words)Objective: The Covid-19 pandemic is rapidly spreading worldwide, notably in Europe and North America, where obesity is highly prevalent. The relation between obesity and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has not been fully documented.Methods: In this retrospective cohort study we analyzed the relationship between clinical characteristics, including body mass index (BMI), and the requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in 124 consecutive patients admitted in intensive care for SARS-CoV-2, in a single French center.Results : Obesity (BMI >30 kg/m2) and severe obesity (BMI >35 kg/m2) were present in 47.6% and 28.2% of cases, respectively. Overall, 85 patients (68.6%) required IMV. The proportion of patients who required IMV increased with BMI categories (p<0.01, Chi square test for trend), and it was greatest in patients with BMI >35 kg/m 2 (85.7%). In multivariate logistic regression, the need for IMV was significantly associated with male sex (p<0.05) and BMI (p<0.05), independent of age, diabetes, and hypertension. The odds ratio for IMV in patients with BMI >35 kg/m 2 vs patients with BMI <25 kg/m 2 was 7. 36 (1.63-33.14; p=0.02) Conclusion: The present study showed a high frequency of obesity among patients admitted in intensive care for SARS-CoV-2. Disease severity increased with BMI. Obesity is a risk factor for SARS-CoV-2 severity requiring increased attention to preventive measures in susceptible individuals. Accepted Article

No abstract

BackgroundConsequences of hyperoxemia, such as acute lung injury, atelectasis, and reduced bacterial clearance, might promote ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). The aim of our study was to determine the relationship between hyperoxemia and VAP.MethodsThis retrospective observational study was performed in a 30-bed mixed ICU. All patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours were eligible. VAP was defined using clinical, radiologic, and quantitative microbiological criteria. Hyperoxemia was defined as PaO2 > 120 mmHg. All data, except those related to hyperoxemia, were prospectively collected. Risk factors for VAP were determined using univariate and multivariate analysis.ResultsVAP was diagnosed in 141 of the 503 enrolled patients (28 %). The incidence rate of VAP was 14.7 per 1000 ventilator days. Hyperoxemia at intensive care unit admission (67 % vs 53 %, OR = 1.8, 95 % CI (1.2, 29), p <0.05) and number of days spent with hyperoxemia were significantly more frequent in patients with VAP, compared with those with no VAP. Multivariate analysis identified number of days spent with hyperoxemia (OR = 1.1, 95 % CI (1.04, 1.2) per day, p = 0.004), simplified acute physiology score (SAPS) II (OR = 1.01, 95 % CI (1.002, 1.024) per point, p < 0 .05), red blood cell transfusion (OR = 1.8, 95 % CI (1.2, 2.7), p = 0.01), and proton pomp inhibitor use (OR = 1.9, 95 % CI (1.03, 1.2), p < 0.05) as independent risk factors for VAP. Other multiple regression models also identified hyperoxemia at ICU admission (OR = 1.89, 95 % CI (1.23, 2.89), p = 0.004), and percentage of days with hyperoxemia (OR = 2.2, 95 % CI (1.08, 4.48), p = 0.029) as independent risk factors for VAP.ConclusionHyperoxemia is independently associated with VAP. Further studies are required to confirm our results.

No abstract

IMPORTANCEThe benefit of high-dose dexamethasone and oxygenation strategies vs standard of care for patients with severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) caused by COVID-19 pneumonia is debated.OBJECTIVES To assess the benefit of high-dose dexamethasone compared with standard of care dexamethasone, and to assess the benefit of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO 2 ) or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) compared with oxygen support standard of care (O 2 SC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis multicenter, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in 19 intensive care units (ICUs) in France from April 2020 to January 2021. Eligible patients were consecutive ICU-admitted adults with COVID-19 AHRF. Randomization used a 2 × 3 factorial design for dexamethasone and oxygenation strategies; patients not eligible for at least 1 oxygenation strategy and/or already receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) were only randomized for dexamethasone. All patients were followed-up for 60 days. Data were analyzed from May 26 to July 31, 2021.INTERVENTIONS Patients received standard dexamethasone (dexamethasone-phosphate 6 mg/d for 10 days [or placebo prior to RECOVERY trial results communication]) or high-dose dexamethasone (dexamethasone-phosphate 20 mg/d on days 1-5 then 10 mg/d on days 6-10). Those not requiring IMV were additionally randomized to O 2 SC, CPAP, or HFNO 2 . MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe main outcomes were time to all-cause mortality, assessed at day 60, for the dexamethasone interventions, and time to IMV requirement, assessed at day 28, for the oxygenation interventions. Differences between intervention groups were calculated using proportional Cox models and expressed as hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS Among 841 screened patients, 546 patients (median [IQR] age, years; 414 [75.8%] men) were randomized between standard dexamethasone (276 patients, including 37 patients who received placebo) or high-dose dexamethasone (270 patients). Of these, 333 patients were randomized among O 2 SC (109 patients, including 56 receiving standard dexamethasone), CPAP (109 patients, including 57 receiving standard dexamethasone), and HFNO 2 (115 patients, including 56 receiving standard dexamethasone). There was no difference in 60-day mortality between standard and high-dose dexamethasone groups (HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.69-1.33]; P = .79). There was no significant difference for the cumulative incidence of IMV criteria at day 28 among O 2 support groups (O 2 SC vs CPAP: HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.71-1.63]; O 2 SC vs HFNO 2 : HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.69-1.55]) or 60-day mortality (O 2 SC vs CPAP: HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.58-1.61; O 2 SC vs HFNO 2 : HR, 0.89 [95% CI,). Interactions between interventions were not significant. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this randomized clinical trial among ICU patients with COVID-19-related AHRF, high-dose dexamethasone did not significantly improve 60-day survival. The oxygenation strategies in patients who were not initially receiving IMV did not significantly modify 28-day risk of...

