKI stage 1, 44 patients (12%) with AKI stage 2, and 93 patients (25% with AKI stage 3). Chronic kidney disease (OR 7.41; 95% CI 2.98-18.4), need for invasive mechanical ventilation at day 1 (OR 4.83; 95% CI 2.26-10.3), need for vasopressors at day 1 (OR 2.1; 95% CI 1.05-4.21) were associated with increased risk of AKI. Day 28 mortality in the cohort was 26.4% and was higher in patients with AKI (37.4 vs. 14.7%, P < 0.001). Neither AKI (HR 1.35; 95% CI 0.78-2.32) nor AKI stage were associated with mortality (HR [95% CI] for stage 1, 2 and 3 when compared to no AKI of, respectively, 1.02 [0.49-2.10], 1.73 [0.81-3.68] and 1.42 [0.78-2.58]).

CONCLUSION

In this large cohort of SARS-CoV2-related pneumonia patients admitted to the ICU, AKI was frequent, mostly driven by preexisting chronic kidney disease and life sustaining therapies, with unclear adjusted relationship with day 28 outcome.

Relative Sparing of the Left Upper Zone on Chest Radiography in Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia

The radiological findings of COVID-19 are well-described, including its evolution. In an earlier report of admission chest radiographs of patients with COVID-19, we anecdotally noted relative sparing of the left upper zone (LUZ). We subsequently aimed to describe the main chest radiograph findings in another cohort, focusing on zonal predominance. The admission chest radiographs of 111 patients with CO-VID-19 pneumonia requiring intensive care admission were reviewed by 2 thoracic radiologists and categorized according to the predominant pattern into either ground-glass opacities (GGOs), alveolar infiltrates and/or consolidation, or reticular and/or nodular infiltrates or an equal combination of both, and the extent of disease involvement of each of the zones using a modified Radiologic Assessment of Lung Edema (RALE) score. Parenchymal changes were detected in all. In total, 106 radiographs showed GGOs, alveolar infiltrates, and/or consolidation, and 5 had a combination of reticular/nodular infiltrates as well as GGOs, alveolar infiltrates, and/or consolidation. The LUZ had a significant lower grading score than the right upper zone: 1 versus 2 (p < 0.001). Likewise, the upper zones had a significant lower score than the mid and lower zones (p < 0.001). Our findings confirmed the relative sparing of the LUZ in severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Development and Validation of a Predictive Model for Severe COVID-19: A Case-Control Study in China

Background: Predicting the risk of progression to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) could facilitate personalized diagnosis and treatment options, thus optimizing the use of medical resources.

Methods: In this prospective study, 206 patients with COVID-19 were enrolled from regional medical institutions between December 20, 2019, and April 10, 2020. We collated a range of data to derive and validate a predictive model for COVID-19 progression, including demographics, clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, and cytokine levels. Variation analysis, along with the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and Boruta algorithms, was used for modeling. The performance of the derived models was evaluated by specificity, sensitivity, area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), Akaike information criterion (AIC), calibration plots, decision curve analysis (DCA), and Hosmer–Lemeshow test.

Results: We used the LASSO algorithm and logistic regression to develop a model that can accurately predict the risk of progression to severe COVID-19. The model incorporated alanine aminotransferase (ALT), interleukin (IL)-6, expectoration, fatigue, lymphocyte ratio (LYMR), aspartate transaminase (AST), and creatinine (CREA). The model yielded a satisfactory predictive performance with an AUC of 0.9104 and 0.8792 in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. The final model was then used to create a nomogram that was packaged into an open-source and predictive calculator for clinical use. The model is freely available online at https://severeconid-19predction.shinyapps.io/SHINY/.

Conclusion: In this study, we developed an open-source and free predictive calculator for COVID-19 progression based on ALT, IL-6, expectoration, fatigue, LYMR, AST, and CREA. The validated model can effectively predict progression to severe COVID-19, thus providing an efficient option for early and personalized management and the allocation of appropriate medical resources.

Implications of early respiratory support strategies on disease progression in critical COVID-19: a matched subanalysis of the prospective RISC-19-ICU cohort

BACKGROUND

Uncertainty about the optimal respiratory support strategies in critically ill COVID-19 patients is widespread. While the risks and benefits of noninvasive techniques versus early invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) are intensely debated, actual evidence is lacking. We sought to assess the risks and benefits of different respiratory support strategies, employed in intensive care units during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic on intubation and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality rates.

