IMPORTANCE Many patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are critically ill and require care in the intensive care unit (ICU). OBJECTIVE To evaluate the independent risk factors associated with mortality of patients with COVID-19 requiring treatment in ICUs in the Lombardy region of Italy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective, observational cohort study included 3988 consecutive critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 referred for ICU admission to the coordinating center (Fondazione IRCCS [Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico] Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy) of the COVID-19 Lombardy ICU Network from February 20 to April 22, 2020. Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 was confirmed by real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction assay of nasopharyngeal swabs. Follow-up was completed on May 30, 2020. EXPOSURES Baseline characteristics, comorbidities, long-term medications, and ventilatory support at ICU admission. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Time to death in days from ICU admission to hospital discharge. The independent risk factors associated with mortality were evaluated with a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS Of the 3988 patients included in this cohort study, the median age was 63 (interquartile range [IQR] 56-69) years; 3188 (79.9%; 95% CI, 78.7%-81.1%) were men, and 1998 of 3300 (60.5%; 95% CI, 58.9%-62.2%) had at least 1 comorbidity. At ICU admission, 2929 patients (87.3%; 95% CI, 86.1%-88.4%) required invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The median follow-up was 44 (95% CI, 40-47; IQR, 11-69; range, 0-100) days; median time from symptoms onset to ICU admission was 10 (95% CI, 9-10; IQR, 6-14) days; median length of ICU stay was 12 (95% CI, 12-13; IQR, 6-21) days; and median length of IMV was 10 (95% CI, 10-11; IQR, 6-17) days. Cumulative observation time was 164 305 patient-days. Hospital and ICU mortality rates were 12 (95% CI, 11-12) and 27 (95% CI, 26-29) per 1000 patients-days, respectively. In the subgroup of the first 1715 patients, as of May 30, 2020, 865 (50.4%) had been discharged from the ICU, 836 (48.7%) had died in the ICU, and 14 (0.8%) were still in the ICU; overall, 915 patients (53.4%) died in the hospital. Independent risk factors associated with mortality included older age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.75; 95% CI, 1.60-1.92), male sex (HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.31-1.88), high fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO 2) (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10-1.19), high positive end-expiratory pressure (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06) or low PaO 2 :FiO 2 ratio (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.74-0.87) on ICU admission, and history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.28-2.19), hypercholesterolemia (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.02-1.52), and type 2 diabetes (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01-1.39). No medication was independently associated with mortality (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.97-1.42; angiotensin receptor blockers HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.85-1.29). CONCLUS...
Background:The severe inflammatory state secondary to COVID-19 leads to a severe derangement of hemostasis that has been recently described as a state of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) and consumption coagulopathy, defined as decreased platelet count, increased fibrin(ogen) degradation products such as D-dimer, as well as low fibrinogen.Aims: Whole blood from 24 patients admitted at the intensive care unit because of COVID-19 was collected and evaluated with thromboelastography by the TEG pointof-care device on a single occasion and six underwent repeated measurements on two consecutive days for a total of 30 observations. Plasma was evaluated for the other parameters of hemostasis.Results: TEG parameters are consistent with a state of hypercoagulability as shown by decreased values, and increased values of K angle and MA. Platelet count was normal or increased, prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time were near(normal).Fibrinogen was increased and D-dimer was dramatically increased. C-reactive protein was increased. Factor VIII and von Willebrand factor (n = 11) were increased. Antithrombin (n = 11) was marginally decreased and protein C (n = 11) was increased. Conclusion:The results of this cohort of patients with COVID-19 are not consistent with acute DIC, rather they support hypercoagulability together with a severe inflammatory state. These findings may explain the events of venous thromboembolism observed in some of these patients and support antithrombotic prophylaxis/ treatment. Clinical trials are urgently needed to establish the type of drug, dosage, and optimal duration of prophylaxis.
Background Few small studies have described hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) during COVID-19. Research Question What patient characteristics in critically ill patients with COVID-19 are associated with HAIs and how do HAIs associate with outcomes in these patients? Study Design and Methods Multicenter retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data including adult patients with severe COVID-19, admitted to 8 Italian hub hospitals from February 20, 2020, to May 20, 2020. Descriptive statistics, univariable and multivariable Weibull regression models were used to assess incidence, microbial etiology, resistance patterns, risk factors (i.e., demographics, comorbidities, exposure to medication), and impact on outcomes (i.e., ICU survival, length of ICU and hospital stay and duration of mechanical ventilation) of microbiologically-confirmed HAIs. Results Of the 774 included patients, 359 (46%) patients developed 759 HAIs (44.7 infections/1000 ICU patient-days, 35% multi-drug resistant (MDR) bacteria). Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) (389, 50%), bloodstream infections (183, 34%), and catheter related blood stream infections (74, 10%) were the most frequent HAIs, with 26.0 (23.6-28.8) VAPs/1000 patient intubation-days, 11.7(10.1-13.5) BSIs/1000 ICU patient-days, and 4.7 (3.8-5.9) CRBSIs/1000 patient-days. Gram-negative bacteria (especially Enterobacterales ) and Staphylococcus aureus caused 64% and 28% of VAPs. Variables independently associated with infection were age, PEEP and treatment with broad-spectrum antibiotic at admission. 234 patients (30%) died in ICU (15.3 deaths/1000 ICU patient-days). Patients with HAIs complicated by septic shock had almost doubled mortality (52% vs. 29%), while non-complicated infections did not affect mortality. HAIs prolonged mechanical ventilation (24(14-39) vs. 9(5-13) days; p<0.001), ICU and hospital stay (24(16-41) vs. 9(6-14) days, p=0.003; and (42(25-59) vs. 23(13-34) days, p<0.001). Interpretation Critically-ill COVID-19 patients are at high risk for HAIs, especially VAPs and BSIs due to MDR organisms. HAIs prolong mechanical ventilation and hospitalization, and HAIs complicated by septic-shock almost doubled mortality.
