Pulmonary embolism or thrombosis in ARDS COVID-19 patients: A French monocenter retrospective study

COVID-19 and a Pulmonary Abscess in a 2-Month Infant: A Case Report

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is an acute respiratory syndrome that has had a significant global impact. Some studies reported that SARS-CoV-2 infected adults, especially intubated individuals, are at risk of lung abscess, but a few studies show lung abscess in infants. We present a 2-month-old infant with a lung abscess and positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR.

COVID-19 associated pulmonary embolism: clinical, biochemical and CT imaging findings

INTRODUCTION

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection represented a disruptive pathology that emerged in late 2019 with profound implications ranging from individual health to health systems and world economy. Our study aimed to evaluate clinical, biochemical and computerized tomography (CT) parameters values in determining the severity of pulmonary embolism (PE) associated with COVID-19.

METHODS

We performed an observational cohort study evaluating demographic, clinical, biochemical, coagulation markers, as well as CT imaging parameters.

RESULTS

In our study on 186 patients with COVID-19, we found that 31 patients (16,66%) had pulmonary embolism. Significant correlations for the patients with PE were detected in C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, serum ferritin, IL-6, serum myoglobin, NT-proBNP, D-dimers, serum proteins, transaminases as well as white cell blood counts. Patients with pulmonary embolism had a more severe lung involvement, with thrombi distribution mainly involving the lower lobes.

CONCLUSION

Early identification of PE is an important step for timely and efficient treatment in the intensive care management of COVID-19 patients. Our study showed that high plasmatic values of lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, IL-6, white blood cells and D-dimers and low proteins serum levels are strongly linked with COVID-19-associated pulmonary embolism.

Prevalence of Thromboembolic Events, Including Venous Thromboembolism and Arterial Thrombosis, in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Background

Many studies have evaluated thromboembolic events in COVID-19 patients, and most of them have reported a high estimation of the prevalence of such events. The present study sought to evaluate the prevalence of thromboembolic events in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

This study is a systematic review with meta-analysis that investigated thromboembolic events in patients with COVID-19 from the start of the pandemic to August 31, 2021. The 4 main databases for collecting articles were Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science. Deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, arterial thrombosis, and the overall rate of thromboembolic events were considered primary outcomes.

Results

In a total of 63 studies (104 920 patients with COVID-19), the overall thrombosis rate was 21% (95% CI, 18% to 25%), the rate of deep vein thrombosis was 20% (95% Cl, 16% to 25%), the rate of pulmonary embolism was 8% (95% Cl, 6% to 10%), and the rate of arterial thrombosis was 5% (95% Cl, 3% to 7%). The prevalence of all primary outcomes in critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) was significantly higher (P<0.05). In older patients, the prevalence of overall thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or deep vein thrombosis was significantly higher (P<0.05).

Conclusion

This study showed that COVID-19 increases the risk of thromboembolic events, especially in elderly and critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. Therefore, more strategies are needed to prevent thromboembolic events in patients with COVID-19, especially in ICU-admitted and elderly patients.

Pulmonary embolism in COVID-19, risk factors and association with inflammatory biomarkers

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected millions of people worldwide resulting in a substantial number of hospitalizations. Venous thromboembolism including pulmonary embolism is a known complication of COVID-19 pneumonia although its incidence in such patients is unclear. In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, we looked at the incidence of pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients and its associations with various risk factors including demographics, comorbidities, inflammatory markers and coagulation profiles. We analyzed data from 193 patients of mixed ethnicity with a mean age of 51, mostly South Asians (62%) and Arabs (29%). Diabetes and hypertension were the most prevalent comorbidities accounting for 46% (N = 88) and 36% (N = 71) respectively. Critical COVID-19 illness was diagnosed in 67% of patients. The frequency of COVID-19 related pulmonary embolism was 21.8% (N = 42). We found no association of pulmonary embolism with demographic, comorbid or inflammatory variables. Only a raised D-Dimer was found to be associated with pulmonary embolism. Having a pulmonary embolism had no impact on the length of stay, critical illness, or mortality. Receiving steroids or being on standard thromboprophylaxis or weight/D-Dimer adjusted thromboprophylaxis also had no impact on the frequency of pulmonary embolism. Nine incidents of major bleeding were recorded independent of therapeutic anticoagulation. Patients admitted to the hospital for COVID-19 pneumonia had a relatively high incidence of pulmonary embolism. D-dimer was the only associated laboratory parameter associated with pulmonary embolism. However, further research is needed to evaluate its predictive and prognostic utility, particularly in an older population.

Advanced Imaging Supports the Mechanistic Role of Autoimmunity and Plaque Rupture in COVID-19 Heart Involvement

The cardiovascular system is frequently affected by coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), particularly in hospitalized cases, and these manifestations are associated with a worse prognosis. Most commonly, heart involvement is represented by myocarditis, myocardial infarction, and pulmonary embolism, while arrhythmias, heart valve damage, and pericarditis are less frequent. While the clinical suspicion is necessary for a prompt disease recognition, imaging allows the early detection of cardiovascular complications in patients with COVID-19. The combination of cardiothoracic approaches has been proposed for advanced imaging techniques, i.e., CT scan and MRI, for a simultaneous evaluation of cardiovascular structures, pulmonary arteries, and lung parenchyma. Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain the cardiovascular injury, and among these, it is established that the host immune system is responsible for the aberrant response characterizing severe COVID-19 and inducing organ-specific injury. We illustrate novel evidence to support the hypothesis that molecular mimicry may be the immunological mechanism for myocarditis in COVID-19. The present article provides a comprehensive review of the available evidence of the immune mechanisms of the COVID-19 cardiovascular injury and the imaging tools to be used in the diagnostic workup. As some of these techniques cannot be implemented for general screening of all cases, we critically discuss the need to maximize the sustainability and the specificity of the proposed tests while illustrating the findings of some paradigmatic cases.

