The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Research Priorities for Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Critical Illness

Dose-response relationship between awake prone-positioning duration and PaO2/FiO2 changes and risk of disease aggravation in patients with severe COVID-19: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients not mechanically ventilated often fail to achieve the recommended duration of awake prone positioning due to treatment interruption and discomfort. Few studies have investigated the link between treatment outcome and prone-positioning duration, the inability to accurately guide patients to perform awake prone positioning.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to characterise and explore the relationship between awake prone-positioning duration with the ratio of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2 [P/F]) changes and the risk of disease aggravation.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study; dose-response relationship was used. Awake prone positioning was performed on patients with severe Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) for 5 consecutive days from 1 February to 21 March 2023. Linear and logistic regression models were utilised to assess the association between prone-positioning duration with P/F changes and risk of disease aggravation, respectively. Meanwhile, the restricted cubic spline was used to evaluate the dose-response relationships.

RESULTS

A total of 408 patients with severe COVID-19 were analysed. The daily prone positioning duration was 4.57 ± 2.74 h/d, and the changes in P/F were 67.63 ± 69.17 mmHg. On the sixth day of hospitalisation, the condition of 52 (12.8%) patients deteriorated. There was a positive, nonlinear dose-response relationship (Poverall < 0.001, Pnonlinearity = 0.041) and a strong, significant positive correlation (β = 29.286, t = 4.302, P < 0.001) between the prone-positioning duration and P/F changes. The risk of disease aggravation gradually decreases with the increase of prone-positioning duration. Nonetheless, the prone-positioning duration was not statistically associated with disease aggravation (odds ratio = 0.986, 95% confidence interval: 0.514-1.895).

CONCLUSIONS

Awake prone positioning for ≥4 h/d is effective on oxygenation (not mortality/intubation) and is achievable for patients with severe COVID-19. Prolonged prone positioning is promising in improving patients' oxygenation but does not alleviate their risk of disease aggravation.

SARS-CoV-2 pathophysiology and post-vaccination severity: a systematic review

Currently, COVID-19 is still striking after 4 years of prevalence, with millions of cases and thousands of fatalities being recorded every month. The virus can impact other major organ systems, including the gastrointestinal tract (GIT), cardiovascular, central nervous system, renal, and hepatobiliary systems. The resulting organ dysfunction from SARS-CoV-2 may be attributed to one or a combination of mechanisms, such as direct viral toxicity, disruptions in the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), thrombosis, immune dysregulation, and ischemic injury due to vasculitis. SARS-CoV-2 vaccines effectively reduce the severity of the disease, hospitalizations, and mortality. As of October 2024, 13.58 billion vaccine doses have been administered, with an average of 6959 daily doses. Also, the boosters are given after the primary immunization in a homologous and heterologous manner. The vaccines imposed severe potential health side effects such as clotting or obstruction of blood vessels termed arterial or venous thrombosis, autoimmune damage of nerve cells (Guillain-Barré syndrome; GBS), intense activation of coagulation system (vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia), acute ischemic stroke (AIS) and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST), myocarditis, pericarditis, and glomerular disease. Overall, it is essential to highlight that the significant benefits of COVID-19 vaccination far outweigh the low risk of conditions. mRNA-based vaccine technology has emerged as a rapidly deployable vaccine candidate and a viable alternative to existing vaccines. It has a very low probability of adverse health effects, confirmed by data represented by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), Yellow card approved under CDC, WHO.

The Effect of Pulmonary Hypertension on Mortality and Intensive Care Unit Admission in Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AIM

Severe COVID-19 can cause acute respiratory distress syndrome, hypoxia, systemic complications, and increased mortality. Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a major global health issue associated with worsening symptoms and increased mortality. This systematic review aimed to assess the influence of PH onset among COVID-19 patients on all-cause mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission.

METHOD

An unrestricted search of five databases up to June 2022 was undertaken. Pulmonary hypertension was assessed using transthoracic echocardiogram, computed tomography, or right heart catheterisation. After duplicate screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment, random effects meta-analyses of odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were performed for all-cause mortality and ICU admission.

RESULTS

From the 26 studies that were included (3,373 patients, 76% males, median age 62.6 years), PH in COVID-19 patients was significantly associated with higher odds for all-cause mortality (26 studies; OR 3.89; 95% CI 2.85-5.31; p<0.001) and higher odds for ICU admission (six studies; OR 2.50; 95% CI 1.69-3.70; p<0.001). Meta-regression/subgroup analyses by patient demographics, comorbidities, or therapeutic regimens, and sensitivity analyses did not find any differences.

CONCLUSION

Evidence from observational studies indicates that PH in COVID-19 patients is associated with increased odds of mortality and ICU admission.

COVID-19 and Mortality in the Global Surgical Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

To date, no systematic review or meta-analysis has comprehensively estimated the risk of mortality by surgery type on an international scale. We aim to delineate the risk of mortality in patients with COVID-19 who undergo surgery.

METHODS

PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, OVID, the World Health Organization Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease, and Corona-Central databases were searched from December 2019 through January 2022. Studies providing data on mortality in patients undergoing surgery were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines for abstracting data were followed and performed independently by two reviewers. The main outcome was mortality in patients with COVID-19.

RESULTS

Of a total of 4023 studies identified, 46 studies with 80,015 patients met our inclusion criteria. The mean age was 67 y; 57% were male. Surgery types included general (14.9%), orthopedic (23.4%), vascular (6.4%), thoracic (10.6%), and urologic (8.5%). Patients undergoing surgery with COVID-19 elicited a nine-fold increased risk of mortality (relative risk [RR] 8.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.96-16.32) over those without COVID-19. In low-income and middle-income countries (RR: 16.04, 95% CI: 4.59-56.12), the mortality risk was twice as high compared to high-income countries (RR: 7.50, 95% CI: 4.30-13.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality risk in surgical patients with COVID-19 compared to those without is increased almost 10-fold. The risk was highest in low-income and middle-income countries compared to high-income countries, suggesting a disproportionate effect of the pandemic on resource-constrained regions.

Gas-exchange deficit and systemic hypoperfusion in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 young adult patients with pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Lung damage leading to gas-exchange deficit and sepsis leading to systemic hypoperfusion are well-known features of severe pneumonia. Although frequently described in COVID-19, their prognostic impact in COVID-19-related pneumonia versus COVID-19-unrelated pneumonia has never been compared. This study assesses fundamental gas-exchange and hemodynamic parameters and explores their prognostic impact in COVID-19 pneumonia and non-COVID-19 pneumonia.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated arterial pO2/FiO2, alveolar to arterial O2 gradient, shock index, and serum lactate in 126 COVID-19 pneumonia patients, aged 18-65, presenting to the emergency department with acute, non-hypercapnic respiratory failure. As a control group we identified 1:1 age-, sex-, and pO2/FiO2-matched COVID-19-urelated pneumonia patients. Univariate and multivariable predictors of 30-day survival were identified in both groups.

RESULTS

COVID-19 patients showed lower arterial serum lactate concentration (P<0.001) and shock index (P<0.001) values as compared to non-COVID-19 patients. While we did not observe differences in lactate concentration or in shock index values in deceased vs. surviving COVID-19 patients (P=0.7 and P=0.6, respectively), non-COVID-19 deceased patients showed significantly higher lactate and shock index than non-COVID-19 survivors (P<0.001 and P=0.03). The pO2/FiO2 was the most powerful determinant of survival by Cox regression multivariate analysis in COVID-19 patients (P=0.006), while it was lactate in non-COVID-19 patients (P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

As compared to COVID19-unrelated pneumonia, COVID-19 pneumonia outcome seems more strictly correlated to the extent of lung damage, rather than to the systemic circulatory and metabolic derangements typical of sepsis.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign Research Priorities 2023

OBJECTIVES

To identify research priorities in the management, epidemiology, outcome, and pathophysiology of sepsis and septic shock.

