Background Preliminary reports have described significant procoagulant events in patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), including life-threatening pulmonary embolism (PE). Main text We review the current data on the epidemiology, the possible underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms, and the therapeutic implications of PE in relation to COVID-19. The incidence of PE is reported to be around 2.6–8.9% of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients and up to one-third of those requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission, despite standard prophylactic anticoagulation. This may be explained by direct and indirect pathologic consequences of COVID-19, complement activation, cytokine release, endothelial dysfunction, and interactions between different types of blood cells. Conclusion Thromboprophylaxis should be started in all patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 admitted to the hospital. The use of an intermediate therapeutic dose of low molecular weight (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin can be considered on an individual basis in patients with multiple risk factors for venous thromboembolism, including critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. Decisions about extending prophylaxis with LMWH after hospital discharge should be made after balancing the reduced risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) with the risk of increased bleeding events and should be continued for 7–14 days after hospital discharge or in the pre-hospital phase in case of pre-existing or persisting VTE risk factors. Therapeutic anticoagulation is the cornerstone in the management of patients with PE. Selection of an appropriate agent and correct dosing requires consideration of underlying comorbidities.

No abstract

IntroductionThe study was aimed at verifying whether the occurrence of hypernatremia during the intensive care unit (ICU) stay increases the risk of death in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). We performed a retrospective study on a prospectively collected database including all patients consecutively admitted over a 3-year period with a diagnosis of TBI (post-resuscitation Glasgow Coma Score ≤ 8) to a general/neurotrauma ICU of a university hospital, providing critical care services in a catchment area of about 1,200,000 inhabitants.MethodsDemographic, clinical, and ICU laboratory data were prospectively collected; serum sodium was assessed an average of three times per day. Hypernatremia was defined as two daily values of serum sodium above 145 mmol/l. The major outcome was death in the ICU after 14 days. Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used, with time-dependent variates designed to reflect exposure over time during the ICU stay: hypernatremia, desmopressin acetate (DDAVP) administration as a surrogate marker for the presence of central diabetes insipidus, and urinary output. The same models were adjusted for potential confounding factors.ResultsWe included in the study 130 TBI patients (mean age 52 years (standard deviation 23); males 74%; median Glasgow Coma Score 3 (range 3 to 8); mean Simplified Acute Physiology Score II 50 (standard deviation 15)); all were mechanically ventilated; 35 (26.9%) died within 14 days after ICU admission. Hypernatremia was detected in 51.5% of the patients and in 15.9% of the 1,103 patient-day ICU follow-up. In most instances hypernatremia was mild (mean 150 mmol/l, interquartile range 148 to 152). The occurrence of hypernatremia was highest (P = 0.003) in patients with suspected central diabetes insipidus (25/130, 19.2%), a condition that was associated with increased severity of brain injury and ICU mortality. After adjustment for the baseline risk, the incidence of hypernatremia over the course of the ICU stay was significantly related with increased mortality (hazard ratio 3.00 (95% confidence interval: 1.34 to 6.51; P = 0.003)). However, DDAVP use modified this relation (P = 0.06), hypernatremia providing no additional prognostic information in the instances of suspected central diabetes insipidus.ConclusionsMild hypernatremia is associated with an increased risk of death in patients with severe TBI. In a proportion of the patients the association between hypernatremia and death is accounted for by the presence of central diabetes insipidus.

No abstract

Publisher's NoteSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in patients treated with veno-arterial (VA-) or veno-venous (VV-) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). In this setting, the use of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) can help to optimize fluid status but may also negatively impact on patients' outcome. In contrast, the relationship between AKI, CRRT, and survival in critically ill adult patients receiving ECMO is not well defined. The institutional ECMO database (n = 162) from November 2008 to December 2013, excluding patients with ICU survival <24 hours was reviewed. Demographics, co-morbidities, and concomitant therapies for all patients were collected. AKI was defined according to the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) criteria. ICU mortality was noted. Data were retrieved for 135 patients (79 with VA-ECMO and 56 with VV-ECMO). Of these, 95 developed AKI, 63 (47%) of whom required CRRT; thus three groups of patients were identified: (a) no AKI; (b) AKI without CRRT (AKINOCRRT ); and (c) CRRT with AKI (AKICRRT ). AKINOCCRT patients were more likely to have preexisting heart disease, to be more severely ill, and to be treated with VA-ECMO than those without AKI. AKICRRT patients were also more likely to be treated with VA-ECMO, had more organ dysfunction at the time of ECMO insertion, and needed more transfusions and inotropic agents than patients without AKI. ICU mortality was 53% (72/135) and was similar in the three groups, even when different AKI stages or VA/VV-ECMO were analyzed separately. In this study, the use of CRRT was not associated with an increased mortality in an adult population of patients treated with ECMO, even after adjustment for confounders.

Refractory septic shock is defined as persistently low mean arterial blood pressure despite volume resuscitation and titrated vasopressors/inotropes in patients with a proven or suspected infection and concomitant organ dysfunction. Its management typically requires high doses of catecholamines, which can induce significant adverse effects such as ischemia and arrhythmias. Angiotensin II (Ang II), a key product of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, is a vasopressor agent that could be used in conjunction with other vasopressors to stabilize critically ill patients during refractory septic shock, and reduce catecholamine requirements. However, very few clinical data are available to support Ang II administration in this setting. Here, we review the current literature on this topic to better understand the role of Ang II administration during refractory septic shock, differentiating experimental from clinical studies. We also consider the potential role of exogenous Ang II administration in specific organ dysfunction and possible pitfalls with Ang II in sepsis. Various issues remain unresolved and future studies should investigate important topics such as: the optimal dose and timing of Ang II administration, a comparison between Ang II and the other vasopressors (epinephrine; vasopressin), and Ang II effects on microcirculation.

Protein-energy malnutrition (PEW) is highly prevalent in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and is associated with a significant increase of the already high mortality and morbidity risk typical of this clinical setting. Since a key mechanism of PEW in ESRD is inadequate nutrient intake, oral nutritional supplements are extensively employed, and have been demonstrated to be highly effective in PEW prevention and treatment. Intradialytic parenteral nutrition (IDPN), i.e. the administration of nutrients through the extracorporeal circuit during hemodialysis, has also been proposed as a modality of nutritional support for patients with ESRD. However, even though metabolic/nutritional status is improved by this nutritional approach, the evidence linking IDPN to decreased hospitalization rate and lower mortality risk is still scant. The aim of the present paper is to review the role of IDPN as a modality of nutritional supplementation for ESRD patients on hemodialysis. To this end, quantitative and qualitative aspects, practical management, the indications, and limits of IDPN are discussed. On the basis of the available evidence, it is suggested that IDPN is a safe and efficacious modality of nutritional support in ESRD, and could represent an adjunctive strategy for patients with reduced spontaneous dietary intake when intensive dietetic counseling and oral supplementation have failed.