No abstract

Background: Little is known about the incidence and risk of intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired bloodstream infections (BSI) in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Materials and methods: This retrospective, single-centre study was conducted in Northern Italy. The primary study objectives were as follows: (a) to assess the incidence rate of ICU-acquired BSI and (b) to assess the cumulative risk of developing ICU-acquired BSI. Results: Overall, 78 critically ill patients with COVID-19 were included in the study. Forty-five episodes of ICU-acquired BSI were registered in 31 patients, with an incidence rate of 47 episodes (95% confidence interval [CI] 35-63) per 1000 patient-days at risk. The estimated cumulative risk of developing at least one BSI episode was of almost 25% after 15 days at risk and possibly surpassing 50% after 30 days at risk. In multivariable analysis, anti-inflammatory treatment was independently associated with the development of BSI (cause-specific hazard ratio [csHR] 1.07 with 95% CI 0.38-3.04 for tocilizumab, csHR 3.95 with 95% CI 1.20-13.03 for methylprednisolone and csHR 10.69 with 95% CI 2.71-42.17 for methylprednisolone plus tocilizumab, with no anti-inflammatory treatment as the reference group; overall P for the dummy variable = 0.003). Conclusions: The incidence rate of BSI was high, and the cumulative risk of developing BSI increased with ICU stay. Further study will clarify if the increased risk of BSI we detected in COVID-19 patients treated with anti-inflammatory drugs is outweighed by the benefits of reducing any possible pro-inflammatory dysregulation induced by SARS-CoV-2.

Importance: Neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms that persist or develop three months after the onset of COVID-19 pose a significant threat to the global healthcare system. These symptoms are yet to be synthesized and quantified via meta-analysis. Objective: To determine the prevalence of neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms reported 12 weeks (3 months) or more after acute COVID-19 onset in adults. Data sources: A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Scopus was conducted for studies published between January 1st, 2020 and August 1st, 2021. The systematic review was guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses. Study selection: Studies were included if the length of follow-up satisfied the National Institute for Healthcare Excellence (NICE) definition of post-COVID-19 syndrome (symptoms that develop or persist ≥3 months after the onset of COVID-19). Additional criteria included the reporting of neurological or neuropsychiatric symptoms in individuals with COVID-19. Data extraction and synthesis: Two authors independently extracted data on patient characteristics, hospital and/ or ICU admission, acute-phase COVID-19 symptoms, length of follow-up, and neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms. Main outcome(s) and measure(s):The primary outcome was the prevalence of neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms reported ≥3 months post onset of COVID-19. We also compared post-COVID-19 syndrome in hospitalised vs. non-hospitalised patients, with vs. without ICU admission during the acute phase of infection, and with mid-term (3 to 6 months) and long-term (>6 months) follow-up. Results: Of 1458 articles, 19 studies, encompassing a total of 11,324 patients, were analysed. Overall prevalence for neurological post-COVID-19 symptoms were: fatigue (37%, 95% CI: 24%-50%), brain fog (32%, 9%-55%), memory issues (27%, 18%-36%), attention disorder (22%, 10%-34%), myalgia (18%, 4%-32%), anosmia (12%, 7%-17%), dysgeusia (11%, 4%-17%) and headache (10%, 1%-21%). Neuropsychiatric conditions included sleep disturbances (31%, 18%-43%), anxiety (23%, 13%-33%) and depression (12%, 7%-21%). Neuropsychiatric symptoms substantially increased in prevalence between mid-and long-term follow-up. Compared to nonhospitalised patients, patients hospitalised for acute COVID-19 had reduced frequency of anosmia, anxiety,