DESIGN

Shortly after publication of the most recent Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines, the Surviving Sepsis Research Committee, a multiprofessional group of 16 international experts representing the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Society of Critical Care Medicine, convened virtually and iteratively developed the article and recommendations, which represents an update from the 2018 Surviving Sepsis Campaign Research Priorities.

METHODS

Each task force member submitted five research questions on any sepsis-related subject. Committee members then independently ranked their top three priorities from the list generated. The highest rated clinical and basic science questions were developed into the current article.

RESULTS

A total of 81 questions were submitted. After merging similar questions, there were 34 clinical and ten basic science research questions submitted for voting. The five top clinical priorities were as follows: 1) what is the best strategy for screening and identification of patients with sepsis, and can predictive modeling assist in real-time recognition of sepsis? 2) what causes organ injury and dysfunction in sepsis, how should it be defined, and how can it be detected? 3) how should fluid resuscitation be individualized initially and beyond? 4) what is the best vasopressor approach for treating the different phases of septic shock? and 5) can a personalized/precision medicine approach identify optimal therapies to improve patient outcomes? The five top basic science priorities were as follows: 1) How can we improve animal models so that they more closely resemble sepsis in humans? 2) What outcome variables maximize correlations between human sepsis and animal models and are therefore most appropriate to use in both? 3) How does sepsis affect the brain, and how do sepsis-induced brain alterations contribute to organ dysfunction? How does sepsis affect interactions between neural, endocrine, and immune systems? 4) How does the microbiome affect sepsis pathobiology? 5) How do genetics and epigenetics influence the development of sepsis, the course of sepsis and the response to treatments for sepsis?

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge advances in multiple clinical domains have been incorporated in progressive iterations of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines, allowing for evidence-based recommendations for short- and long-term management of sepsis. However, the strength of existing evidence is modest with significant knowledge gaps and mortality from sepsis remains high. The priorities identified represent a roadmap for research in sepsis and septic shock.

Atypical Complications during the Course of COVID-19: A Comprehensive Review

COVID-19 is primarily a respiratory disease, but numerous studies have indicated the involvement of various organ systems during the course of illness. We conducted a comprehensive review of atypical complications of COVID-19 with their incidence range (IR) and their impact on hospitalization and mortality rates. We identified 97 studies, including 55 research articles and 42 case studies. We reviewed four major body organ systems for various types of atypical complications: (i) Gastro-intestinal (GI) and hepatobiliary system, e.g., bowel ischemia/infarction (IR: 1.49-83.87%), GI bleeding/hemorrhage (IR: 0.47-10.6%), hepatic ischemia (IR: 1.0-7.4%); (ii) Neurological system, e.g., acute ischemic stroke/cerebral venous sinus thrombosis/cerebral hemorrhage (IR: 0.5-90.9%), anosmia (IR: 4.9-79.6%), dysgeusia (IR: 2.8-83.38%), encephalopathy/encephalitis with or without fever and hypoxia (IR: 0.19-35.2%); (iii) Renal system, e.g., acute kidney injury (AKI)/acute renal failure (IR: 0.5-68.8%); (iv) Cardiovascular system, e.g., acute cardiac injury/non-coronary myocardial injury (IR: 7.2-55.56%), arrhythmia/ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (IR: 5.9-16.7%), and coagulopathy/venous thromboembolism (IR: 19-34.4%). This review encourages and informs healthcare practitioners to keenly monitor COVID-19 survivors for these atypical complications in all major organ systems and not only treat the respiratory symptoms of patients. Post-COVID effects should be monitored, and follow-up of patients should be performed on a regular basis to check for long-term complications.

Genetic Variations in the Human Angiotensin-ConvertingEnzyme 2 and Susceptibility to Coronavirus Disease-19

Background

Health and economies are both affected by the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) global pandemic. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is a polymorphic enzyme that is a part of the renin-angiotensin system, and it plays a crucial role in viral entry. Previous investigations and studies revealed that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and ACE2 have a considerable association. Recently, ACE2 variants have been described in human populations in association with cardiovascular and pulmonary conditions. In this study, genetic susceptibility to COVID-19 in different populations was investigated.

Methods and Results

We evaluated the identified variants based on the predictive performance of 5 deleteriousness-scoring methods and the 2015 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) guidelines. The results indicated 299 variants within the ACE2 gene. The variants were analyzed by different in-silico analysis tools to assess their functional effects. Ultimately, 5 more deleterious variants were found in the ACE2 gene.

Conclusions

Collecting more information about the variations in binding affinity between SARS-CoV-2 and host-cell receptors due to ACE2 variants leads to progress in treatment strategies for COVID-19. The evidence accumulated in this study showed that ACE2 variants in different populations may be associated with the genetic susceptibility, symptoms, and outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Mechanical Power Delivered by Noninvasive Ventilation Contributes to Physio-Anatomical and Clinical Responses to Early Versus Late Proning in COVID-19 Pneumonia

OBJECTIVES

To study: 1) the effect of prone position (PP) on noninvasive ventilation (NIV)-delivered mechanical power (MP) and 2) the impact of MP on physio-anatomical and clinical responses to early versus late PP in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia.

DESIGN

Nonrandomized trial with inverse probability of treatment weighted-matched groups.

SETTING

HUMANITAS Gradenigo Sub-ICU.

PATIENTS

One hundred thirty-eight SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia patients with moderate-to-severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (Pa o2 /F io2 ratio < 200 mm Hg) receiving NIV from September 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021 (Ethics approval: ISRCTN23016116).

INTERVENTIONS

Early PP or late PP or supine position.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Respiratory parameters were hourly recorded. Time-weighted average MP values were calculated for each ventilatory session. Gas exchange parameters and ventilatory ratio (VR) were measured 1 hour after each postural change. Lung ultrasonographic scores and circulating biomarkers were assessed daily. MP delivered during the initial 24 hours of NIV (MP [first 24 hr]) was the primary exposure variable. Primary outcomes: 28-day endotracheal intubation and death. Secondary outcomes: oxygen-response, C o2 -response, ultrasonographic, and systemic inflammatory biomarker responses after 24 hours of NIV. Fifty-eight patients received early PP + NIV, 26 late PP + NIV, and 54 supine NIV. Early PP group had lower 28-day intubation and death than late PP (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% CI, 0.19-0.69 and HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.07-0.67, respectively) and supine group. In Cox multivariate analysis, (MP [first 24 hr]) predicted 28-day intubation (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.25-2.09; p = 0.009) and death (HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.19-1.91; p = 0.007). Compared with supine position, PP was associated with a 35% MP reduction. VR, ultrasonographic scores, and inflammatory biomarkers improved after 24 hours of NIV in the early PP, but not in late PP or supine group. A MP (first 24 hr) greater than or equal to 17.9 J/min was associated with 28-day death (area under the curve, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.88-0.96; p < 0.001); cumulative hours of MP greater than or equal to 17.9 J/min delivered before PP initiation attenuated VR, ultrasonographic, and biomarker responses to PP.

CONCLUSIONS

MP delivered by NIV during initial 24 hours predicts clinical outcomes. PP curtails MP, but cumulative hours of NIV with MP greater than or equal to 17.9 J/min delivered before PP initiation attenuate the benefits of PP.

Early posthospitalization recovery after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in survivors of COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine the influence of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) on outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 during the first 120 days after hospital discharge.

METHODS

Five academic centers conducted a retrospective analysis of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 admitted during March through May 2020. Survivors had access to a multidisciplinary postintensive care recovery clinic. Physical, psychological, and cognitive deficits were measured using validated instruments and compared based on ECMO status.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty two mechanically ventilated patients were compared with 46 patients cannulated for venovenous ECMO. Patients receiving ECMO were younger and traveled farther but there was no significant difference in gender, race, or body mass index. ECMO patients were mechanically ventilated for longer durations (median, 26 days [interquartile range, 19.5-41 days] vs 13 days [interquartile range, 7-20 days]) and were more likely to receive inhaled pulmonary vasodilators, neuromuscular blockade, investigational COVID-19 therapies, blood transfusions, and inotropes. Patients receiving ECMO experienced greater bleeding and clotting events (P < .01). However, survival at discharge was similar (69.6% vs 70.6%). Of the 217 survivors, 65.0% had documented follow-up within 120 days. Overall, 95.5% were residing at home, 25.7% had returned to work or usual activity, and 23.1% were still using supplemental oxygen; these rates did not differ significantly based on ECMO status. Rates of physical, psychological, and cognitive deficits were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that COVID-19 survivors experience significant physical, psychological, and cognitive deficits following intensive care unit admission. Despite a more complex critical illness course, longer average duration of mechanical ventilation, and longer average length of stay, patients treated with venovenous ECMO had similar survival at discharge and outcomes within 120 days of discharge.