Mechanical ventilation with plateau pressure lower than 35 cm H2O and high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) has been recommended as lung protective strategy. Ten patients with ARDS (five from pulmonary [p] and five from extrapulmonary [exp] origin), underwent 2 h of lung protective strategy, 1 h of lung protective strategy with three consecutive sighs/min at 45 cm H2O plateau pressure, and 1 h of lung protective strategy. Total minute ventilation, PEEP (14.0 +/- 2.2 cm H2O), inspiratory oxygen fraction, and mean airway pressure were kept constant. After 1 h of sigh we found that: (1) PaO2 increased (from 92.8 +/- 18.6 to 137.6 +/- 23.9 mm Hg, p < 0.01), venous admixture and PaCO2 decreased (from 38 +/- 12 to 28 +/- 14%, p < 0.01; and from 52.7 +/- 19.4 to 49.1 +/- 18.4 mm Hg, p < 0.05, respectively); (2) end-expiratory lung volume increased (from 1.49 +/- 0.58 to 1.91 +/- 0.67 L, p < 0.01), and was significantly correlated with the oxygenation (r = 0.82, p < 0.01) and lung elastance (r = 0.76, p < 0.01) improvement. Sigh was more effective in ARDSexp than in ARDSp. After 1 h of sigh interruption, all the physiologic variables returned to baseline. The derecruitment was correlated with PaCO2 (r = 0.86, p < 0.01). We conclude that: (1) lung protective strategy alone at the PEEP level used in this study may not provide full lung recruitment and best oxygenation; (2) application of sigh during lung protective strategy may improve recruitment and oxygenation.
In this cohort of patients with AHRF, an increasing HFNC flow rate progressively decreased inspiratory effort and improved lung aeration, dynamic compliance and oxygenation. Most of the effect on inspiratory workload and CO clearance was already obtained at the lowest flow rate.
Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) has been classically employed as a rescue therapy for patients with respiratory failure not treatable with conventional mechanical ventilation alone. In recent years, however, the timing of ECMO initiation has been readdressed and ECMO is often started earlier in the time course of respiratory failure. Furthermore, some centers are starting to use ECMO as a first line of treatment, i.e., as an alternative to invasive mechanical ventilation in awake, non-intubated, spontaneously breathing patients with respiratory failure (“awake” ECMO). There is a strong rationale for this type of respiratory support as it avoids several side effects related to sedation, intubation, and mechanical ventilation. However, the complexity of the patient–ECMO interactions, the difficulties related to respiratory monitoring, and the management of an awake patient on extracorporeal support together pose a major challenge for the intensive care unit staff. Here, we review the use of vv-ECMO in awake, spontaneously breathing patients with respiratory failure, highlighting the pros and cons of this approach, analyzing the pathophysiology of patient–ECMO interactions, detailing some of the technical aspects, and summarizing the initial clinical experience gained over the past years.
During anesthesia and paralysis, PEEP improves respiratory function in morbidly obese patients but not in normal subjects.
Rationale: Prone positioning reduces mortality in severe ARDS patients. To date no evidence supports the use of prone positioning during venovenous extracorporeal oxygenation (ECMO).Objectives: Aim of the study was to assess feasibility, safety and effect on oxygenation and lung mechanics of prone positioning during ECMO. As a secondary exploratory aim, we assessed the association between PP and hospital mortality. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study in six italian ECMO centers, including patients managed with prone positioning (PP) during ECMO support (prone group, four centers) and patients managed in the supine position (control group, two centers). Physiological variables were analyzed at 4 time points (supine before PP, start of PP, end of PP, supine after PP). The association between prone positioning and hospital mortality was assessed by multivariate analysis and propensity score matching. Results: 240 patients were included, 107 in the prone group and 133 in the supine group.Median duration of the 326 pronation cycles was 15 [12][13][14][15][16][17][18] hours. Minor reversible complications were reported in 6% of prone positioning maneuvers. Prone positioning improved oxygenation and reduced intrapulmonary shunt. Unadjusted hospital mortality was lower in the prone group (34 vs 50%, p=0.017). After adjusting for covariates, prone positioning remained significantly associated with a reduction of hospital mortality (OR=0.50, 95%CI: 0.29-0.87). 66 propensity score-matched patients were identified in each group. In this matched sample, patients who underwent pronation had higher ECMO duration (16 vs10 days, p-value=0.0344) but lower hospital mortality (30% vs 53%, p=0.0241).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.