METHODS

Subanalysis of a prospective, multinational registry of critically ill COVID-19 patients. Patients were subclassified into standard oxygen therapy ≥10 L/min (SOT), high-flow oxygen therapy (HFNC), noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NIV), and early IMV, according to the respiratory support strategy employed at the day of admission to ICU. Propensity score matching was performed to ensure comparability between groups.

RESULTS

Initially, 1421 patients were assessed for possible study inclusion. Of these, 351 patients (85 SOT, 87 HFNC, 87 NIV, and 92 IMV) remained eligible for full analysis after propensity score matching. 55% of patients initially receiving noninvasive respiratory support required IMV. The intubation rate was lower in patients initially ventilated with HFNC and NIV compared to those who received SOT (SOT: 64%, HFNC: 52%, NIV: 49%, p = 0.025). Compared to the other respiratory support strategies, NIV was associated with a higher overall ICU mortality (SOT: 18%, HFNC: 20%, NIV: 37%, IMV: 25%, p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

In this cohort of critically ill patients with COVID-19, a trial of HFNC appeared to be the most balanced initial respiratory support strategy, given the reduced intubation rate and comparable ICU mortality rate. Nonetheless, considering the uncertainty and stress associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, SOT and early IMV represented safe initial respiratory support strategies. The presented findings, in agreement with classic ARDS literature, suggest that NIV should be avoided whenever possible due to the elevated ICU mortality risk.

Acute kidney injury: Incidence, risk factors, and outcomes in severe COVID-19 patients

Background

COVID-19 is a multisystemic disorder that frequently causes acute kidney injury (AKI). However, the precise clinical and biochemical variables associated with AKI progression in patients with severe COVID-19 remain unclear.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study on 278 hospitalized patients who were admitted to the ward and intensive care unit (ICU) with COVID-19 between March 2020 and June 2020, at the University Hospital, São Paulo, Brazil. Patients aged ≥ 18 years with COVID-19 confirmed on RT-PCR were included. AKI was defined according to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria. We evaluated the incidence of AKI, several clinical variables, medicines used, and outcomes in two sub-groups: COVID-19 patients with AKI (Cov-AKI), and COVID-19 patients without AKI (non-AKI). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

Results

First, an elevated incidence of AKI (71.2%) was identified, distributed across different stages of the KDIGO criteria. We further observed higher levels of creatinine, C-reactive protein (CRP), leukocytes, neutrophils, monocytes, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in the Cov-AKI group than in the non-AKI group, at hospital admission. On univariate analysis, Cov-AKI was associated with older age (>62 years), hypertension, CRP, MCV, leucocytes, neutrophils, NLR, combined hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin treatment, use of mechanical ventilation, and vasoactive drugs. Multivariate analysis showed that hypertension and the use of vasoactive drugs were independently associated with a risk of higher AKI in COVID-19 patients. Finally, we preferentially found an altered erythrocyte and leukocyte cellular profile in the Cov-AKI group compared to the non-AKI group, at hospital discharge.

Conclusions

In our study, the development of AKI in patients with severe COVID-19 was related to inflammatory blood markers and therapy with hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin, with vasopressor requirement and hypertension considered potential risk factors. Thus, attention to the protocol, hypertension, and some blood markers may help assist doctors with decision-making for the management of COVID-19 patients with AKI.

The repurposed use of anesthesia machines to ventilate critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Background

The surge of critically ill patients due to the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) overwhelmed critical care capacity in areas of northern Italy. Anesthesia machines have been used as alternatives to traditional ICU mechanical ventilators. However, the outcomes for patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure cared for with Anesthesia Machines is currently unknow. We hypothesized that COVID-19 patients receiving care with Anesthesia Machines would have worse outcomes compared to standard practice.

Methods

We designed a retrospective study of patients admitted with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis at a large tertiary urban hospital in northern Italy. Two care units were included: a 27-bed standard ICU and a 15-bed temporary unit emergently opened in an operating room setting. Intubated patients assigned to Anesthesia Machines (AM group) were compared to a control cohort treated with standard mechanical ventilators (ICU-VENT group). Outcomes were assessed at 60-day follow-up. A multivariable Cox regression analysis of risk factors between survivors and non-survivors was conducted to determine the adjusted risk of death for patients assigned to AM group.

Results

Complete daily data from 89 mechanically ventilated patients consecutively admitted to the two units were analyzed. Seventeen patients were included in the AM group, whereas 72 were in the ICU-VENT group. Disease severity and intensity of treatment were comparable between the two groups. The 60-day mortality was significantly higher in the AM group compared to the ICU-vent group (12/17 vs. 27/72, 70.6% vs. 37.5%, respectively, p = 0.016). Allocation to AM group was associated with a significantly increased risk of death after adjusting for covariates (HR 4.05, 95% CI: 1.75–9.33, p = 0.001). Several incidents and complications were reported with Anesthesia Machine care, raising safety concerns.

