From Cytokine Storm to Cytokine Breeze: Did Lessons Learned from Immunopathogenesis Improve Immunomodulatory Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe COVID-19?

Complex immune response to infection has been highlighted, more than ever, during the COVID-19 pandemic. This review explores the immunomodulatory treatment of moderate-to-severe forms of this viral sepsis in the context of specific immunopathogenesis. Our objective is to analyze in detail the existing strategies for the use of immunomodulators in COVID-19. Immunomodulating therapy is very challenging; there are still underpowered or, in other ways, insufficient studies with inconclusive or conflicting results regarding a rationale for adding a second immunomodulatory drug to dexamethasone. Bearing in mind that a “cytokine storm” is not present in the majority of COVID-19 patients, it is to be expected that the path to the adequate choice of a second immunomodulatory drug is paved with uncertainty. Anakinra, a recombinant human IL-1 receptor antagonist, is a good choice in this setting. Yet, the latest update of the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (31 May 2022) claims that there is insufficient evidence to recommend either for or against the use of anakinra for the treatment of COVID-19. EMA’s human medicines committee recommended extending the indication of anakinra to include treatment of COVID-19 in adult patients only recently (17 December 2021). It is obvious that this is still a work in progress, with few ongoing clinical trials. With over 6 million deaths from COVID-19, this is the right time to speed up this process. Our conclusion is that, during the course of COVID-19, the immune response is changing from the early phase to the late phase in individual patients, so immunomodulating therapy should be guided by individual responses at different time points.

Immunomonitoring of Monocyte and Neutrophil Function in Critically Ill Patients: From Sepsis and/or Trauma to COVID-19

Immune cells and mediators play a crucial role in the critical care setting but are understudied. This review explores the concept of sepsis and/or injury-induced immunosuppression and immuno-inflammatory response in COVID-19 and reiterates the need for more accurate functional immunomonitoring of monocyte and neutrophil function in these critically ill patients. in addition, the feasibility of circulating and cell-surface immune biomarkers as predictors of infection and/or outcome in critically ill patients is explored. It is clear that, for critically ill, one size does not fit all and that immune phenotyping of critically ill patients may allow the development of a more personalized approach with tailored immunotherapy for the specific patient. In addition, at this point in time, caution is advised regarding the quality of evidence of some COVID-19 studies in the literature.

Effect of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Combined With Patient-Controlled Intravenous Morphine Analgesia on Analgesic Use and Post-Thoracotomy Pain. A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled, Proof-of-Concept Clinical Trial

Background

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is used for various chronic pain conditions, but experience with tDCS for acute postoperative pain is limited. This study investigated the effect of tDCS vs. sham stimulation on postoperative morphine consumption and pain intensity after thoracotomy.

Methods

This is a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial in lung cancer patients undergoing thoracotomy under general anesthesia. All patients received patient-controlled (PCA) intravenous morphine and intercostal nerve blocks at the end of surgery. The intervention group (a-tDCS, n = 31) received anodal tDCS over the left primary motor cortex (C3-Fp2) for 20 min at 1.2 mA, on five consecutive days; the control group (n = 31) received sham stimulation. Morphine consumption, number of analgesia demands, and pain intensity at rest, with movement and with cough were recorded at the following intervals: immediately before (T1), immediately after intervention (T2), then every hour for 4 h (Т3-Т6), then every 6 h (Т7-Т31) for 5 days. We recorded outcomes on postoperative days 1 and 5 and conducted a phone interview inquiring about chronic pain 1 year later (NCT03005548).

Results

A total of 62 patients enrolled, but tDCS was prematurely stopped in six patients. Fifty-five patients (27 a-tDCS, 28 sham) had three or more tDCS applications and were included in the analysis. Cumulative morphine dose in the first 120 h after surgery was significantly lower in the tDCS [77.00 (54.00-123.00) mg] compared to sham group [112.00 (79.97-173.35) mg, p = 0.043, Cohen's d = 0.42]. On postoperative day 5, maximum visual analog scale (VAS) pain score with cough was significantly lower in the tDCS group [29.00 (20.00-39.00) vs. 44.50 (30.00-61.75) mm, p = 0.018], and pain interference with cough was 80% lower [10.00 (0.00-30.00) vs. 50.00 (0.00-70.00), p = 0.013]. One year after surgery, there was no significant difference between groups with regard to chronic pain and analgesic use.

Conclusion

In lung cancer patients undergoing thoracotomy, three to five tDCS sessions significantly reduced cumulative postoperative morphine use, maximum VAS pain scores with cough, and pain interference with cough on postoperative day 5, but there was no obvious long-term benefit from tDCS.

[Effect of mechanical pressure-controled ventilation in patients with disturbed respiratory function during laparoscopic cholecystectomy]

BACKGROUND/AIM

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is considered to be the gold standard for laparoscopic surgical procedures. In ASA III patients with concomitant respiratory diseases, however, creation of pneumoperitoneum and the position of patients during surgery exert additional negative effect on intraoperative respiratory function, thus making a higher challenge for the anesthesiologist than for the surgeon. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) and pressure controlled ventilation (PCV) during general anesthesia on respiratory function in ASA III patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

The study included 60 patients randomized into two groups depending on the mode of ventilation: IPPV or PCV. Respiratory volume (VT), peak inspiratory pressure (PIP), compliance (C), end-tidal CO2 pressure (PETCO2), oxygen saturation (SpO2), partial pressures of O2, CO2 (PaO2 and PaCO2) and pH of arterial blood were recorded within four time intervals.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in VT, SpO2, PaO2, PaCO2 and pH values neither within nor between the two groups. In time interval t1 there were no statistically significant differences in PIP, C, PETCO2 values between the IPPV and the PCV group. But, in the next three time intervals there was a difference in PIP, C, and PETCO2 values between the two groups which ranged from statistically significant to highly significant; PIP was lower, C and PETCO2 were higher in the PCV group.

CONCLUSION

Pressure controlled ventilation better maintains stability regarding intraoperative ventilatory parameters in ASA III patients with concomitant respiratory diseases during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

[Influence of perioperative administration of amino acids on thermoregulation response in patients underwent colorectal surgical procedures]

BACKGROUND

Hypothermia in the surgical patients can be the consequence of long duration of surgical intervention, general anesthesia and low temperature in operating room. Postoperative hypothermia contributes to a number of postoperative complications such as arrythmia, myocardial ischemia, hypertension, bleeding, wound infection, coagulopathy, prolonged effect of muscle relaxants. External heating procedures are used to prevent this condition, but some investigations reported that infusion of aminoacids during surgery can induce thermogenesis and prevent postoperative hypothermia.

CASE REPORT

We reported two males who underwent major colorectal surgery for rectal carcinoma. One patient recived Aminosol 15% solution, 125 ml/h, while the other did not. The esophageal temperatures in both cases were measured every 30 minutes during the operation and 60 minutes after in Intensive Care Unit. We were monitoring blood pressure, heart rate, ECG, and shivering. Patient who received aminoacids showed ameliorated postoperative hypothermia without hypertension, arrythmia, or shivering, while the other showed all symptoms mentioned above.

CONCLUSION

According to literature data, as well as our findings, we can conclude that intraoperative intravenous treatment with amino acid solution ameliorates postoperative hypothermia along with its complications.