COVID-19 infection and its impact on case fatality in patients with pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Although a high prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) has been reported in association with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in critically ill patients, nationwide data on the outcome of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and PE are still limited. Thus, we investigated seasonal trends and predictors of in-hospital death in patients with COVID-19 and PE in Germany.

METHODS

We used a German nationwide inpatient sample to analyse data on hospitalisations among COVID-19 patients with and without PE during 2020, and to detect changes in PE prevalence and case fatality in comparison with 2019.

RESULTS

We analysed 176 137 COVID-19 hospitalisations in 2020; PE was recorded in 1.9% (n=3362) of discharge certificates. Almost one-third of patients with COVID-19 and PE died during the in-hospital course (28.7%) compared with COVID-19 patients without PE (17.7%). Between 2019 and 2020, numbers of PE-related hospitalisations were largely unchanged (98 485 versus 97 718), whereas the case fatality rate of PE increased slightly in 2020 (from 12.7% to 13.1%; p<0.001). Differences in case fatality were found between PE patients with and without COVID-19 in 2020 (28.7% versus 12.5%; p<0.001), corresponding to a 3.1-fold increased risk of PE-related death (OR 3.16, 95% CI 2.91-3.42; p<0.001) in the presence of COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

In Germany, the prevalence of PE events during hospitalisations was similar in 2019 and 2020. However, the fatality rate among patients with both COVID-19 and PE was substantially higher than that in those with only one of these diseases, suggesting a life-threatening additive prognostic impact of the COVID-19-PE combination.

Early-stage COVID-19 pandemic observations on pulmonary embolism using nationwide multi-institutional data harvesting

We introduce a multi-institutional data harvesting (MIDH) method for longitudinal observation of medical imaging utilization and reporting. By tracking both large-scale utilization and clinical imaging results data, the MIDH approach is targeted at measuring surrogates for important disease-related observational quantities over time. To quantitatively investigate its clinical applicability, we performed a retrospective multi-institutional study encompassing 13 healthcare systems throughout the United States before and after the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. Using repurposed software infrastructure of a commercial AI-based image analysis service, we harvested data on medical imaging service requests and radiology reports for 40,037 computed tomography pulmonary angiograms (CTPA) to evaluate for pulmonary embolism (PE). Specifically, we compared two 70-day observational periods, namely (i) a pre-pandemic control period from 11/25/2019 through 2/2/2020, and (ii) a period during the early COVID-19 pandemic from 3/8/2020 through 5/16/2020. Natural language processing (NLP) on final radiology reports served as the ground truth for identifying positive PE cases, where we found an NLP accuracy of 98% for classifying radiology reports as positive or negative for PE based on a manual review of 2,400 radiology reports. Fewer CTPA exams were performed during the early COVID-19 pandemic than during the pre-pandemic period (9806 vs. 12,106). However, the PE positivity rate was significantly higher (11.6 vs. 9.9%, p < 10^-4) with an excess of 92 PE cases during the early COVID-19 outbreak, i.e., ~1.3 daily PE cases more than statistically expected. Our results suggest that MIDH can contribute value as an exploratory tool, aiming at a better understanding of pandemic-related effects on healthcare.

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) occurs in up to 10% of patients with respiratory failure admitted through the emergency department. Use of noninvasive respiratory support has proliferated in recent years; clinicians must understand the relative merits and risks of these technologies and know how to recognize signs of failure. The cornerstone of ARDS care of the mechanically ventilated patient is low-tidal volume ventilation based on ideal body weight. Adjunctive therapies, such as prone positioning and neuromuscular blockade, may have a role in the emergency department management of ARDS depending on patient and department characteristics.

Incidence and prognostic value of pulmonary embolism in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Pulmonary embolisms are frequently and prognostically in individuals infected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); the incidence of pulmonary embolisms is varied across numerous studies. This study aimed to assess the pooled incidence of pulmonary embolic events and the prognostic value of such events in intensive care unit (ICU) admissions of patients with COVID-19.

Methods

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EmBase were systematically searched for eligible studies published on or before October 20, 2021. The pooled incidence of pulmonary embolism was calculated using the random-effects model. Moreover, the prognostic value was assessed by measuring the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (PLR and NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

Results

Thirty-six studies involving 10,367 COVID-19 patients were selected for the final meta-analysis. The cumulative incidence of pulmonary embolism in patients with COVID-19 was 21% (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 18−24%; P<0.001), and the incidence of pulmonary embolism in ICU and non-ICU patients was 26% (95%CI: 22−31%; P<0.001) and 17% (95%CI: 14−20%; P<0.001), respectively. The predictive role of pulmonary embolism in ICU admission was also assessed, and the sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR, and AUC were 0.31 (95%CI: 0.21−0.42), 0.84 (95%CI: 0.75−0.90), 1.88 (95%CI: 1.45−2.45), 0.83 (95%CI: 0.75−0.91), 2.25 (95%CI: 1.64−3.08), and 0.61 (95%CI: 0.57−0.65), respectively.

Conclusion

This study found that the incidence of pulmonary embolism was relatively high in COVID-19 patients, and the incidence of pulmonary embolism in ICU patients was higher than that in non-ICU patients.

