Objective To describe the clinical characteristics of children and adolescents admitted to intensive care with confirmed COVID-19. Method Prospective, multicenter, observational study, in 19 pediatric intensive care units. Patients aged 1 month to 19 years admitted consecutively (March–May 2020) were included. Demographic, clinical-epidemiological features, treatment, and outcomes were collected. Subgroups were compared according to comorbidities, age < 1 year, and need for invasive mechanical ventilation. A multivariable logistic regression model was used for predictors of severity. Results Seventy-nine patients were included (ten with multisystemic inflammatory syndrome). Median age 4 years; 54% male (multisystemic inflammatory syndrome, 80%); 41% had comorbidities (multisystemic inflammatory syndrome, 20%). Fever (76%), cough (51%), and tachypnea (50%) were common in both groups. Severe symptoms, gastrointestinal symptoms, and higher inflammatory markers were more frequent in multisystemic inflammatory syndrome. Interstitial lung infiltrates were common in both groups, but pleural effusion was more prevalent in the multisystemic inflammatory syndrome group (43% vs. 14%). Invasive mechanical ventilation was used in 18% (median 7.5 days); antibiotics, oseltamivir, and corticosteroids were used in 76%, 43%, and 23%, respectively, but not hydroxychloroquine. The median pediatric intensive care unit length-of-stay was five days; there were two deaths (3%) in the non- multisystemic inflammatory syndrome group. Patients with comorbidities were older and comorbidities were independently associated with the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 5.5; 95% CI, 1.43–21.12; p = 0.01). Conclusions In Brazilian pediatric intensive care units, COVID-19 had low mortality, age less than 1 year was not associated with a worse prognosis, and patients with multisystemic inflammatory syndrome had more severe symptoms, higher inflammatory biomarkers, and a greater predominance of males, but only comorbidities and chronic diseases were independent predictors of severity.

A daily evaluation to check readiness for weaning combined with a spontaneous breathing test reduced the mechanical ventilation duration for children on mechanical ventilation for >24 hrs, without increasing the extubation failure rate or the need for noninvasive ventilation.

Objective: To describe the clinical characteristics of children and adolescents admitted to intensive care with confirmed COVID-19. Method: Prospective, multicenter, observational study, in 19 pediatric intensive care units. Patients aged 1 month to 19 years admitted consecutively (March–May, 2020) were included. Demographic, clinical-epidemiological features, treatment, and outcomes were collected. Subgroups were compared according to comorbidities, age < 1 year, and need for invasive mechanical ventilation. A multivariable logistic regression model was used for predictors of severity. Results: Seventy-nine patients were included (ten with multisystemic inflammatory syndrome). Median age 4 years; 54% male (multisystemic inflammatory syndrome, 80%); 41% had comorbidities (multisystemic inflammatory syndrome, 20%). Fever (76%), cough (51%), and tachypnea (50%) were common in both groups. Severe symptoms, gastrointestinal symptoms, and higher inflammatory markers were more frequent in multisystemic inflammatory syndrome. Interstitial lung infiltrates were common in both groups, but pleural effusion was more prevalent in the multisystemic inflammatory syndrome group (43% vs. 14%). Invasive mechanical ventilation was used in 18% (median 7.5 days); antibiotics, oseltamivir, and corticosteroids were used in 76%, 43%, and 23%, respectively, but not hydroxychloroquine. The median pediatric intensive care unit length-of-stay was five days; there were two deaths (3%) in the non- multisystemic inflammatory syndrome group. Patients with comorbidities were older, and comorbidities were independently associated with the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 5.5; 95% CI, 1.43–21.12; p = 0.01). Conclusions: In Brazilian pediatric intensive care units, COVID-19 had low mortality, age less than 1 year was not associated with a worse prognosis, and patients with multisystemic inflammatory syndrome had more severe symptoms, higher inflammatory biomarkers, and a greater predominance of males, but only comorbidities and chronic diseases were independent predictors of severity.

Mortality is high in pediatric acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome. Mechanical ventilation-associated risk factors for death among such patients are potential targets for intervention.