Vaccination is the most effective and best way to avoid the disease of COVID-19

Most of the vaccines that are effective against SARS-CoV-2 have used the following functional strategies: inactivated viruses, live attenuated viruses, viral vector-based vaccines, subunit vaccines, recombinant proteins, and DNA/RNA vaccines. Among the vaccines that stimulate the host's immune system with the help of DNA are: undergoing Phase 2/3 trials including INO-4800 (International Vaccine Institute; Inovio Pharmaceuticals), Symvivo, Canada-COVID19 (AnGes, Inc.); GX-19 (Genexine, Inc.). BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines were made by BioNTech/Pfizer/Fosun Pharma group and Moderna/NIAID group, respectively, which are considered as types of RNA vaccines. Vaccines that are based on the viral vector are AstraZeneca, Sputonium, and Johnson-Jensen. Among the inactive viral vaccines, the following can be mentioned: CoronaVac (Sinovac) WIBP vaccine (Wuhan Institute of Biological Products, Sinopharm), BBIBPCorV (Beijing Institute of Biological Products, Sinopharm), BBV152/Covaxin (Bharat Biotech, ICMR, National Institute of Virology) And among the protein-based/subunit vaccines, the following can be counted: NVX-CoV2373: (Novavax); SCB-2019 vaccine (Clover Biopharmaceuticals AUS Pty Ltd.); Covax-19 (GeneCure Biotechnologies; Vaxine Pty Ltd.) mRNA vaccines, viral vector vaccines, and protein subunit vaccines cannot cause disease because these vaccines stimulate the immune system to produce antibodies against virus proteins instead of the virus itself (or its antigen). MRNA vaccines increase SARS-CoV-2 proteins and ultimately stimulate the production of T and B lymphocytes. The epidemic of HCoVs and their destructive and harmful effects on life has caused the scientific community to seek the production of an effective and efficient vaccine before its catastrophic release. We all need to know that none of us will be healed until the other is healed. The purpose of this review article is to present a selection of existing knowledge in the field of fighting and preventing the coronavirus.

A Comparison of the Adverse Effects and Utility of Different Monoclonal Antibodies for SARS-CoV-2: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Introduction Multiple monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatments have been developed to combat the growing number of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) strains. These treatments have been shown to be effective in reducing the risk of hospitalization and death from SARS-CoV-2 infection with a low risk of adverse effects; however, more data is required to evaluate the comparative efficacy of mAbs. The primary objective of this study is to describe the hospitalization rate, length of stay (LOS), and mortality rate in SARS-CoV-2 patients treated with four different mAb treatments, including bamlanivimab plus etesevimab, casirivimab plus imdevimab, sotrovimab, and bebtelovimab. Methods A retrospective chart review and prospective phone surveys of SARS-CoV-2 patients treated with mAbs in a 400-bed tertiary, suburban medical center were conducted between June 2020 and April 2022. Eligibility criteria for mAbs included non-hospitalized patients over the age of 18 with less than 10 days of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms and no oxygen requirement on emergency department (ED) admission. Data were collected from the retrospective chart review and subjective patient surveys. A chi-squared test was used. Significance was assessed at p < 0.05. Results The study population included 3249 patients, with 1537 males and 1712 females and an average age of 62.48 ± 17.54 years. Five hundred forty-two patients received bamlanivimab plus etesevimab; 849 received bebtelovimab; 1577 received casirivimab plus imdevimab; and 281 received sotrovimab. The overall hospitalization rate was 1.0%, and the mortality rate was 0.2% following mAb treatment. The hospitalization rate was greatest among patients administered Sotrovimab (2.1%) and least among patients administered Bebtelovimab (0.1%) (p = 0.010). 2.4% of patients who were discharged from the ED after receiving one of the four mAbs returned within 30 days with SARS-CoV-2 symptoms. The average length of stay was 4.75 ± 4.56 days, with no significant differences between the mAbs. The provider-reported adverse event rate was 2.2%, with significant differences in adverse event rates between mAbs. Bamlanivimab-etesevimab was associated with the highest adverse event rate (4.6%), and sotrovimab was associated with the lowest adverse event rate (1.4%) (p < 0.001). Conclusion This study shows a low hospitalization and mortality rate following mAb infusion in patients with mild and moderate COVID-19. However, there were significant differences in hospitalization and mortality among patients receiving each of the four mAb treatments. There was a high degree of patient-reported symptom improvement, and adverse reactions were reported in only 2.2% of patients with no severe reactions. Multiple monoclonal antibody treatments are not effective as monotherapy; however, this study shows the potential benefits of including a mAb infusion as part of a SARS-CoV-2 treatment plan.

COVID-19 of differing severity: from bulk to single-cell expression data analysis

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is raging worldwide and causes an immense disease burden. Despite this, the biomarkers and targeting drugs of COVID-19 of differing severity remain largely unknown. Based on the GSE164805 dataset, we identified modules most critical for mild COVID-19 (mCOVID-19) and severe COVID-19 (sCOVID-19) through WGCNA, respectively. We subsequently constructed a protein-protein interaction network, and detected 16 hub genes for mCOVID-19 and 10 hub genes for sCOVID-19, followed by the prediction of upstream transcription factors (TFs) and kinases. The enrichment analysis then showed downregulation of TNFA signaling via NFKB for mCOVID-19, as well as downregulation of MYC targets V1 for sCOVID-19. Infiltration degrees of many immune cells, such as macrophages, were also sharply different between mCOVID-19 and sCOVID-19 samples. Predicted protein targeting drugs with the highest scores nearly all belong to naturally derived or synthetic glucocorticoids. For the two single-cell RNA-seq datasets, we explored the expression distribution of hub genes for mCOVID-19/sCOVID-19 in each cell type. The expression levels of PRKCA, MCM5, TYMS, RBBP4, BCL6, FLOT1, KDM6B, and TLR2 were found to be cell-type-specific. Furthermore, the expression levels of 10 hub genes for mCOVID-19 were significantly upregulated in PBMCs between eight healthy controls and eight mCOVID-19 patients at our institution. Collectively, we detected critical modules, pathways, TFs, kinases, immune cells, targeting drugs, hub genes, and their expression distributions in different cell types that may involve the pathogenesis of COVID-19 of differing severity, which may propel earlier diagnosis and more effective treatment of this intractable disease in the future.

Mechanical power normalized to aerated lung predicts noninvasive ventilation failure and death and contributes to the benefits of proning in COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure

Background

Concern exists that noninvasive ventilation (NIV) may promote ventilation-induced lung injury(VILI) and worsen outcome in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). Different individual ventilatory variables have been proposed to predict clinical outcomes, with inconsistent results.Mechanical power (MP), a measure of the energy transfer rate from the ventilator to the respiratory system during mechanical ventilation, might provide solutions for this issue in the framework of predictive, preventive and personalized medicine (PPPM). We explored (1) the impact of ventilator-delivered MP normalized to well-aerated lung (MP_WAL) on physio-anatomical and clinical responses to NIV in COVID-19-related AHRF and (2) the effect of prone position(PP) on MP_WAL.