Mortality and Pulmonary Embolism in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome From COVID-19 vs. Non-COVID-19

Purpose

There may be a difference in respiratory mechanics, inflammatory markers, and pulmonary emboli in COVID-19 associated ARDS vs. ARDS from other etiologies. Our purpose was to determine differences in respiratory mechanics, inflammatory markers, and incidence of pulmonary embolism in patients with and without COVID-19 associated ARDS admitted in the same period and treated with a similar ventilation strategy.

Methods

A cohort study of COVID-19 associated ARDS and non COVID-19 patients in a Saudi Arabian center between June 1 and 15, 2020. We measured respiratory mechanics (ventilatory ratio (VR), recruitability index (RI), markers of inflammation, and computed tomography pulmonary angiograms.

Results

Forty-two patients with COVID-19 and 43 non-COVID patients with ARDS comprised the cohort. The incidence of “recruitable” patients using the recruitment/inflation ratio was slightly lower in COVID-19 patients (62 vs. 86%; p = 0.01). Fifteen COVID-19 ARDS patients (35.7%) developed a pulmonary embolism as compared to 4 (9.3%) in other ARDS patients (p = 0.003). In COVID-19 patients, a D-Dimer ≥ 5.0 mcg/ml had a 73% (95% CI 45–92%) sensitivity and 89% (95% CI 71–98%) specificity for predicting pulmonary embolism. Crude 60-day mortality was higher in COVID-19 patients (35 vs. 15%; p = 0.039) but three multivariate analysis showed that independent predictors of 60-day mortality included the ventilatory ratio (OR 3.67, 95% CI 1.61–8.35), PaO2/FIO2 ratio (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.87–0.99), IL-6 (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00–1.03), and D-dimer (OR 7.26, 95% CI 1.11–47.30) but not COVID-19 infection.

Conclusion

COVID-19 patients were slightly less recruitable and had a higher incidence of pulmonary embolism than those with ARDS from other etiologies. A high D-dimer was predictive of pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 infection was not an independent predictor of 60-day mortality in the presence of ARDS.

Cumulative Evidence for the Association of Thrombosis and the Prognosis of COVID-19: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Although thrombosis events have been reported in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the association between thrombosis and COVID-19-related critical status or risk of mortality in COVID-19 has been inconsistent.

Objective

We conducted a meta-analysis of reports assessing the association between thrombosis and the prognosis of COVID-19.

Methods

The EMBASE, Ovid-MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases were searched up to December 9, 2021, and additional studies were retrieved via manual searching. Studies were included if they reported the risk of COVID-19-related critical status or COVID-19-related mortality in relation to thrombosis. The related data were extracted by two authors independently, and a random effects model was conducted to pool the odds ratios (ORs). In addition, stratified analyses were conducted to evaluate the association.

Results

Among 6,686 initially identified studies, we included 25 studies published in 2020 and 2021, with a total of 332,915 patients according to predefined inclusion criteria. The associations between thrombosis and COVID-19-related mortality and COVID-19-related critical status were significant, with ORs of 2.61 (95% CI, 1.91–3.55, p < 0.05) and 2.9 (95% CI, 1.6–5.24, p < 0.05), respectively. The results were statistically significant and consistent in stratified analyses.

Conclusions

Thrombosis is associated with an increased risk of mortality and critical status induced by COVID-19. Further prospective studies with large sample sizes are required to establish whether these associations are causal by considering more confounders and to clarify their mechanisms.

Observational studies cannot prove causality. However, autopsy studies show thrombosis events preceding COVID-19-related deaths. The results of this meta-analysis reported that thrombosis was associated with a 161% increased risk of mortality from COVID-19 and a 190% increased risk of COVID-19-related critical status. The type of thrombosis included in the original studies also seemed to be related to the results.

Risk Factors for Venous Thromboembolism in Severe COVID-19: A Study-Level Meta-Analysis of 21 Studies

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with COVID-19 in intensive care units (ICU) is frequent, but risk factors (RF) remain unidentified. In this meta-analysis (CRD42020188764) we searched for observational studies from ICUs reporting the association between VTE and RF in Medline/Embase up to 15 April 2021. Reviewers independently extracted data in duplicate and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Analyses were conducted using the random-effects model and produced a non-adjusted odds ratio (OR). We analysed 83 RF from 21 studies (5296 patients). We found moderate-certainty evidence for an association between VTE and the D-dimer peak (OR 5.83, 95%CI 3.18–10.70), and length of hospitalization (OR 7.09, 95%CI 3.41–14.73) and intubation (OR 2.61, 95%CI 1.94–3.51). We identified low-certainty evidence for an association between VTE and CRP (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.32–2.53), D-dimer (OR 4.58, 95% CI 2.52–8.50), troponin T (OR 8.64, 95% CI 3.25–22.97), and the requirement for inotropic drugs (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.15–2.43). Traditional VTE RF (i.e., history of cancer, previous VTE events, obesity) were not found to be associated to VTE in COVID-19. Anticoagulation was not associated with a decreased VTE risk. VTE RF in severe COVID-19 correspond to individual illness severity, and inflammatory and coagulation parameters.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 as Cause of Viral Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Coronavirus disease 2019 is a heterogeneous disease most frequently causing respiratory tract infection, which can induce respiratory failure and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in its severe forms. The prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019-related sepsis is still unclear; we aimed to describe this in a systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases were searched based on a prespecified protocol (International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews: CRD42020202018).