BackgroundUtilization of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has increased worldwide, but its use remains restricted to severely ill patients, and few referral centers are properly structured to offer this support. Inter-hospital transfer of patients on ECMO support can be life-threatening. In this study, we report a single-center experience and a systematic review of the available published data on complications and mortality associated with ECMO transportation.MethodsWe reported single-center data regarding complications and mortality associated with the transportation of patients on ECMO support. Additionally, we searched multiple databases for case series, observational studies, and randomized controlled trials regarding mortality of patients transferred on ECMO support. Results were analyzed independently for pediatric (under 12 years old) and adult populations. We pooled mortality rates using a random-effects model. Complications and transportation data were also described.ResultsA total of 38 manuscripts, including our series, were included in the final analysis, totaling 1481 patients transported on ECMO support. A total of 951 patients survived to hospital discharge. The pooled survival rates for adult and pediatric patients were 62% (95% CI 57–68) and 68% (95% CI 60–75), respectively. Two deaths occurred during patient transportation. No other complication resulting in adverse outcome was reported.ConclusionUsing the available pooled data, we found that patient transfer to a referral institution while on ECMO support seems to be safe and adds no significant risk of mortality to ECMO patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13613-016-0232-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Introduction Noninvasive ventilation is a safe and eff ective method to treat acute respiratory failure, minimizing the respiratory workload and oxygenation. Few studies compare the effi cacy of diff erent types of noninvasive ventilation interfaces and their adaptation. Objective To identify the most frequently noninvasive ventilation interfaces used and eventual problems related to their adaptation in critically ill patients. Methods We conducted an observational study, with patients older than 18 years old admitted to the intensive care and step-down units of the Albert Einstein Jewish Hospital that used noninvasive ventilation. We collected data such as reason to use noninvasive ventilation, interface used, scheme of noninvasive ventilation used (continuously, periods or nocturnal use), adaptation, and reasons for nonadaptation. Results We evaluated 245 patients with a median age of 82 years (range of 20 to 107 years). Acute respiratory failure was the most frequent cause of noninvasive ventilation used (71.3%), followed by pulmonary expansion (10.24%), after mechanical ventilation weaning (6.14%) and sleep obstructive apnea (8.6%). The most frequently used interface was total face masks (74.7%), followed by facial masks in 24.5% of the patients, and 0.8% used performax masks. The use of noninvasive ventilation for periods (82.4%) was the most common scheme of use, with 10.6% using it continuously and 6.9% during the nocturnal period only. Interface adaptation occurred in 76% of the patients; the 24% that did not adapt had their interface changed to improve adaptation afterwards. The total face mask had 75.5% of interface adaptation, the facial mask had 80% and no adaptation occurred in patients that used the performax mask. The face format was the most frequent cause of nonadaptation in 30.5% of the patients, followed by patient's related discomfort (28.8%), air leaking (27.7%), claustrophobia (18.6%), noncollaborative patient (10.1%), patient agitation (6.7%), facial trauma or lesion (1.7%), type of mask fi xation (1.7%), and 1.7% patients with other causes. Conclusion Acute respiratory failure was the most frequent reason for noninvasive ventilation use, with the total face mask being the most frequent interface used. The most common causes of interface nonadaptation were face format, patient-related discomfort and air leaking, showing improvement of adaptation after changing the interface used. P2 Exercise training reduces oxidative damage in skeletal muscle of septic rats

Objective: To introduce the notion of noninvasive mechanical ventilation as an alternative for invasive ventilation in children, describing advantages and disadvantages, indications, and the process of equipment installation. Sources of data: Literature review through PubMed/Medline, using as source articles focusing on noninvasive ventilation in pediatric populations, as well as consensus statements and metanalyses concerning noninvasive ventilation in adults. Summary of the findings: The main indication for noninvasive ventilation is respiratory failure due to hypercapnia. It is contra-indicated in the presence of hemodynamic instability. The advantages of noninvasive ventilation include: the equipment is easy to install; it is not invasive and involves less discomfort; there is a lower incidence of complications associated with the endotracheal tube; lower cost. The disadvantages are: gastric distention; transient hypoxemia; facial skin necrosis. The equipment required for noninvasive ventilation includes an interface (mask) and a respirator. The removal of noninvasive ventilation equipment is relatively simple, but chronic patients may require assistance in the home. Conclusions: Noninvasive ventilation is a less costly, efficient and simple to perform alternative in cases of respiratory failure without hemodynamic instability.

ObjectiveTo characterize the transport of severely ill patients with extracorporeal respiratory or cardiovascular support.MethodsA series of 18 patients in the state of São Paulo, Brazil is described. All patients were consecutively evaluated by a multidisciplinary team at the hospital of origin. The patients were rescued, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support was provided on site. The patients were then transported to referral hospitals for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. Data were retrieved from a prospectively collected database.ResultsFrom 2011 to 2017, 18 patients aged 29 (25 - 31) years with a SAPS 3 of 84 (68 - 92) and main primary diagnosis of leptospirosis and influenza A (H1N1) virus were transported to three referral hospitals in São Paulo. A median distance of 39 (15 - 82) km was traveled on each rescue mission during a period of 360 (308 - 431) min. A median of one (0 - 2) nurse, three (2 - 3) physicians, and one (0 - 1) physical therapist was present per rescue. Seventeen rescues were made by ambulance, and one rescue was made by helicopter. The observed complications were interruption in the energy supply to the pump in two cases (11%) and oxygen saturation < 70% in two cases. Thirteen patients (72%) survived and were discharged from the hospital. Among the nonsurvivors, there were two cases of brain death, two cases of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and one case of irreversible pulmonary fibrosis.ConclusionsTransportation with extracorporeal support occurred without serious complications, and the hospital survival rate was high.