Methods

We analyzed 216 noninvasively ventilated COVID-19 patients (108 patients receiving PP + NIV and 108 propensity score-matched patients receiving supine NIV) with moderate-to-severe(paO2/FiO2 ratio < 200) AHRF enrolled in the PRO-NIV controlled non-randomized study (ISRCTN23016116).Quantification of differentially aerated lung volumes by lung ultrasonography (LUS) was validated against CT scans. Respiratory parameters were hourly recorded, ABG were performed 1 h after each postural change. Time-weighed average values of ventilatory variables, including MP_WAL, and gas exchange parameters (paO2/FiO2 ratio, dead space indices) were calculated for each ventilatory session. LUS and circulating biomarkers were assessed daily.

Results

Compared with supine position, PP was associated with a 34% MP_WAL reduction, attributable largely to an absolute MP reduction and secondly to an enhanced lung reaeration.Patients receiving a high MP_WAL during the 1^st 24 h of NIV [MP_WAL(day 1)] had higher 28-d NIV failure (HR = 4.33,95%CI:3.09 - 5.98) and death (HR = 5.17,95%CI: 3.01 - 7.35) risks than those receiving a low MP_WAL(day 1).In Cox multivariate analyses, MP_WAL(day 1) remained independently associated with 28-d NIV failure (HR = 1.68,95%CI:1.15-2.41) and death (HR = 1.69,95%CI:1.22-2.32).MP_WAL(day 1) outperformed other power measures and ventilatory variables as predictor of 28-d NIV failure (AUROC = 0.89;95%CI:0.85-0.93) and death (AUROC = 0.89;95%CI:0.85-0.94).MP_WAL(day 1) predicted also gas exchange, ultrasonographic and inflammatory biomarker responses, as markers of VILI, on linear multivariate analysis.

Conclusions

In the framework of PPPM, early bedside MP_WAL calculation may provide added value to predict response to NIV and guide subsequent therapeutic choices i.e. prone position adoption during NIV or upgrading to invasive ventilation, to reduce hazardous MP_WAL delivery, prevent VILI progression and improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19-related AHRF.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13167-023-00325-5.

Insight into the liver dysfunction in COVID-19 patients: Molecular mechanisms and possible therapeutic strategies

As of June 2022, more than 530 million people worldwide have become ill with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although COVID-19 is most commonly associated with respiratory distress (severe acute respiratory syndrome), meta-analysis have indicated that liver dysfunction also occurs in patients with severe symptoms. Current studies revealed distinctive patterning in the receptors on the hepatic cells that helps in viral invasion through the expression of angiotensin-converting enzyme receptors. It has also been reported that in some patients with COVID-19, therapeutic strategies, including repurposed drugs (mitifovir, lopinavir/ritonavir, tocilizumab, etc.) triggered liver injury and cholestatic toxicity. Several proven indicators support cytokine storm-induced hepatic damage. Because there are 1.5 billion patients with chronic liver disease worldwide, it becomes imperative to critically evaluate the molecular mechanisms concerning hepatotropism of COVID-19 and identify new potential therapeutics. This review also designated a comprehensive outlook of comorbidities and the impact of lifestyle and genetics in managing patients with COVID-19.

Genetic conservation across SARS-CoV-2 non-structural proteins - Insights into possible targets for treatment of future viral outbreaks

The majority of SARS-CoV-2 therapeutic development work has focussed on targeting the spike protein, viral polymerase and proteases. As the pandemic progressed, many studies reported that these proteins are prone to high levels of mutation and can become drug resistant. Thus, it is necessary to not only target other viral proteins such as the non-structural proteins (NSPs) but to also target the most conserved residues of these proteins. In order to understand the level of conservation among these viruses, in this review, we have focussed on the conservation across RNA viruses, conservation across the coronaviruses and then narrowed our focus to conservation of NSPs across coronaviruses. We have also discussed the various treatment options for SARS-CoV-2 infection. A synergistic melding of bioinformatics, computer-aided drug-design and in vitro/vivo studies can feed into better understanding of the virus and therefore help in the development of small molecule inhibitors against the viral proteins.

Harnessing the Power of Venomous Animal-Derived Toxins against COVID-19

Animal-derived venoms are complex mixtures of toxins triggering important biological effects during envenomings. Although venom-derived toxins are known for their potential of causing harm to victims, toxins can also act as pharmacological agents. During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was observed an increase in in-depth studies on antiviral agents, and since, to date, there has been no completely effective drug against the global disease. This review explores the crosstalk of animal toxins and COVID-19, aiming to map potential therapeutic agents derived from venoms (e.g., bees, snakes, scorpions, etc.) targeting COVID-19.

Low Interferon-γ Levels in Cord and Peripheral Blood of Pregnant Women Infected with SARS-CoV-2

COVID-19 is characterized by the immune system's overreaction resulting in a 'cytokine storm', consisting in a massive release of cytokine into the bloodstream, leading to local and systemic inflammatory response. This clinical picture is further complicated in case of infection of patients with a peculiar immunological status, such as pregnancy. In this paper, we focused on Interferon-γ, which plays a pivotal immunomodulatory role in normal pregnancy and fetal development, as well as in defense against pathogens. In this study, we compared the levels of Interferon-γ and the Interferon autoantibodies of the peripheral and cord blood of pregnant women with confirmed mild COVID-19 and healthy pregnant women. The Interferon-γ was significantly lower both in the peripheral and cord blood of SARS-CoV-2-positive mothers, suggesting that infection can affect the fetal microenvironment even without severe maternal symptoms. In conclusion, further studies are needed to clarify whether lower levels of Interferon-γ due to SARS-CoV-2 infection affect the development or infection susceptibility of infants born to SARS-CoV-2-infected mothers.

Effectiveness of early awake self proning strategy in non-intubated patients with COVID-19 hypoxemia: an open-labelled randomized clinical trial from Jodhpur, India

Awake self-proning is being used widely as respiratory support in COVID-19 hypoxemia, in resource-limited settings. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of early awake self-proning in preventing mortality and the need for intubation in adults with moderate COVID-19 hypoxemia. In this randomized clinical trial with inten-tion-to-treat analysis, we enrolled eligible adults with COVID-19 hypoxemia (SpO2 <94%), requiring supplemental oxygen via nasal prongs or facemask from a tertiary-care setting in Jodhpur, India between June 15 to December 24, 2020. Awake proning comprised of 4-hour cycles with prone position maintained 2 h per cycle. The control group did not maintain any specific position. All participants received standard care. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortal-ity and requirement for mechanical ventilation. Of 502 participants included, mean (SD) age was 59.7 (12.7) years with 124 women (24.6%); 257 were randomized to awake-proning, 245 to control group and all 502 were included for follow-up mortality analysis. Mortality at follow-up was 16.3% in the awake-prone and 15.1% in the control group [OR:1.10 (0.68-1.78), p=0.703). The requirement of mechanical ventilation was 10% in both groups (p=0.974). Survival time (in days) was not significantly different between the groups [Log-rank test, HR: 1.08 (95% CI, 0.70-1.68), p=0.726]. Likewise, time to intubation was comparable (Log-rank test, HR: 0.93 (95% CI, 0.56-1.70), p=0.974). Hence, awake self-proning did not improve survival or requirement of mechanical-ventilation in non-intubated patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 hypox-emia. Trial Registration: Clinical trial registry of India, ID: CTRI/2020/06/025804.   The trial is accessible from WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) at https://trialsearch.who.int ***************************************************************   *Appendix Authors list  Deepak Kumar1, Gopal Krishna Bohra1, Nishant Kumar Chauhan2, Nikhil Kothari3, Vijaya Lakshmi Nag4 Sanjeev Misra5  1Department of Internal Medicine; 2Department of Pulmonary Medicine; 3Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care; 4Department of Microbiology; 5Department of Surgical Oncology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, India.

Providing respiratory and ventilation care in the face of shifting evidence: current opinion in critical care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the clinical problem and noninvasive treatments of hypoxemia in critically-ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia and describe recent advances in evidence supporting bedside decision making.