Conclusions

Our results support the hypothesis that care associated with the use of Anesthesia Machines is inadequate to provide long-term critical care to patients with COVID-19. Added safety risks must be considered if no other option is available to treat severely ill patients during the ongoing pandemic.

Clinical trial number

Not applicable.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-021-01376-9.

A case report of individualized ventilation in a COVID-19 patient - new possibilities and caveats to consider with flow-controlled ventilation

BACKGROUND

Flow-controlled ventilation (FCV) is a novel ventilation method increasingly being used clinically, particularly during the current COVID-19 pandemic. However, the continuous flow pattern in FCV during inspiration and expiration has a significant impact on respiratory parameters and ventilatory settings compared to conventional ventilation modes. In addition, the constant flow combined with direct intratracheal pressure measurement allows determination of dynamic compliance and ventilation settings can be adjusted accordingly, reflecting a personalized ventilation approach.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 50-year old women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was admitted to a tertiary medical center. Initial ventilation occurred with best standard of care pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) and was then switched to FCV, by adopting PCV ventilator settings. This led to an increase in oxygenation by 30 %. Subsequently, to reduce invasiveness of mechanical ventilation, FCV was individualized by dynamic compliance guided adjustment of both, positive end-expiratory pressure and peak pressure; this intervention reduced driving pressure from 18 to 12 cm H2O. However, after several hours, compliance further deteriorated which resulted in a tidal volume of only 4.7 ml/kg.

CONCLUSIONS

An individualized FCV approach increased oxygenation parameters in a patient suffering from severe COVID-19 related ARDS. Direct intratracheal pressure measurements allow for determination of dynamic compliance and thus optimization of ventilator settings, thereby reducing applied and dissipated energy. However, although desirable, this personalized ventilation strategy may reach its limits when lung function is so severely impaired that patient's oxygenation has to be ensured at the expense of lung protective ventilation concepts.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Antimicrobial Resistance: Parallel and Interacting Health Emergencies

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are parallel and interacting health emergencies that provide the opportunity for mutual learning. As their measures and consequences are comparable, the COVID-19 pandemic helps to illustrate the potential long-term impact of AMR, which is less acute but not less crucial. They may also impact each other as there is a push to use existing antimicrobials to treat critically ill COVID-19 patients in the absence of specific treatments. Attempts to manage the spread of COVID-19 may also lead to a slowdown in AMR. Understanding how COVID-19 affects AMR trends and what we can expect if these trends remain the same or worsen will help us to plan the next steps for tackling AMR. Researchers should start collecting data to measure the impact of current COVID-19 policies and programs on AMR.

A multicentric, randomized, controlled phase III study of centhaquine (Lyfaquin ® ) as a resuscitative agent in hypovolemic shock patients

INTRODUCTION

Centhaquine (Lyfaquin ^® ) showed significant safety and efficacy in preclinical and clinical phase I and II studies.

METHODS

A prospective, multicentric, randomized phase III study was conducted in patients with hypovolemic shock having systolic blood pressure (SBP) of ≤90 mm Hg and blood lactate levels of ≥2 mmol/L. Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio, 71 patients to the centhaquine group and 34 patients to the control (saline) group. Every patient received standard of care (SOC) and was followed for 28 days. The study drug (normal saline or centhaquine (0.01 mg/kg)) was administered in 100 mL of normal saline infusion over 1 hour. The primary objectives were to determine changes (mean through 48 hours) in SBP, diastolic blood pressure (DBP), blood lactate levels, and base deficit. The secondary objectives included the amount of fluids, blood products, vasopressors administered in the first 48 hours, duration of hospital stay, time in ICU, time on the ventilator support, change in patient's Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome (MODS) scores, and the proportion of patients with 28-day all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

The demographics of patients and baseline vitals in both groups were comparable. Trauma was the cause of hypovolemic shock in 29.41% of control and 47.06% of centhaquine, gastroenteritis in 44.12% of control, and 29.41% of centhaquine patients. An equal amount of fluids and blood products were administered in both groups during the first 48 hours of resuscitation. A lesser amount of vasopressors was needed in the first 48 hours of resuscitation in the centhaquine group. An increase in SBP from the baseline was consistently higher in the centhaquine group than in the control. A significant increase in pulse pressure in the centhaquine group than the control group suggests improved stroke volume due to centhaquine. The shock index was significantly lower in the centhaquine group than control from 1 hour (p=0.0320) till 4 hours (p=0.0494) of resuscitation. Resuscitation with centhaquine had a significantly greater number of patients with improved blood lactate and the base deficit than the control group. ARDS and MODS improved with centhaquine, and an 8.8% absolute reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality was observed in the centhaquine group.