STUDY SELECTION

Studies reporting on patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 diagnosed with sepsis according to sepsis-3 or according to the presence of infection-related organ dysfunctions necessitating organ support/replacement were included in the analysis. The primary end point was prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019-related sepsis among adults hospitalized in the ICU and the general ward. Among secondary end points were the need for ICU admission among patients initially hospitalized in the general ward and the prevalence of new onset of organ dysfunction in the ICU. Outcomes were expressed as proportions with respective 95% CI.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently screened and reviewed existing literature and assessed study quality with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Methodological index for nonrandomized studies.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of 3,825 articles, 151 were analyzed, only five of which directly reported sepsis prevalence. Noting the high heterogeneity observed, coronavirus disease 2019-related sepsis prevalence was 77.9% (95% CI, 75.9-79.8; I2 = 91%; 57 studies) in the ICU, and 33.3% (95% CI, 30.3-36.4; I2 = 99%; 86 studies) in the general ward. ICU admission was required for 17.7% (95% CI, 12.9-23.6; I2 = 100%) of ward patients. Acute respiratory distress syndrome was the most common organ dysfunction in the ICU (87.5%; 95% CI, 83.3-90.7; I2 = 98%).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of coronavirus disease 2019 patients hospitalized in the ICU meet Sepsis-3 criteria and present infection-associated organ dysfunction. The medical and scientific community should be aware and systematically report viral sepsis for prognostic and treatment implications.

Incidence and effects of deep vein thrombosis on the outcome of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 infection

Background

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) has been reported to occur at different rates in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Limited data exist regarding comparisons with non–COVID-19 patients with similar characteristics. Our objective was to compare the rates of DVT in patients with and without COVID-19 and to determine the effect of DVT on the outcomes.

Methods

We performed a retrospective, observational cohort study at a single-institution, level 1 trauma center comparing patients with and without COVID-19. The 573 non–COVID-19 patients (age, 61 ± 17 years; 44.9% male) had been treated from March 20, 2019 to June 30, 2019, and the 213 COVID-19 patients (age, 61 ± 16 years; 61.0% male) had been treated during the same interval in 2020. Standard prophylactic anticoagulation therapy consisted of 5000 U of heparin three times daily for the medical patients without COVID-19 who were not in the intensive care unit (ICU). The ICU, surgical, and trauma patients without COVID-19 had received 40 mg of enoxaparin daily (not adjusted to weight). The patients with COVID-19 had also received enoxaparin 40 mg daily (also not adjusted to weight), regardless of whether treated in the ICU. The two primary outcomes were the rate of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the COVID-19 group vs that in the historic control and the effect of DVT on mortality. The subgroup analyses included patients with adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), pulmonary embolism (PE), and intensive care unit patients (ICU).

Results

The rate of DVT and PE for the non–COVID-19 patients was 12.4% (71 of 573) and 3.3% (19 of 573) compared with 33.8% (72 of 213) and 7.0% (15 of 213) for the COVID-19 patients, respectively. Unprovoked PE had developed in 10 of 15 COVID-19 patients (66.7%) compared with 8 of 497 non–COVID-19 patients (1.6%). The 60 COVID-19 patients with ARDS had had an incidence of DVT of 46.7% (n = 28). In contrast, the incidence of DVT for the 153 non–COVID-19 patients with ARDS was 28.8% (n = 44; P = .01). The COVID-19 patients requiring the ICU had had an increased rate of DVT (39 of 90; 43.3%) compared with the non–COVID-19 patients (33 of 123; 33.3%; P = .01). The risk factors for mortality included age, DVT, multiple organ failure syndrome, and prolonged ventilatory support with the following odd ratios: 1.030 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.002-1.058), 2.847 (95% CI, 1.356-5.5979), 4.438 (95% CI, 1.973-9.985), and 5.321 (95% CI, 1.973-14.082), respectively.

Conclusions

The incidence of DVT for COVID-19 patients receiving standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation that was not weight adjusted was high, especially for ICU patients. DVT is one of the factors contributing to increased mortality. These results suggest a reevaluation is necessary of the present standard-dose thromboprophylaxis for patients with COVID-19.

Risk factors for pulmonary embolism in patients with COVID-19: a systemic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To detect the risk factors for pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

Studies were searched for in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Two authors independently screened articles and extracted data. The data were pooled by meta-analysis and three subgroup analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Of the 2210 articles identified, 27 studies were included. Pooled analysis suggested that males (odds ratio (OR) 1.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-1.75, P = 0.000), obesity (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.03-1.82, P = 0.033), mechanical ventilation (OR 3.34, 95% CI 1.90-5.86, P = 0.000), severe parenchymal abnormalities (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.43-2.58, P = 0.000), ICU admission (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.48-4.03, P = 0.000), and elevated D-dimer and white blood cell values (at two time points: hospital admission or closest to computed tomography pulmonary angiography) (P = 0.000) correlated with a risk for PE occurrence in COVID-19 patients. However, age and common comorbidities had no association with PE occurrence. Computed tomography pulmonary angiography, unclear-ratio/low-ratio, and hospitalization subgroups had consistent risk factors with all studies; however, other subgroups had fewer risk factors for PE.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors for PE in COVID-19 were different from the classic risk factors for PE and are likely to differ in diverse study populations.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of incidence, prognosis, and laboratory indicators of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019

OBJECTIVE

We have summarized the incidence, anticoagulation panels, laboratory characteristics, and mortality of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

After systematically searching PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, MedRxiv, and BioRxiv, a systematic review and meta-analysis of 18 retrospective, 6 prospective observational, and 2 cross-sectional studies was performed according to the guidelines of the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) statement.