RECENT FINDINGS

High-flow nasal oxygen and noninvasive ventilation, along with awake prone positioning are potentially helpful therapies for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. High-flow nasal oxygen therapy has been widely implemented as a form of oxygen support supported by prepandemic randomized controlled trials showing possible benefit over noninvasive ventilation. Given the sheer volume of patients, noninvasive ventilation was often required, and based on a well conducted randomized controlled trial there was a developing role for helmet-interface noninvasive. Coupled with noninvasive supports, the use of awake prone positioning demonstrated physiological benefits, but randomized controlled trial data did not demonstrate clear outcome superiority.

SUMMARY

The use of noninvasive oxygen strategies and our understanding of the proposed mechanisms are evolving. Variability in patient severity and physiology may dictate a personalized approach to care. High-flow nasal oxygen may be paired with awake and spontaneously breathing prone-positioning to optimize oxygen and lung mechanics but requires further insight before widely applying to clinical practice.

Evaluation of the Prevalence of Barotrauma and Affecting Factors in Patients with COVID-19 during Follow-Up in the Intermediate Care Unit

It is known that pneumothorax (PX) and pneumomediastinum (PM) develop due to COVID-19 disease. The objective of our study was to determine the prevalence of PX/PM due to COVID-19 in the intermediate intensive care unit (IMCU) and to evaluate the factors causing barotrauma and also the clinical outcomes of these patients. A total of 283 non-intubated patients with COVID-19 pneumonia followed up in the IMCU in a 1-year period were included in the study. The patients were classified as group 1 (having barotrauma) and group 2 (without barotrauma). The rate of barotrauma was 8.1% (n = 23, group 1). PX developed on the right hemithorax in 12 (70.6%) patients. Group 1 had statistically significantly higher 28-day mortality rates compared with group 2 (p = 0.014). The eosinophil and d-dimer levels of the patients in group 1 were higher, while C-reactive protein (CRP), fibrinogen, and albumin levels were lower than Group 2 (p < 0.001, p = 0.017, p = 0.001, p < 0.001), and p < 0.001, respectively). The similar rates of NIMV administration in our study groups support that barotrauma is not the only mechanism in the development of PX/PM. The findings of high blood eosinophil count and low blood levels of CRP, albumin, and fibrinogen in the barotrauma group of our study might be a pathfinder for future studies.

A disturbed balance between blood complement protective factors (FH, ApoE) and common pathway effectors (C5a, TCC) in acute COVID-19 and during convalesce

A complement effect on homeostasis during infection is determined by both cytotoxic (activate complement component 5 (C5a) terminal cytotoxic complex (TCC)), and cytoprotective elements (complement factor H (FH), as well as apolipoprotein E (ApoE)). Here, we investigated the gap in knowledge in their blood milieu during SARS-CoV-2 infection with respect to the viral burden, level of tissue necrosis, and immunological response. 101 patients hospitalized with a PCR-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 had blood collected at H1 (48 h), H2 (3-4 Days), H3 (5-7 days), H4 (more than 7 days up to 93 days). Pre-existing conditions, treatment, the incidence of cerebrovascular events (CVA), a history of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), and mortality was collected using electronic medical records. Plasma C5a, TCC, FH, and ApoE were considered as a complement milieu. Tissue necrosis (HMGB1, RAGE), non-specific inflammatory responses (IL-6, C-reactive protein), overall viral burden (SARS-CoV-2 spike protein), and specific immune responses (IgG, IgA, IgM directed αS- & N-proteins) were assessed simultaneously. C5a remained elevated across all time points, with the peak at 5-7 days. Studied elements of complement coalesced around three clusters: #0 (↑↑↑C5a, ↑↑TCC, ↓↓ApoE), #1 ↑C5a, ↑TCC, ↑↑↑FH); #2 (↑C5a, ↑TCC, ↑FH, ↑↑↑ApoE). The decline in FH and ApoE was a predictor of death, while TCC and C5a correlated with patient length of stay, APACHE, and CRP. Increased levels of C5a (Δ = 122.64; p = 0.0294; data not shown) and diminished levels of FH (Δ = 836,969; p = 0.0285; data not shown) co-existed with CVA incidence. C5a correlated storngly with blood RAGE and HMGB1, but not with viral load and immunological responsiveness. Remdesivir positively affected FH preservation, while convalescent plasma treatment elevated C5a levels. Three clusters of complement activation demonstrated a various milieu of ApoE & FH vs C5a & TCC in COVID-19 patients. Complement activation is linked to increased necrosis markers but not to viral burden or immune system response.

Assessment of Tocilizumab (Humanized Monoclonal Antibody) for Therapeutic Efficacy and Clinical Safety in Patients with Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19)

Background and objectives: COVID-19 patients exhibit a broad range of manifestations, presenting with a flu-like respiratory tract infection that can advance to a systemic and severe disease characterized by pneumonia, pulmonary edema, severe damage to the airways, and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS, causing fatality in 70% of COVID-19 cases). A ‘cytokine storm’ profile is found in most severely influenced COVID-19 patients. The treatment protocol of the disease also includes tocilizumab, which is a humanized monoclonal antibody used to treat autoimmune and inflammatory conditions. This study was designed (1) to assess the role of tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients regarding therapeutic efficacy through evaluation of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) resolution and anticoagulant effect, analyzing clinical safety via monitoring of associated adverse effects profile; and (2) to compare the clinical safety and therapeutic efficacy of institutional treatment regimen (alone) versus tocilizumab added to an institutional treatment module in COVID-19 patients. Materials and Methods: In this study, the endpoints parametric assessment of severely diseased patients of COVID-19 was performed (total n = 172, control group (institutional protocol treatment provided), n = 101 and test group (tocilizumab provided), n = 71) at the Khyber Teaching Institution, MTI, Peshawar. The assessments were compared using non-parametric analyses at baseline and after a follow-up of 12−18 days until the patient discharged or expired. Results: Results of the study revealed an insignificant difference among the control vs. test group in resolving inflammatory parameters (C-reactive protein (CRP) 21.30 vs. 50.07; p = 0.470, ferritin 482.9 vs. 211.5; p = 0.612, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) 29.12 vs.18.8; p = 0.0863, and D-dimer 464 vs.164.4; p = 0.131). However, a statistically significant difference was found between the control group and test group regarding coagulation parameters (international normalized ratio (INR) 0.12 vs. −0.07; p ≤ 0.001; activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) 0.42 vs. −1.16; p ≤ 0.001; prothrombin time (PT) 0.31 vs. −0.96; p ≤ 0.001; platelet count −12.34 vs. −1.47; p = 0.012) and clinical survival rate (89.10 vs. 90.14; p < 0.001). Furthermore, there was significantly higher infection rates and raised alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) associated with the tocilizumab group as compared to those receiving institutional treatment (bacterial infections: 0.99% vs. 15.49%; p ≤ 0.01, ALT: 3.96% vs. 28.16%; p ≤ 0.01, ALP: 1.98% vs. 22.53%; p ≤ 0.01). Conclusions: From this study, it was concluded that tocilizumab can be a better drug of choice in terms of efficacy, particularly in resolving coagulopathy in severe COVID-19 patients.

Potential Cell-Based and Cell-Free Therapy for Patients with COVID-19

Since it was first reported, the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains an unresolved puzzle for biomedical researchers in different fields. Various treatments, drugs, and interventions were explored as treatments for COVID. Nevertheless, there are no standard and effective therapeutic measures. Meanwhile, mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) therapy offers a new approach with minimal side effects. MSCs and MSC-based products possess several biological properties that potentially alleviate COVID-19 symptoms. Generally, there are three classifications of stem cell therapy: cell-based therapy, tissue engineering, and cell-free therapy. This review discusses the MSC-based and cell-free therapies for patients with COVID-19, their potential mechanisms of action, and clinical trials related to these therapies. Cell-based therapies involve the direct use and injection of MSCs into the target tissue or organ. On the other hand, cell-free therapy uses secreted products from cells as the primary material. Cell-free therapy materials can comprise cell secretomes and extracellular vesicles. Each therapeutic approach possesses different benefits and various risks. A better understanding of MSC-based and cell-free therapies is essential for supporting the development of safe and effective COVID-19 therapy.