No abstract

Objectives Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) has emerged as a complication in critically ill COVID-19 patients. The objectives of this multinational study were to determine the prevalence of CAPA in patients with COVID-19 in intensive care units (ICU) and to investigate risk factors for CAPA as well as outcome. Methods The European Confederation of Medical Mycology (ECMM) conducted a multinational study including 20 centers from nine different countries to assess epidemiology, risk factors, and outcome of CAPA. CAPA was defined according to the 2020 ECMM/ISHAM consensus definitions. Results A total of 592 patients were included in this study, including 11 (1.9%) patients with histologically proven CAPA, 80 (13.5%) patients with probable CAPA, 18 (3%) with possible CAPA and 483 (81.6%) without CAPA. CAPA was diagnosed a median of 8 days (range 0-31) after ICU admission predominantly in older patients [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.04 per year; 95%CI 1.02-1.06] with any form of invasive respiratory support (HR 3.4; 95%CI 1.84-6.25) and receiving tocilizumab (HR 2.45; 95%CI 1.41-4.25). Median prevalence of CAPA per center was 10.7% (range 1.7%-26.8%). CAPA was associated with significantly lower 90-day ICU survival rate (29% in patients with CAPA versus 57% in patients without CAPA; Mantel-Byar p<0.001 ) and remained an independent negative prognostic variable after adjusting for other predictors of survival (HR=2.14; 95%CI: 1.59-2.87, p<=0.001 ). Conclusion Prevalence of CAPA varied between centers. CAPA was significantly more prevalent among older patients, patients receiving invasive ventilation and patients receiving tocilizumab, and was an independent strong predictor of ICU mortality.

BackgroundThe invasive nature of the current methods for monitoring of intracranial pressure (ICP) has prevented their use in many clinical situations. Several attempts have been made to develop methods to monitor ICP non-invasively. The aim of this study is to assess the relationship between ultrasound-based non-invasive ICP (nICP) and invasive ICP measurement in neurocritical care patients.Methods and findingsThis was a prospective, single-cohort observational study of patients admitted to a tertiary neurocritical care unit. Patients with brain injury requiring invasive ICP monitoring were considered for inclusion. nICP was assessed using optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD), venous transcranial Doppler (vTCD) of straight sinus systolic flow velocity (FVsv), and methods derived from arterial transcranial Doppler (aTCD) on the middle cerebral artery (MCA): MCA pulsatility index (PIa) and an estimator based on diastolic flow velocity (FVd). A total of 445 ultrasound examinations from 64 patients performed from 1 January to 1 November 2016 were included. The median age of the patients was 53 years (range 37–64). Median Glasgow Coma Scale at admission was 7 (range 3–14), and median Glasgow Outcome Scale was 3 (range 1–5). The mortality rate was 20%. ONSD and FVsv demonstrated the strongest correlation with ICP (R = 0.76 for ONSD versus ICP; R = 0.72 for FVsv versus ICP), whereas PIa and the estimator based on FVd did not correlate with ICP significantly. Combining the 2 strongest nICP predictors (ONSD and FVsv) resulted in an even stronger correlation with ICP (R = 0.80). The ability to detect intracranial hypertension (ICP ≥ 20 mm Hg) was highest for ONSD (area under the curve [AUC] 0.91, 95% CI 0.88–0.95). The combination of ONSD and FVsv methods showed a statistically significant improvement of AUC values compared with the ONSD method alone (0.93, 95% CI 0.90–0.97, p = 0.01). Major limitations are the heterogeneity and small number of patients included in this study, the need for specialised training to perform and interpret the ultrasound tests, and the variability in performance among different ultrasound operators.ConclusionsOf the studied ultrasound nICP methods, ONSD is the best estimator of ICP. The novel combination of ONSD ultrasonography and vTCD of the straight sinus is a promising and easily available technique for identifying critically ill patients with intracranial hypertension.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause severe respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. The abnormalities observed on chest computed tomography (CT) and the clinical presentation of COVID-19 patients are not always like those of typical acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and can change over time. This manuscript aimed to provide brief guidance for respiratory management of COVID-19 patients before, during, and after mechanical ventilation, based on the recent literature and on our direct experience with this population. We identify that chest CT patterns in COVID-19 may be divided into three main phenotypes: 1) multiple, focal, possibly overperfused ground-glass opacities; 2) inhomogeneously distributed atelectasis; and 3) a patchy, ARDS-like pattern. Each phenotype can benefit from different treatments and ventilator settings. Also, peripheral macro-and microemboli are common, and attention should be paid to the risk of pulmonary embolism. We suggest use of personalized mechanical ventilation strategies based on respiratory mechanics and chest CT patterns. Further research is warranted to confirm our hypothesis.

Although the wide 95% CI in our pooled DOR suggests caution, ultrasonographic ONSD may be a potentially useful approach for assessing IH when IIDs are not indicated or available (CRD42018089137, PROSPERO).