BackgroundAnti-synthetase (AS) and dermato-pulmonary associated with anti-MDA-5 antibodies (aMDA-5) syndromes are near one of the other autoimmune inflammatory myopathies potentially responsible for severe acute interstitial lung disease. We undertook a 13-year retrospective multicenter study in 35 French ICUs in order to describe the clinical presentation and the outcome of patients admitted to the ICU for acute respiratory failure (ARF) revealing AS or aMDA-5 syndromes.ResultsFrom 2005 to 2017, 47 patients (23 males; median age 60 [1st–3rd quartiles 52–69] years, no comorbidity 85%) were admitted to the ICU for ARF revealing AS (n = 28, 60%) or aMDA-5 (n = 19, 40%) syndromes. Muscular, articular and cutaneous manifestations occurred in 11 patients (23%), 14 (30%) and 20 (43%) patients, respectively. Seventeen of them (36%) had no extra-pulmonary manifestations. C-reactive protein was increased (139 [40–208] mg/L), whereas procalcitonine was not (0.30 [0.12–0.56] ng/mL). Proportion of patients with creatine kinase ≥ 2N was 20% (n = 9/47). Forty-two patients (89%) had ARDS, which was severe in 86%, with a rate of 17% (n = 8/47) of extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation requirement. Proportion of patients who received corticosteroids, cyclophosphamide, rituximab, intravenous immunoglobulins and plasma exchange were 100%, 72%, 15%, 21% and 17%, respectively. ICU and hospital mortality rates were 45% (n = 21/47) and 51% (n = 24/47), respectively. Patients with aMDA-5 dermato-pulmonary syndrome had a higher hospital mortality than those with AS syndrome (n = 16/19, 84% vs. n = 8/28, 29%; p = 0.001).ConclusionsIntensivists should consider inflammatory myopathies as a cause of ARF of unknown origin. Extra-pulmonary manifestations are commonly lacking. Mortality is high, especially in aMDA-5 dermato-pulmonary syndrome.

Background No recommendation exists about the timing and setting for tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation in septic shock. Patients and methods This prospective multicenter observational study was conducted in 30 ICUs in France and Spain. All consecutive patients presenting with septic shock were eligible. The use of tracheal intubation was described across the participating ICUs. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify parameters associated with early intubation (before H8 following vasopressor onset). Results Eight hundred and fifty-nine patients were enrolled. Two hundred and nine patients were intubated early (24%, range 4.5–47%), across the 18 centers with at least 20 patients included. The cumulative intubation rate during the ICU stay was 324/859 (38%, range 14–65%). In the multivariate analysis, seven parameters were significantly associated with early intubation and ranked as follows by decreasing weight: Glasgow score, center effect, use of accessory respiratory muscles, lactate level, vasopressor dose, pH and inability to clear tracheal secretions. Global R-square of the model was only 60% indicating that 40% of the variability of the intubation process was related to other parameters than those entered in this analysis. Conclusion Neurological, respiratory and hemodynamic parameters only partially explained the use of tracheal intubation in septic shock patients. Center effect was important. Finally, a vast part of the variability of intubation remained unexplained by patient characteristics. Trial registration Clinical trials NCT02780466, registered on May 23, 2016. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02780466?term=intubatic&draw=2&rank=1.

The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of colonization pressure on intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired multidrug resistant bacteria (MDRB). All patients hospitalized for more than 48 h in the ICU were included in this prospective observational study. MDRB were defined as methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa resistant to ceftazidime or imipenem, Gram-negative bacilli producing extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL), and all strains of Acinetobacter baumannii and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. Colonization pressure was daily calculated in the three participating ICUs. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to determine risk factors for ICU-acquired MDRB. Two hundreds and four (34%) of the 593 included patients acquired an MDRB during their ICU stay. Multivariate analysis identified colonization pressure as an independent risk factor for ICU-acquired MDRB (OR (95% CI) 4.18 (1.03-17.01), p = 0.046). Other independent risk factors for ICU-acquired MDRB were mechanical ventilation (3.08 (1.28-7.38), p = 0.012), and arterial catheter use (OR, 3.04 (1.38-6.68), p = 0.006). ICU-acquired MDRB were associated with increased mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU stay. However, ICU-acquired MDRB was not independently associated with ICU-mortality. Colonization pressure is an independent risk factor for acquiring MDRB in the ICU.