When to Use Antibiotics in COVID-19: A Proposal Based on Questions

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected millions of people, including hundreds of deaths. The search for adequate treatments and interventions that influence poor prognostic factors and reduce mortality has led to excessive use of antibiotics based on the possible existence of bacterial co-infection. However, there is no evidence to justify the systematic use of antimicrobials in COVID-19. The recommendations seek to provide knowledge regarding treatment; standardizing a management algorithm requires validation in clinical trials and studies of greater methodological rigor.

Biological Properties of SARS-CoV-2 Variants: Epidemiological Impact and Clinical Consequences

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a virus that belongs to the coronavirus family and is the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). As of May 2022, it had caused more than 500 million infections and more than 6 million deaths worldwide. Several vaccines have been produced and tested over the last two years. The SARS-CoV-2 virus, on the other hand, has mutated over time, resulting in genetic variation in the population of circulating variants during the COVID-19 pandemic. It has also shown immune-evading characteristics, suggesting that vaccinations against these variants could be potentially ineffective. The purpose of this review article is to investigate the key variants of concern (VOCs) and mutations of the virus driving the current pandemic, as well as to explore the transmission rates of SARS-CoV-2 VOCs in relation to epidemiological factors and to compare the virus's transmission rate to that of prior coronaviruses. We examined and provided key information on SARS-CoV-2 VOCs in this study, including their transmissibility, infectivity rate, disease severity, affinity for angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors, viral load, reproduction number, vaccination effectiveness, and vaccine breakthrough.

What is the Hidden Biological Mechanism Underlying the Possible SARS-CoV-2 Vertical Transmission? A Mini Review

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS- CoV-2) represents an emerging infection that is spreading around the world. Among susceptible patients, pregnant women are more likely to develop serious complications and negative obstetric outcomes. Vertical transmission constitutes a debating issue which has not been completely understood. This review aims at describing the currently available evidence on SARS-CoV2 vertical transmission. We carried out a computerized literature search in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, selecting the most relevant studies on vertical transmission from the outbreak onset until February 2022. The analysis of the available literature identifies the presence of SARS-CoV2 genome in different biological specimens, confirming the hypothesis that a transplacental infection can occur. In spite of the high number of infected people around the world, mother-to-child infections have been infrequently reported but it can be observed under certain biologic conditions. A deep knowledge of the underlying mechanisms of SARS-CoV2 vertical transmission is of paramount importance for planning an adequate management for the affected mothers and newborns.

A novel model to predict severe COVID-19 and mortality using an artificial intelligence algorithm to interpret chest X-Rays and clinical variables

Background

Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) could develop severe disease requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). This article presents a novel method that predicts whether a patient will need admission to the ICU and assesses the risk of in-hospital mortality by training a deep-learning model that combines a set of clinical variables and features in chest radiographs.

Methods

This was a prospective diagnostic test study. Patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection between March 2020 and January 2021 were included. This study was designed to build predictive models obtained by training convolutional neural networks for chest radiograph images using an artificial intelligence (AI) tool and a random forest analysis to identify critical clinical variables. Then, both architectures were connected and fine-tuned to provide combined models.

Results

2552 patients were included in the clinical cohort. The variables independently associated with ICU admission were age, fraction of inspired oxygen (F_iO2) on admission, dyspnoea on admission and obesity. Moreover, the variables associated with hospital mortality were age, F_iO2 on admission and dyspnoea. When implementing the AI model to interpret the chest radiographs and the clinical variables identified by random forest, we developed a model that accurately predicts ICU admission (area under the curve (AUC) 0.92±0.04) and hospital mortality (AUC 0.81±0.06) in patients with confirmed COVID-19.

Conclusions

This automated chest radiograph interpretation algorithm, along with clinical variables, is a reliable alternative to identify patients at risk of developing severe COVID-19 who might require admission to the ICU.

In patients with #COVID19, an automated chest radiograph interpretation algorithm, along with clinical variables, is a reliable alternative to identify patients at risk of developing severe COVID-19, who might require admission to the intensive care unithttps://bit.ly/3Kf61TK

Clinical characteristics, systemic complications, and in-hospital outcomes for patients with COVID-19 in Latin America. LIVEN-Covid-19 study: A prospective, multicenter, multinational, cohort study

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic has spread worldwide, and almost 396 million people have been infected around the globe. Latin American countries have been deeply affected, and there is a lack of data in this regard. This study aims to identify the clinical characteristics, in-hospital outcomes, and factors associated with ICU admission due to COVID-19. Furthermore, to describe the functional status of patients at hospital discharge after the acute episode of COVID-19.

Material and methods

This was a prospective, multicenter, multinational observational cohort study of subjects admitted to 22 hospitals within Latin America. Data were collected prospectively. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize patients, and multivariate regression was carried out to identify factors associated with severe COVID-19.

Results

A total of 3008 patients were included in the study. A total of 64.3% of patients had severe COVID-19 and were admitted to the ICU. Patients admitted to the ICU had a higher mean (SD) 4C score (10 [3] vs. 7 [3)], p<0.001). The risk factors independently associated with progression to ICU admission were age, shortness of breath, and obesity. In-hospital mortality was 24.1%, whereas the ICU mortality rate was 35.1%. Most patients had equal self-care ability at discharge 43.8%; however, ICU patients had worse self-care ability at hospital discharge (25.7% [497/1934] vs. 3.7% [40/1074], p<0.001).

Conclusions

This study confirms that patients with SARS CoV-2 in the Latin American population had a lower mortality rate than previously reported. Systemic complications are frequent in patients admitted to the ICU due to COVID-19, as previously described in high-income countries.

Prognostic factors and outcomes in COVID-19 patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation: a retrospective cohort study

Background:

Mechanical ventilation (MV) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients is associated with high mortality and extensive resource utilization. The aim of this study was to investigate prognostic factors and outcomes associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) in COVID-19 patients.

Methods:

This was a retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 patients requiring invasive MV who were hospitalized between 1 March 2020 and 30 June 2021 in the intensive care units (ICUs) of three referral hospitals belonging to a single health system. Data were extracted from electronic health records. PMV was defined as  > 17 days of MV.

Results:

Of 355 patients studied, 86 (24%) required PMV. PMV patients had lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio, higher PCO2, and higher plateau and driving pressures during the first 2 weeks of MV than their short MV (SMV; ⩽ 17 days) counterparts. PMV patients received more proning, neuromuscular blockade, and tracheostomy, had longer ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), and required discharge to an inpatient rehabilitation facility more frequently (all p < 0.001). Overall 30-day mortality was 43.9%, with no statistically significant difference between PMV and SMV groups. In PMV patients, smoking, Charlson comorbidity index > 6, and week 2 PaO2/FiO2 ratio < 150 and plateau pressure ⩾ 30 were positively associated with 30-day mortality. In a multivariate model, results were directionally consistent with the univariate analysis but did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusion:

PMV is commonly required in COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure. Despite the higher need for critical care interventions and LOS, more than half of the PMV cohort survived to hospital discharge. Higher PaO2/FiO2 ratio, lower plateau pressure, and fewer comorbidities appear to be associated with survival in this group.

Drug interaction risk between cardioprotective drugs and drugs used in treatment of COVID-19: A evidence-based review from six databases

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

This Review discusses the potential drug interactions risk between Drugs used in treating COVID-19 infection and Drugs used in treating comorbid conditions (Diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular illness).

METHOD

Six Databases were consulted a) Micromedex drug interaction b) Medicine complete.com c) Liverpool Drug Interaction Group for COVID-19 therapies d) Epocrates e) Medscape f) drugs.com. To acquire information on possible interaction effects between drugs used for COVID-19 treatment such as atazanavir, lopinavir/ritonavir, remdesivir, molnupiravir, paxlovid(nirmatrelvir/ritonavir), dexamethasone, azithromycin, chloroquine, and FDA approved monoclonal antibodies with primarily used antidiabetic drugs, antihypertensive drugs, and drugs acting on the cardiovascular system.