RESULTS

Overall, 4382 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were included. Men accounted for significantly more patients than did women (odds ratio [OR], 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-2.02; P < .001). The total incidence of VTE among the patients with COVID-19 was 28.3% (95% CI, 21.6%-35.4%), with an incidence of 38.0% (95% CI, 29.1%-47.4%) and 17.2% (95% CI, 11.4%-23.8%) among those with severe and general COVID-19, respectively. The total incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower extremities was 18.3% (95% CI, 10.8%-27.2%). The incidence of DVT was 22.1% (95% CI, 11.0%-35.5%) and 12.8% (95% CI, 5.0%-23.3%) in those with severe and general COVID-19, respectively. The total incidence of pulmonary embolism was 17.6% (95% CI, 12.3%-23.5%), with a rate of 21.7% (95% CI, 14.8%-29.3%) in severe cases and 12.5% (95% CI, 6.1%-23.5%) in general cases. When COVID-19 severity was unclassified, the mortality for the patients with VTE was not significantly greater (25.2%; 95% CI, 12.2%-40.5%) than that for those without VTE (10.2%; 95% CI, 3.4%-19.5%; OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 0.46-7.64; P = .377). However, among the patients with severe COVID-19, those who had developed VTE had significantly greater mortality compared with those without VTE (OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.15-3.53; P = .014). The patients with COVID-19 and VTE had significantly higher D-dimer levels than did similar patients without VTE in multiple studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The occurrence of VTE, DVT, and pulmonary embolism has been substantial among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, especially among those with severe COVID-19. Patients with severe COVID-19 and VTE had significantly greater mortality compared with similar patients without VTE. An increased D-dimer level might be an indicator of the occurrence of VTE in patients with COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Multisystem review of pathophysiology

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic is associated with high morbidity and mortality. COVID-19, which is caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS CoV-2), affects multiple organ systems through a myriad of mechanisms. Afflicted patients present with a vast constellation of symptoms, from asymptomatic disease to life-threatening complications. The most common manifestations pertain to mild pulmonary symptoms, which can progress to respiratory distress syndrome and venous thromboembolism. However, in patients with renal failure, life-threatening cardiac abnormalities can ensue. Various mechanisms such as viral entry through Angiotensin receptor (ACE) affecting multiple organs and thus releasing pro-inflammatory markers have been postulated. Nevertheless, the predictors of various presentations in the affected population remain elusive. An ameliorated understanding of the pathology and pathogenesis of the viral infection has led to the development of variable treatment options, with many more that are presently under trial. This review article discusses the pathogenesis of multiple organ involvement secondary to COVID-19 infection in infected patients.

•

This review sheds light on the pathogenesis of multi-organ involvement secondary to COVID-19 infection.

•

The predictors of various presentations in the affected population are not clear at present. A better understanding of the pathology and pathogenesis of the viral infection will be pivotal in the development of variable treatment options.

•

Various proposed mechanisms such as viral entry through Angiotensin receptor (ACE) affecting multiple organs, releasing pro-inflammatory markers and cytokines inducing hypercoagulable state and cytokine storm syndrome have been postulated.

Mortality and risk factors associated with pulmonary embolism in coronavirus disease 2019 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To determine, in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection, the associations of pulmonary embolism (PE) with mortality and risk factors for PE as well as the therapeutic benefit of anticoagulant prophylaxis. Embase, PubMed, Cochrane controlled trials register, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception to October 10, 2020. We included all published trials on PE in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 with eligibility of the trials assessed following the PRISMA guidelines. Sixteen clinical trials with 5826 patients were eligible. There were significant associations of PE with the male gender [odd ratio (OR) = 1.59, 95% CI 1.28-1.97], mechanical ventilation (OR = 3.71, 95% CI 2.57-5.36), intensive care unit admission (OR = 2.99, 95% CI 2.11-4.23), circulating D-dimer [mean difference (MD) = 5.04 µg/mL, 95% CI 3.67-6.42) and CRP (MD = 1.97 mg/dL, 95% CI 0.58- 3.35) concentrations without significant correlation between PE and mortality (OR = 1.31, 95% CI 0.82-2.08) as well as other parameters or comorbidities. After omitting one trial with strict patient selection criteria for anticoagulant prophylaxis, significant prophylactic benefit was noted (OR = 0.31, 95% CI 0.1-0.91). Our findings identified the risk factors associated with PE in COVID-19 patients and supported the therapeutic benefit of anticoagulant prophylaxis against PE in this patient population.

Development of an Image-Based HCS-Compatible Method for Endothelial Barrier Function Assessment

The recent renascence of phenotypic drug discovery (PDD) is catalyzed by its ability to identify first-in-class drugs and deliver results when the exact molecular mechanism is partially obscure. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a severe, life-threatening condition with a high mortality rate that has increased in frequency due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite decades of laboratory and clinical study, no efficient pharmacological therapy for ARDS has been found. An increase in endothelial permeability is the primary event in ARDS onset, causing the development of pulmonary edema that leads to respiratory failure. Currently, the detailed molecular mechanisms regulating endothelial permeability are poorly understood. Therefore, the use of the PDD approach in the search for efficient ARDS treatment can be more productive than classic target-based drug discovery (TDD), but its use requires a new cell-based assay compatible with high-throughput (HTS) and high-content (HCS) screening. Here we report the development of a new plate-based image cytometry method to measure endothelial barrier function. The incorporation of image cytometry in combination with digital image analysis substantially decreases assay variability and increases the signal window. This new method simultaneously allows for rapid measurement of cell monolayer permeability and cytological analysis. The time-course of permeability increase in human pulmonary artery endothelial cells (HPAECs) in response to the thrombin and tumor necrosis factor α treatment correlates with previously published data obtained by transendothelial resistance (TER) measurements. Furthermore, the proposed image cytometry method can be easily adapted for HTS/HCS applications.

