A fraction of COVID-19 patients progress to a severe disease manifestation with respiratory failure and the necessity of mechanical ventilation. Identifying patients at risk is critical for optimized care and early therapeutic interventions. We investigated the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 shedding relative to disease severity.We analyzed nasopharyngeal and tracheal shedding of SARS-CoV-2 in 92 patients with diagnosed COVID-19. Upon admission, standardized nasopharyngeal swabs or sputum were collected. If patients were mechanically ventilated, tracheal aspirates were additionally obtained. Viral shedding was quantified by real-time PCR detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA.45% (41 of 92) of COVID-19 had a severe disease course with the need for mechanical ventilation (severe group). At week 1, the initial viral shedding determined from nasopharyngeal swabs showed no significant difference between non-severe and severe cases. At week 2, a difference could be observed as the viral shedding remained elevated in severely ill patients. A time course of C-reactive-Protein (CRP), Interleukin-6 (Il-6), and Procalcitonin (PCT) revealed an even more protracted inflammatory response following the delayed drop of virus shedding load in severely ill patients. A significant proportion (47.8%) of patients showed evidence of prolonged viral shedding (>17 days), which was associated with severe disease courses (73.2%).We report that viral shedding does not differ significantly between severe and non-severe cases upon admission to the hospital. Elevated SARS-CoV-2 shedding in the second week of hospitalisation, a systemic inflammatory reaction peaking between second and third week and prolonged viral shedding are associated with a more severe disease course.

Prolonged shedding of infectious SARS-CoV-2 has recently been reported in a number of immunosuppressed individuals with COVID-19. Here, we describe the detection of high levels of replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 in specimens taken from the respiratory tract of a B-cell depleted patient up to 154 days after initial COVID-19 diagnosis concomitant with the development of high mutation rate. In this patient, a total of 11 nonsynonymous mutations were detected in addition to the Y144 deletion in the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2.Virus evolution studies revealed a dramatic diversification in viral population coinciding with treatment with convalescent plasma and clinical respiratory deterioration. Our findings highlight the urgent need for continuous real-time surveillance of genetic changes of SARS-CoV-2 adaptation alongside immunological investigations in patients with severely compromised humoral responses who may shed infectious virus over prolonged periods of time.

The role of veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy (V-V ECMO) in severe COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is still under debate and conclusive data from large cohorts are scarce. Furthermore, criteria for the selection of patients that benefit most from this highly invasive and resource-demanding therapy are yet to be defined. In this study, we assess survival in an international multicenter cohort of COVID-19 patients treated with V-V ECMO and evaluate the performance of several clinical scores to predict 30-day survival. Methods: This is an investigator-initiated retrospective non-interventional international multicenter registry study (NCT04405973, first registered 28 May 2020). In 127 patients treated with V-V ECMO at 15 centers in Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Belgium, and the United States, we calculated the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Score, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II), Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) Score, Respiratory Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Survival Prediction (RESP) Score, Predicting Death for Severe ARDS on V‑V ECMO (PRESERVE) Score, and 30-day survival. Results: In our study cohort which enrolled 127 patients, overall 30-day survival was 54%. Median SOFA, SAPS II, APACHE II, RESP, and PRESERVE were 9, 36, 17, 1, and 4, respectively. The prognostic accuracy for all these scores (area under the receiver operating characteristic—AUROC) ranged between 0.548 and 0.605. Conclusions: The use of scores for the prediction of mortality cannot be recommended for treatment decisions in severe COVID-19 ARDS undergoing V-V ECMO; nevertheless, scoring results below or above a specific cut-off value may be considered as an additional tool in the evaluation of prognosis. Survival rates in this cohort of COVID-19 patients treated with V‑V ECMO were slightly lower than those reported in non-COVID-19 ARDS patients treated with V-V ECMO.

The aim of the current paper is to summarize the results of the International CytoSorb Registry. Data were collected on patients of the intensive care unit. The primary endpoint was actual in-hospital mortality compared to the mortality predicted by APACHE II score. The main secondary endpoints were SOFA scores, inflammatory biomarkers and overall evaluation of the general condition. 1434 patients were enrolled. Indications for hemoadsorption were sepsis/septic shock (N = 936); cardiac surgery perioperatively (N = 172); cardiac surgery postoperatively (N = 67) and “other” reasons (N = 259). APACHE-II-predicted mortality was 62.0±24.8%, whereas observed hospital mortality was 50.1%. Overall SOFA scores did not change but cardiovascular and pulmonary SOFA scores decreased by 0.4 [-0.5;-0.3] and -0.2 [-0.3;-0.2] points, respectively. Serum procalcitonin and C-reactive protein levels showed significant reduction: -15.4 [-19.6;-11.17] ng/mL; -17,52 [-70;44] mg/L, respectively. In the septic cohort PCT and IL-6 also showed significant reduction: -18.2 [-23.6;-12.8] ng/mL; -2.6 [-3.0;-2.2] pg/mL, respectively. Evaluation of the overall effect: minimal improvement (22%), much improvement (22%) and very much improvement (10%), no change observed (30%) and deterioration (4%). There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of mortality, but there were improvements in cardiovascular and pulmonary SOFA scores and a reduction in PCT, CRP and IL-6 levels. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02312024 (retrospectively registered).

Background The successful initiation of enteral nutrition is frequently hampered by various complications occurring in patients treated in the intensive care unit (ICU). Successful placement of a nasojejunal tube by CORTRAK enteral access system (CEAS) has been reported to be a simple bedside tool for placing the postpyloric (PP) feeding tube. Methods We evaluated the efficacy and side effects using CEAS to establish EN in patients with critical illness, thrombocytopenia, and/or anticoagulation. Results Fifty‐six mechanically ventilated patients were analyzed. Twenty‐four of them underwent prior hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (SCT). Sixteen patients received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation treatment because of acute respiratory distress syndrome. The median platelet count at PP placement was 26 g/L (range, 4–106 g/L); 16 patients received therapeutic anticoagulation (activated partial thromboplastin time, 50–70 s). CEAS‐assisted placement of a PP nasojejunal tube was performed successfully in all patients. The most frequent adverse event was epistaxis in 27 patients (48.2%), which was mostly mild (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 1, n = 21 [77.8%], and grade 2, n = 6). A significant association between a low platelet count and bleeding complications was observed (P < 0.001). Conclusion Performed by an experienced operator, CEAS is a simple, rapidly available, and effective bedside tool for safely placing PP feeding tubes for EN in patients with thrombocytopenia, even when showing an otherwise‐caused coagulopathy in the ICU. Higher‐grade bleeding complications were not observed despite their obvious correlation to thrombocytopenia. A prospective study is in preparation.