RESULTS

Potential interaction effects such as worsening glycemic control were prominent with lopinavir/ritonavir and the primarily used antidiabetic drugs, which needs dosage adjustment and close monitoring. The risk of hypotension and irregular heart rhythm is the potential interaction effects with concomitant use of drugs for COVID-19 treatment and antihypertensive drugs. Caution is advised with drugs such as atazanavir and lopinavir/ritonavir when concomitantly used in treating comorbid conditions. Drugs such as remdesivir, molnupiravir, and some monoclonal antibodies are safer in use with drugs used in treating the comorbid condition.

CONCLUSIONS

Drug-drug interaction remains one of the significant factors in altering the therapeutic efficacy. Drugs used to manage comorbid conditions may influence the COVID-19 treatment with potential interaction effects. These enhance the view on safety concerns about the drug interaction risk in managing COVID-19 infection in patients with comorbid conditions. This primary evidence may concern preventing potential or unintentional effects resulting from Drug-drug interaction, Improving patient quality of life.

Dexamethasone as risk-factor for ICU-acquired respiratory tract infections in severe COVID-19

PURPOSE

Dexamethasone is the only drug that has consistently reduced mortality in patients with COVID-19, especially in patients needing oxygen or invasive mechanical ventilation. However, there is a growing concern about the relation of dexamethasone with the unprecedented rates of ICU-acquired respiratory tract infections (ICU-RTI) observed in patients with severe COVID-19.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, prospective cohort study; conducted in ten countries in Latin America and Europe. We included patients older than 18 with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 requiring ICU admission. A multivariate logistic regression and propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted to determine the relation between dexamethasone treatment and ICU-RTI.

RESULTS

A total of 3777 patients were included. 2065 (54.7%) were treated with dexamethasone within the first 24 h of admission. After performing the PSM, patients treated with dexamethasone showed significantly higher proportions of VAP (282/1652 [17.1%] Vs. 218/1652 [13.2%], p = 0.014). Also, dexamethasone treatment was identified as an adjusted risk factor of ICU-RTI in the multivariate logistic regression model (OR 1.64; 95%CI: 1.37-1.97; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with dexamethasone for severe COVID-19 had a higher risk of developing ICU-acquired respiratory tract infections after adjusting for days of invasive mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, suggesting a cautious use of this treatment.

Pericardial Cytokine "Storm" in a COVID-19 Patient: the Confirmation of a Hypothesis

Novel Coronavirus Disease in most cases produces mild symptoms which resolve after a few days. Some authors hypothesized that SARS-CoV-2 infection could trigger excessive cytokine production leading to a severe multi-organ disease requiring intensive care admission. Respiratory and neurological symptoms are the most frequently reported manifestation of the disease. Indeed, cardiac involvement is reported mostly as a part of a systemic disease. Few isolated cardiac manifestations of COVID-19 infection have been described. We report herein a case of SARS-CoV-2 related severe isolated pericardial involvement requiring ICU admission due to cardiac tamponade needing urgent drainage. Analysis of pericardial fluid from drainage demonstrated a higher cytokine concentration than blood values. Other causes of pericardial disease, such as autoimmunity, bacterial or other than COVID-19 infection, neoplasms or acute myocardial infarction were also evaluated, but all tests confirmed negative results. The suspicion of isolated involvement of the pericardium was therefore demonstrated by the analysis of cytokines which strongly support our hypothesis.

Clinical characteristics, risk factors and outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 registered in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium WHO clinical characterisation protocol: a prospective, multinational, multicentre, observational study

Due to the large number of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many were treated outside the traditional walls of the intensive care unit (ICU), and in many cases, by personnel who were not trained in critical care. The clinical characteristics and the relative impact of caring for severe COVID-19 patients outside the ICU is unknown. This was a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium World Health Organization COVID-19 platform. Severe COVID-19 patients were identified as those admitted to an ICU and/or those treated with one of the following treatments: invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal cannula, inotropes or vasopressors. A logistic generalised additive model was used to compare clinical outcomes among patients admitted or not to the ICU. A total of 40 440 patients from 43 countries and six continents were included in this analysis. Severe COVID-19 patients were frequently male (62.9%), older adults (median (interquartile range (IQR), 67 (55-78) years), and with at least one comorbidity (63.2%). The overall median (IQR) length of hospital stay was 10 (5-19) days and was longer in patients admitted to an ICU than in those who were cared for outside the ICU (12 (6-23) days versus 8 (4-15) days, p<0.0001). The 28-day fatality ratio was lower in ICU-admitted patients (30.7% (5797 out of 18 831) versus 39.0% (7532 out of 19 295), p<0.0001). Patients admitted to an ICU had a significantly lower probability of death than those who were not (adjusted OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.65-0.75; p<0.0001). Patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to an ICU had significantly lower 28-day fatality ratio than those cared for outside an ICU.

Awake prone positioning for COVID-19 acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure: a randomised, controlled, multinational, open-label meta-trial

BACKGROUND

Awake prone positioning has been reported to improve oxygenation for patients with COVID-19 in retrospective and observational studies, but whether it improves patient-centred outcomes is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of awake prone positioning to prevent intubation or death in patients with severe COVID-19 in a large-scale randomised trial.

METHODS

In this prospective, a priori set up and defined, collaborative meta-trial of six randomised controlled open-label superiority trials, adults who required respiratory support with high-flow nasal cannula for acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 were randomly assigned to awake prone positioning or standard care. Hospitals from six countries were involved: Canada, France, Ireland, Mexico, USA, Spain. Patients or their care providers were not masked to allocated treatment. The primary composite outcome was treatment failure, defined as the proportion of patients intubated or dying within 28 days of enrolment. The six trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04325906, NCT04347941, NCT04358939, NCT04395144, NCT04391140, and NCT04477655.

FINDINGS

Between April 2, 2020 and Jan 26, 2021, 1126 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to awake prone positioning (n=567) or standard care (n=559). 1121 patients (excluding five who withdrew from the study) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Treatment failure occurred in 223 (40%) of 564 patients assigned to awake prone positioning and in 257 (46%) of 557 patients assigned to standard care (relative risk 0·86 [95% CI 0·75-0·98]). The hazard ratio (HR) for intubation was 0·75 (0·62-0·91), and the HR for mortality was 0·87 (0·68-1·11) with awake prone positioning compared with standard care within 28 days of enrolment. The incidence of prespecified adverse events was low and similar in both groups.

INTERPRETATION

Awake prone positioning of patients with hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 reduces the incidence of treatment failure and the need for intubation without any signal of harm. These results support routine awake prone positioning of patients with COVID-19 who require support with high-flow nasal cannula.

FUNDING

Open AI inc, Rice Foundation, Projet Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique Interrégional, Appel d'Offre 2020, Groupement Interrégional de Recherche Clinique et d'Innovation Grand Ouest, Association pour la Promotion à Tours de la Réanimation Médicale, Fond de dotation du CHRU de Tours, Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Ltd.

Effect of azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine in patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Chloroquine or its derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) combined with or without azithromycin (AZ) have been widely investigated in observational studies as a treatment option for coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection. The network meta-analysis aims to summarize evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine if AZ or HCQ is associated with improved clinical outcomes. PubMed and Embase were searched from inception to March 7, 2021. We included published RCTs that investigated the efficacy of AZ, HCQ, or its combination among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection. The outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality and the use of mechanical ventilation. The pooled odds ratio was calculated using a random-effect model. A total of 10 RCTs were analyzed. Participant's mean age ranged from 40.4 to 66.5 years. There was no significant effect on mortality associated with AZ plus HCQ (odds ratio [OR] = 0.562 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.168-1.887]), AZ alone (OR = 0.965 [95% CI: 0.865-1.077]), or HCQ alone (OR = 1.122 [95% CI: 0.995-1.266]; p = 0.06). Similarly, based on pooled effect sizes derived from direct and indirect evidence, none of the treatments had a significant benefit in decreasing the use of mechanical ventilation. No heterogeneity was identified (Cochran's Q = 1.68; p = 0.95; τ2  = 0; I2  = 0% [95% CI: 0%-0%]). Evidence from RCTs suggests that AZ with or without HCQ was not associated with a significant effect on the mortality or mechanical ventilation rates in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. More research is needed to explore therapeutics agents that can effectively reduce the mortality or severity of COVID-19.