Lung Abscess in Critically Ill Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients With Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: A French Monocenter Retrospective Study

The pulmonary vascular endothelialitis together with the high rate of distal pulmonary embolism or thrombosis extensively reported in critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients may impair antibiotic diffusion in the lung parenchyma of coronavirus disease 2019 patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia leading to insufficient antibiotic concentration, thus promoting lung abscess formation. We report that 17 of 119 coronavirus disease 2019 patients (14%) with ventilator-associated pneumonia developed a lung abscess. Proportion of patients receiving corticosteroids did not differ between patients with and without lung abscess. Most of lung abscess were polymicrobial. Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus aureus were the leading causative bacteria. Most of lung abscesses involved the right lower lobe. Three patients had concomitant pulmonary embolism or thrombosis in the territory of lung abscess. Lung abscess was retrospectively visible on chest radiograph in 29% of the patients. As the occurrence of lung abscess impacts the duration of antibiotics therapy, chest CT scan should be easily performed in case of treatment failure of ventilator-associated pneumonia despite adequate antimicrobial therapy.

An artificial neural network approach integrating plasma proteomics and genetic data identifies PLXNA4 as a new susceptibility locus for pulmonary embolism

Venous thromboembolism is the third common cardiovascular disease and is composed of two entities, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and its potential fatal form, pulmonary embolism (PE). While PE is observed in ~ 40% of patients with documented DVT, there is limited biomarkers that can help identifying patients at high PE risk. To fill this need, we implemented a two hidden-layers artificial neural networks (ANN) on 376 antibodies and 19 biological traits measured in the plasma of 1388 DVT patients, with or without PE, of the MARTHA study. We used the LIME algorithm to obtain a linear approximate of the resulting ANN prediction model. As MARTHA patients were typed for genotyping DNA arrays, a genome wide association study (GWAS) was conducted on the LIME estimate. Detected single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were tested for association with PE risk in MARTHA. Main findings were replicated in the EOVT study composed of 143 PE patients and 196 DVT only patients. The derived ANN model for PE achieved an accuracy of 0.89 and 0.79 in our training and testing sets, respectively. A GWAS on the LIME approximate identified a strong statistical association peak (rs1424597: p = 5.3 × 10^-7) at the PLXNA4 locus. Homozygote carriers for the rs1424597-A allele were then more frequently observed in PE than in DVT patients from the MARTHA (2% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.005) and the EOVT (3% vs. 0%, p = 0.013) studies. In a sample of 112 COVID-19 patients known to have endotheliopathy leading to acute lung injury and an increased risk of PE, decreased PLXNA4 levels were associated (p = 0.025) with worsened respiratory function. Using an original integrated proteomics and genetics strategy, we identified PLXNA4 as a new susceptibility gene for PE whose exact role now needs to be further elucidated.

Venous Thromboembolism in Hospitalized Critical and Noncritical COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Introduction  Venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been observed as a frequent complication in patients with severe novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection requiring hospital admission. Aim  This study was aimed to evaluate the epidemiology of VTE in hospitalized intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU patients. Materials and Methods  PubMed was searched up to November 13, 2020, and updated in December 12, 2020. We included studies that evaluated the epidemiology of VTE, including pulmonary embolism (PE) and/or deep vein thrombosis (DVT), in patients with COVID-19. Results  A total of 91 studies reporting on 35,017 patients with COVID-19 was included. The overall frequency of VTE in all patients, ICU and non-ICU, was 12.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.103-14.605), 24.1% (95% CI: 20.070-28.280), and 7.7% (95% CI: 5.956-9.700), respectively. PE occurred in 8.5% (95% CI: 6.911-10.208), and proximal DVT occurred in 8.2% (95% CI: 6.675-9.874) of all hospitalized patients. The relative risk for VTE associated with ICU admission was 2.99 (95% CI: 2.301-3.887, p <0.001). DVT and PE estimated in studies that adopted some form of systematic screening were higher compared with studies with symptom-triggered screening. Analysis restricted to studies in the 5th quintile of sample size reported significantly lower VTE estimates. Conclusion  This study confirmed a high risk of VTE in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, especially those admitted to the ICU. Nevertheless, sensitivity analysis suggests that previously reported frequencies of VTE in COVID-19 might have been overestimated.