CONCLUSION

Centhaquine is a highly efficacious resuscitative agent for treating hypovolemic shock. The efficacy of centhaquine in distributive shock due to sepsis and COVID-19 is being explored.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials Registry, India; ctri.icmr.org.in, CTRI/2019/01/017196; clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04045327 .

KEY SUMMARY POINTS

A multicentric, randomized, controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of centhaquine in hypovolemic shock patients.One hundred and five patients were randomized 2:1 to receive centhaquine or saline. Centhaquine was administered at a dose of 0.01 mg/kg in 100 mL saline and infused over 1 hour. The control group received 100 mL of saline over a 1-hour infusion.Centhaquine improved blood pressure, shock index, reduced blood lactate levels, and improved base deficit. Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome (MODS) score improved with centhaquine.An 8.8% absolute reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality was observed in the centhaquine group. There were no drug-related adverse events in the study.

Knowledge, Attitude, and Prevention Practices Toward Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Ethiopia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Coronavirus disease is a major global public health problem. The contagious disease caused by a newly discovered coronavirus, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), was declared a pandemic following the outbreak of cases of respiratory illness during 2019. Although studies assessed COVID-19 knowledge, attitude, and practice in Ethiopia the findings were highly variable and inconsistent.

Objectives

This study assessed the pooled status of knowledge, attitude, and prevention practices regarding COVID-19 in Ethiopia.

Methods

International and national electronic databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Google, were systematically searched. All observational studies on COVID-19 knowledge, attitude, and prevention practices in Ethiopia were included. We assessed heterogeneity among the included studies using the Cochrane Q test statistics and I² test. Lastly, a random-effects meta-analysis model was fitted to estimate the pooled proportion of knowledge, attitude, and prevention practices toward COVID-19 in Ethiopia.

Results

Our search identified 206 studies, 13 of which were included in the final analysis. Adequate knowledge, good attitude, and good prevention practice toward COVID-19 in Ethiopia were observed in 70.25% (95% CI, 61.82%–78.02%), 69.08% (95% CI, 55.42%–81.24%), and 41.62% (95% CI, 27.77%–56.17%) of total participants across studies, respectively.

Conclusions

The results of this study revealed low proportions of adequate knowledge, attitudes, and preventive practices toward COVID-19 in Ethiopia. The lowest pooled proportion was observed in the Amhara region. These findings indicate the need to revise plans and policies to improve the knowledge, attitudes, and prevention practices of people toward COVID-19 in Ethiopia, especially in the Amhara region. (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2021; 82:XXX–XXX) © 2021 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc.

Impact of COVID-19 on inpatient clinical emergencies: A single-center experience

AIM

Determine changes in rapid response team (RRT) activations and describe institutional adaptations made during a surge in hospitalizations for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

Using prospectively collected data, we compared characteristics of RRT calls at our academic hospital from March 7 through May 31, 2020 (COVID-19 era) versus those from January 1 through March 6, 2020 (pre-COVID-19 era). We used negative binomial regression to test differences in RRT activation rates normalized to floor (non-ICU) inpatient census between pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 eras, including the sub-era of rapid COVID-19 census surge and plateau (March 28 through May 2, 2020).

RESULTS

RRT activations for respiratory distress rose substantially during the rapid COVID-19 surge and plateau (2.38 (95% CI 1.39-3.36) activations per 1000 floor patient-days v. 1.27 (0.82-1.71) during the pre-COVID-19 era; p = 0.02); all-cause RRT rates were not significantly different (5.40 (95% CI 3.94-6.85) v. 4.83 (3.86-5.80) activations per 1000 floor patient-days, respectively; p = 0.52). Throughout the COVID-19 era, respiratory distress accounted for a higher percentage of RRT activations in COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 patients (57% vs. 28%, respectively; p = 0.001). During the surge, we adapted RRT guidelines to reduce in-room personnel and standardize personal protective equipment based on COVID-19 status and risk to providers, created decision-support pathways for respiratory emergencies that accounted for COVID-19 status uncertainty, and expanded critical care consultative support to floor teams.

CONCLUSION

Increased frequency and complexity of RRT activations for respiratory distress during the COVID-19 surge prompted the creation of clinical tools and strategies that could be applied to other hospitals.