Bilateral basal ganglia ischemia associated with COVID-19: a case report and review of the literature

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has a broad clinical spectrum, from asymptomatic to multi-organ dysfunction. Acute cerebrovascular events associated with coronavirus disease 2019 are mainly due to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-induced prothrombotic state. Bilateral basal ganglia ischemia is rarely reported.

Case presentation

We report the case of a 64-year-old Asian (Pakistani) gentleman who presented initially with fever, cough, and shortness of breath, likely due to respiratory involvement by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Later, he developed bilateral lower limb pain, followed by confusion and decreased level of consciousness. Accentuated large hypodense opacities were seen in the left and right basal ganglia, with mass effects on the left frontal horn.

Conclusion

This case demonstrates the importance of neuroimaging in the effective management of patients with neurological signs associated with coronavirus disease 2019.

Complex Pathophysiological Mechanisms and the Propose of the Three-Dimensional Schedule For Future COVID-19 Treatment

At present, the global COVID-19 epidemic is still in a state of anxiety, and increasing the cure rate of critically ill patients is an important means to defeat the virus. From an immune perspective, ARDS driven by an inflammatory storm is still the direct cause of death in severe COVID-19 patients. Although some experience has been gained in the treatment of COVID-19, and intensive COVID-19 vaccination has been carried out recently, it is still effective to save lives to develop more effective programs to alleviate the inflammatory storm and ARDS in patients with SARS-CoV-2 or emerging variants of SARS-CoV-2. In reorganizing the ARDS-related inflammatory storm formation program in COVID-19 patients, we highlighted the importance of the vicious circle of inflammatory cytokines and inflammatory cell death, which is aggravated by blood circulation to form multi-system inflammation. Summarizes the interlocking and crisscrossing of inflammatory response and inflammatory cell death mechanisms including NETs, pyrolysis, apoptosis and PANoptosis in severe COVID-19. More importantly, in response to the inflammatory storm formation program we described, and on the premise of following ethical and clinical experimental norms, we propose a three-dimensional integrated program for future research based on boosting antiviral immune response at the initial stage, inhibiting inflammatory cytokine signaling at the exacerbation stage and inhibiting cell death before it's worse to prevent and alleviate ARDS.

Prone positioning for non-intubated hypoxemic patients with COVID-19: cheap, easy, and makes sense, but does it work?

Since the 1970s, prone positioning has been proposed as an inexpensive and physiologically justified management strategy for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The physiological rationale for prone positioning in ARDS has been well described [1,2]. Placing a person in the prone position reduces lung compression, which facilitates better ventilation/perfusion matching and leads to improved oxygenation. However, determining whether patients receive clinically meaningful benefit from prone positioning in the form of reduced mortality or time supported on mechanical ventilation has been challenging. Early trials that used prone positioning as a “rescue” therapy or applied relatively small “doses” of prone positioning (i.e. limited duration of time in prone position) did not demonstrate improvements in mortality or ventilator-free days (VFDs) [3–5].

This editorial evaluates a large observational study that identified strong associations between awake prone positioning and decreased mortality in hospitalised patients with COVID-19https://bit.ly/3m3NeAx

Myeloid phenotypes in severe COVID-19 predict secondary infection and mortality: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

De-regulated host response to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), directly referring to the concept of sepsis-associated immunological dysregulation, seems to be a strong signature of severe COVID-19. Myeloid cells phenotyping is well recognized to diagnose critical illness-induced immunodepression in sepsis and has not been well characterized in COVID-19. The aim of this study is to review phenotypic characteristics of myeloid cells and evaluate their relations with the occurrence of secondary infection and mortality in patients with COVID-19 admitted in an intensive care unit.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of the circulating myeloid cells phenotypes of adult COVID-19 critically ill patients. Phenotyping circulating immune cells was performed by flow cytometry daily for routine analysis and twice weekly for lymphocytes and monocytes subpopulations analysis, as well as monocyte human leukocyte antigen (mHLA)-DR expression.

RESULTS

Out of the 29 critically ill adult patients with severe COVID-19 analyzed, 12 (41.4%) developed secondary infection and six patients died during their stay. Monocyte HLA-DR kinetics was significantly different between patients developing secondary infection and those without, respectively, at day 5-7 and 8-10 following admission. The monocytes myeloid-derived suppressor cells to total monocytes ratio was associated with 28- and 60-day mortality. Those myeloid characteristics suggest three phenotypes: hyperactivated monocyte/macrophage is significantly associated with mortality, whereas persistent immunodepression is associated with secondary infection occurrence compared to transient immunodepression.

CONCLUSIONS

Myeloid phenotypes of critically ill COVID-19 patients may be associated with development of secondary infection, 28- and 60-day mortality.

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: research priorities for the administration, epidemiology, scoring and identification of sepsis

Objective

To identify priorities for administrative, epidemiologic and diagnostic research in sepsis.

Design

As a follow-up to a previous consensus statement about sepsis research, members of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Research Committee, representing the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Society of Critical Care Medicine addressed six questions regarding care delivery, epidemiology, organ dysfunction, screening, identification of septic shock, and information that can predict outcomes in sepsis.

Methods

Six questions from the Scoring/Identification and Administration sections of the original Research Priorities publication were explored in greater detail to better examine the knowledge gaps and rationales for questions that were previously identified through a consensus process.

Results

The document provides a framework for priorities in research to address the following questions: (1) What is the optimal model of delivering sepsis care?; (2) What is the epidemiology of sepsis susceptibility and response to treatment?; (3) What information identifies organ dysfunction?; (4) How can we screen for sepsis in various settings?; (5) How do we identify septic shock?; and (6) What in-hospital clinical information is associated with important outcomes in patients with sepsis?

Conclusions

There is substantial knowledge of sepsis epidemiology and ways to identify and treat sepsis patients, but many gaps remain. Areas of uncertainty identified in this manuscript can help prioritize initiatives to improve an understanding of individual patient and demographic heterogeneity with sepsis and septic shock, biomarkers and accurate patient identification, organ dysfunction, and ways to improve sepsis care.

Awake prone positioning in patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19: the PROFLO multicenter randomized clinical trial

Background

The effect of awake prone positioning on intubation rates is not established. The aim of this trial was to investigate if a protocol for awake prone positioning reduces the rate of endotracheal intubation compared with standard care among patients with moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19.

Methods

We conducted a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Adult patients with confirmed COVID-19, high-flow nasal oxygen or noninvasive ventilation for respiratory support and a PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio ≤ 20 kPa were randomly assigned to a protocol targeting 16 h prone positioning per day or standard care. The primary endpoint was intubation within 30 days. Secondary endpoints included duration of awake prone positioning, 30-day mortality, ventilator-free days, hospital and intensive care unit length of stay, use of noninvasive ventilation, organ support and adverse events. The trial was terminated early due to futility.

Results

Of 141 patients assessed for eligibility, 75 were randomized of whom 39 were allocated to the control group and 36 to the prone group. Within 30 days after enrollment, 13 patients (33%) were intubated in the control group versus 12 patients (33%) in the prone group (HR 1.01 (95% CI 0.46–2.21), P = 0.99). Median prone duration was 3.4 h [IQR 1.8–8.4] in the control group compared with 9.0 h per day [IQR 4.4–10.6] in the prone group (P = 0.014). Nine patients (23%) in the control group had pressure sores compared with two patients (6%) in the prone group (difference − 18% (95% CI − 2 to − 33%); P = 0.032). There were no other differences in secondary outcomes between groups.

Conclusions

The implemented protocol for awake prone positioning increased duration of prone positioning, but did not reduce the rate of intubation in patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 compared to standard care.

Trial registration

ISRCTN54917435. Registered 15 June 2020 (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN54917435).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-021-03602-9.