Screening for venous thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19

Pulmonary thromboembolism and deep venous thrombosis occur frequently in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, the prevalence increases on the intensive care unit (ICU) and is very high in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We undertook a literature review to assess the usefulness of screening for peripheral venous thrombosis or pulmonary thrombosis in patients admitted with COVID-19. Outside of the ICU setting, D-dimer elevation on presentation or marked increase from baseline should alert the need for doppler ultrasound scan of the lower limbs. In the ICU setting, consideration should be given to routine screening with doppler ultrasound, given the high prevalence of thrombosis in this cohort despite standard anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis. However, absence of lower limb thrombosis on ultrasound does not exclude pulmonary venous thrombosis. Screening with CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is not justified in patients on the general wards, unless there are clinical features and/or marked elevations in markers of COVID-19-associated coagulopathy. However, the risk of pulmonary embolism or pulmonary thrombosis in ICU patients is very high, especially in patients on ECMO, where studies that employed routine screening for thrombosis with CT scanning have uncovered up to 100% incidence of pulmonary thrombosis despite standard anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis. Therefore, in patients at low bleeding risk and high clinical suspicion of venous thromboembolism, therapeutic anticoagulation should be considered even before screening, Our review highlights the need for increased vigilance for VTE, with a low threshold for doppler ultrasound and CTPA in high risk in-patient cohorts, where clinical features and D-dimer levels may not accurately reflect the occurrence of pulmonary thromboembolism.

Anticoagulation and In-Hospital Mortality From Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Hypercoagulability in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may aggravate disease severity during hospitalization but the reported survival benefits from anticoagulation (AC) vary among studies. We performed a literature research to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs) of in-hospital mortality and major bleeding comparing among intermediate-to-therapeutic dose AC, prophylactic dose AC, and no AC. Until October 22, 2020, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library Database were searched for studies reporting AC utilization and mortality in COVID-19. Studies with suspected risk of bias were excluded before the synthesis of pooled ORs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random-effects models. Of 37 identified studies (N = 19,510), 17 (N = 17,833) were aggregated in the meta-analysis. The overall mortality rate was 23.1% (95% CI 18.7-28.2). The pooled odds of mortality comparing anticoagulated to non-anticoagulated patients were similar, but lower in prophylactic dose AC group (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.73-0.95). Notably, intermediate-to-therapeutic dose AC increased mortality (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.11-2.31) and major bleeding compared to prophylactic dose AC (OR 3.33; 95% CI 2.34-4.72). Our findings support the optimal efficacy and safety profiles of prophylactic dose AC in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Clinical Outcomes of Pulmonary Embolism in Mexican Patients With COVID-19

Coagulation abnormalities have been reported in COVID-19 patients, which may lead to an increased risk of Pulmonary Embolism (PE). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients diagnosed with PE during their hospital stay. We analyzed patients with PE and COVID-19 in a tertiary center in Mexico City from April to October of 2020. A total of 26 (100%) patients were diagnosed with Pulmonary Embolism and COVID-19. We observed that 14 (54%) patients were receiving either prophylactic or full anticoagulation therapy, before PE diagnosis. We found a significant difference in mortality between the group with less than 7 days (83%) and the group with more than 7 days (15%) in Intensive Care Unit (P = .004); as well as a mean of 8 days for the mortality group compared with 20 days of hospitalization in the survivor group (P = .003). In conclusion, there is an urgent need to review antithrombotic therapy in these patients in order to improve clinical outcomes and decrease hospital overload.

Thrombotic complications in 2928 patients with COVID-19 treated in intensive care: a systematic review

A prothrombotic state is reported with severe COVID-19 infection, which can manifest in venous and arterial thrombotic events. Coagulopathy is reflective of more severe disease and anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis is recommended in hospitalized patients. However, the prevalence of thrombosis on the intensive care unit (ICU) remains unclear, including whether this is sufficiently addressed by conventional anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis. We aimed to identify the rate of thrombotic complications in ICU-treated patients with COVID-19, to inform recommendations for diagnosis and management. A systematic review was conducted to assess the incidence of thrombotic complications in ICU-treated patients with COVID-19. Observational studies and registries reporting thrombotic complications in ICU-treated patients were included. Information extracted included patient demographics, use of thromboprophylaxis or anticoagulation, method of identifying thrombotic complications, and reported patient outcomes. In 28 studies including 2928 patients, thrombotic complications occurred in 34% of ICU-managed patients, with deep venous thrombosis reported in 16.1% and pulmonary embolism in 12.6% of patients, despite anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis, and were associated with high mortality. Studies adopting systematic screening for venous thrombosis with Duplex ultrasound reported a significantly higher incidence of venous thrombosis compared to those relying on clinical suspicion (56.3% vs. 11.0%, p < 0.001). Despite thromboprophylaxis, there is a very high incidence of thrombotic complications in patients with COVID-19 on the ICU. Systematic screening identifies many thrombotic complications that would be missed by relying on clinical suspicion and should be employed, with consideration given to increased dose anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis, whilst awaiting results of prospective trials of anticoagulation in this cohort.

Outcomes of Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Receiving Organ Support Therapies: The International Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study Registry

OBJECTIVES

To describe the outcomes of hospitalized patients in a multicenter, international coronavirus disease 2019 registry.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional observational study including coronavirus disease 2019 patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection between February 15, 2020, and November 30, 2020, according to age and type of organ support therapies.

SETTING

About 168 hospitals in 16 countries within the Society of Critical Care Medicine's Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness University Study coronavirus disease 2019 registry.

PATIENTS

Adult hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients who did and did not require various types and combinations of organ support (mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, vasopressors, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation).

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Primary outcome was hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were discharge home with or without assistance and hospital length of stay. Risk-adjusted variation in hospital mortality for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation was assessed by using multilevel models with hospitals as a random effect, adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, sex, and comorbidities. Among 20,608 patients with coronavirus disease 2019, the mean (± sd) age was 60.5 (±17), 11,1887 (54.3%) were men, 8,745 (42.4%) were admitted to the ICU, and 3,906 (19%) died in the hospital. Hospital mortality was 8.2% for patients receiving no organ support (n = 15,001). The most common organ support therapy was invasive mechanical ventilation (n = 5,005; 24.3%), with a hospital mortality of 49.8%. Mortality ranged from 40.8% among patients receiving only invasive mechanical ventilation (n =1,749) to 71.6% for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, vasoactive drugs, and new renal replacement therapy (n = 655). Mortality was 39% for patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n = 389). Rates of discharge home ranged from 73.5% for patients who did not require organ support therapies to 29.8% for patients who only received invasive mechanical ventilation, and 8.8% for invasive mechanical ventilation, vasoactive drugs, and renal replacement; 10.8% of patients older than 74 years who received invasive mechanical ventilation were discharged home. Median hospital length of stay for patients on mechanical ventilation was 17.1 days (9.7-28 d). Adjusted interhospital variation in mortality among patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation was large (median odds ratio 1.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Coronavirus disease 2019 prognosis varies by age and level of organ support. Interhospital variation in mortality of mechanically ventilated patients was not explained by patient characteristics and requires further evaluation.

Pathophysiological Processes Underlying the High Prevalence of Deep Vein Thrombosis in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) predisposes to deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) particularly in mechanically ventilated adults with severe pneumonia. The extremely high prevalence of DVT in the COVID-19 patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit (ICU) has been established between 25 and 84% based on studies including systematic duplex ultrasound of the lower limbs when prophylactic anticoagulation was systematically administrated. DVT prevalence has been shown to be markedly higher than in mechanically ventilated influenza patients (6-8%). Unusually high inflammatory and prothrombotic phenotype represents a striking feature of COVID-19 patients, as reflected by markedly elevated reactive protein C, fibrinogen, interleukin 6, von Willebrand factor, and factor VIII. Moreover, in critically ill patients, venous stasis has been associated with the prothrombotic phenotype attributed to COVID-19, which increases the risk of thrombosis. Venous stasis results among others from immobilization under muscular paralysis, mechanical ventilation with high positive end-expiratory pressure, and pulmonary microvascular network injuries or occlusions. Venous return to the heart is subsequently decreased with increase in central and peripheral venous pressures, marked proximal and distal veins dilation, and drops in venous blood flow velocities, leading to a spontaneous contrast "sludge pattern" in veins considered as prothrombotic. Together with endothelial lesions and hypercoagulability status, venous stasis completes the Virchow triad and considerably increases the prevalence of DVT and PE in critically ill COVID-19 patients, therefore raising questions regarding the optimal doses for thromboprophylaxis during ICU stay.

Pulmonary embolism in patients with COVID-19 and value of D-dimer assessment: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To investigate, in a meta-analysis, the frequency of pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with COVID-19 and whether D-dimer assessment may be useful to select patients for computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for original studies which reported the frequency of PE on CTPA in patients with COVID-19. The frequency of PE, the location of PE, and the standardized mean difference (SMD) of D-dimer levels between patients with and without PE were pooled by random effects models.

RESULTS

Seventy-one studies were included. Pooled frequencies of PE in patients with COVID-19 at the emergency department (ED), general wards, and intensive care unit (ICU) were 17.9% (95% CI: 12.0-23.8%), 23.9% (95% CI: 15.2-32.7%), and 48.6% (95% CI: 41.0-56.1%), respectively. PE was more commonly located in peripheral than in main pulmonary arteries (pooled frequency of 65.3% [95% CI: 60.0-70.1%] vs. 32.9% [95% CI: 26.7-39.0%]; OR = 3.540 [95% CI: 2.308-5.431%]). Patients with PE had significantly higher D-dimer levels (pooled SMD of 1.096 [95% CI, 0.844-1.349]). D-dimer cutoff levels which have been used to identify patients with PE varied between 1000 and 4800 μg/L.

CONCLUSION

The frequency of PE in patients with COVID-19 is highest in the ICU, followed by general wards and the ED. PE in COVID-19 is more commonly located in peripheral than in central pulmonary arteries, which suggests local thrombosis to play a major role. D-dimer assessment may help to select patients with COVID-19 for CTPA, using D-dimer cutoff levels of at least 1000 μg/L.

KEY POINTS

• The frequency of PE in patients with COVID-19 is highest in the ICU, followed by general wards and the ED. • PE in COVID-19 is more commonly located in peripheral than in central pulmonary arteries. • D-dimer levels are significantly higher in patients with COVID-19 who have PE.

Does pulmonary embolism in critically ill COVID-19 patients worsen the in-hospital mortality: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Mortality in critically ill COVID (coronavirus disease) patients secondary to pulmonary embolism (PE) has conflicting data. We aim to evaluate the mortality outcomes of critically ill patients with and without PE (WPE).

METHODS

Three studies were identified after a digital database search on PE in ICU (intensive care unit) patients until September 2020. The primary outcome was mortality. Outcomes were compared using a random method odds ratio and confidence interval of 95%.

RESULTS

A total of 439 patients were included in the study. Diabetes, hypertension, and renal replacement requirement had no statistically significant association between PE and WPE, p = 0.39, p = 0.23, and p = 0.29 respectively. The study revealed that males have higher odds of PE, OR-1.98, 95%CI-1.01-3.89; p = 0.05. In-hospital mortality results were comparable between PE and WPE after subgroup analysis and correction of heterogeneity, p = 0.25.

CONCLUSION

PE in critically ill COVID patients had similar in-hospital mortality outcomes as WPE patients. The findings are only hypotheses generated from observational studies and need future randomized, prospective clinical trials for a definitive conclusion.