Hemofiltration as an alternative for IL-6 inhibitors in COVID-19 cytokines storm associated with underlaying bacterial infections: A review Article.

SARS-CoV-2 causes mostly mild cases. However, a considerable number of patients develop fatal acute respiratory distress syndrome due to the cytokine storm and imbalanced immune response. Several therapies depending on immunomodulation have been used, including glucocorticoids and IL-6 blockers. However, their efficacy is not perfect with all patients and patients with concomitant bacterial infections and sepsis. Accordingly, studies on different immunomodulators, including extracorporeal techniques, are crucial to save this category of patients. In this review, we overviewed the different immunomodulation techniques shortly, with a brief review of extracorporeal methods.

Expert consensus statement on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation ECMO for COVID-19 severe ARDS: an international Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: The high-quality evidence on managing COVID-19 patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support is insufficient. Furthermore, there is little consensus on allocating ECMO resources when scarce. The paucity of evidence and the need for guidance on controversial topics required an international expert consensus statement to understand the role of ECMO in COVID-19 better. Twenty-two international ECMO experts worldwide work together to interpret the most recent findings of the evolving published research, statement formulation, and voting to achieve consensus. OBJECTIVES: To guide the next generation of ECMO practitioners during future pandemics on tackling controversial topics pertaining to using ECMO for patients with COVID-19-related severe ARDS. METHODS: The scientific committee was assembled of five chairpersons with more than 5 years of ECMO experience and a critical care background. Their roles were modifying and restructuring the panel's questions and, assisting with statement formulation in addition to expert composition and literature review. Experts are identified based on their clinical experience with ECMO (minimum of 5 years) and previous academic activity on a global scale, with a focus on diversity in gender, geography, area of expertise, and level of seniority. We used the modified Delphi technique rounds and the nominal group technique (NGT) through three face-to-face meetings and the voting on the statement was conducted anonymously. The entire process was planned to be carried out in five phases: identifying the gap of knowledge, validation, statement formulation, voting, and drafting, respectively. RESULTS: In phase I, the scientific committee obtained 52 questions on controversial topics in ECMO for COVID-19, further reviewed for duplication and redundancy in phase II, resulting in nine domains with 32 questions with a validation rate exceeding 75% (Fig. 1). In phase III, 25 questions were used to formulate 14 statements, and six questions achieved no consensus on the statements. In phase IV, two voting rounds resulted in 14 statements that reached a consensus are included in four domains which are: patient selection, ECMO clinical management, operational and logistics management, and ethics. CONCLUSION: Three years after the onset of COVID-19, our understanding of the role of ECMO has evolved. However, it is incomplete. Tota14 statements achieved consensus; included in four domains discussing patient selection, clinical ECMO management, operational and logistic ECMO management and ethics to guide next-generation ECMO providers during future pandemic situations.

Clinical evaluation of pregnant women with SARS-COV2 pneumonia: a real-life study from Egypt.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge about the outcome of COVID-19 on pregnant women is so important. The published literature on the outcomes of pregnant women with COVID-19 is confusing. The aim of this study was to report our clinical experience about the effect of COVID-19 on pregnant women and to determine whether it was associated with increased mortality or an increase in the need for mechanical ventilation in this special category of patients. METHODS: This was a cohort study from some isolation hospitals of the Ministry of Health and Population, in eleven governorates, Egypt. The clinical data from the first 64 pregnant women with COVID-19 whose care was managed at some of the Egyptian hospitals from 14 March to 14 June 2020 as well as 114 non-pregnant women with COVID-19 was reviewed. RESULTS: The two groups did not show any significant difference regarding the main outcomes of the disease. Two cases in each group needed mechanical ventilation (p 0.617). Three cases (4.7%) died among the pregnant women and two (1.8%) died among the non-pregnant women (p 0.352). CONCLUSIONS: The main clinical outcomes of COVID-19 were not different between pregnant and non-pregnant women with COVID-19. Based on our findings, pregnancy did not exacerbate the course or mortality of COVID-19 pneumonia.

Implementation of new ECMO centers during the COVID-19 pandemic: experience and results from the Middle East and India.

PURPOSE: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients has increased during the course of the pandemic. As uncertainty existed regarding patient's outcomes, early guidelines recommended against establishing new ECMO centers. We aimed to explore the epidemiology and outcomes of ECMO for COVID-19 related cardiopulmonary failure in five countries in the Middle East and India and to evaluate the results of ECMO in 5 new centers. METHODS: This is a retrospective, multicenter international, observational study conducted in 19 ECMO centers in five countries in the Middle East and India from March 1, 2020, to September 30, 2020. We included patients with COVID-19 who received ECMO for refractory hypoxemia and severe respiratory acidosis with or without circulatory failure. Data collection included demographic data, ECMO-related specific data, pre-ECMO patient condition, 24 h post-ECMO initiation data, and outcome. The primary outcome was survival to home discharge. Secondary outcomes included mortality during ECMO, survival to decannulation, and outcomes stratified by center type. RESULTS: Three hundred and seven COVID-19 patients received ECMO support during the study period, of whom 78 (25%) were treated in the new ECMO centers. The median age was 45 years (interquartile range IQR 37-52), and 81% were men. New center patients were younger, were less frequently male, had received higher PEEP, more frequently inotropes and prone positioning before ECMO and were less frequently retrieved from a peripheral center on ECMO. Survival to home discharge was 45%. In patients treated in new and established centers, survival was 55 and 41% (p = 0.03), respectively. Multivariable analysis retained only a SOFA score < 12 at ECMO initiation as associated with survival (odds ratio, OR 1.93 (95% CI 1.05-3.58), p = 0.034), but not treatment in a new center (OR 1.65 (95% CI 0.75-3.67)). CONCLUSIONS: During pandemics, ECMO may provide favorable outcomes in highly selected patients as resources allow. Newly formed ECMO centers with appropriate supervision of regional experts may have satisfactory results.

Utility of Lung Ultrasound in Decision-making to Prioritize Hospital Admission for COVID-19 Patients: A Developing Country Perspective.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In the midst of this pandemic, planning the prioritization of hospital admissions for patients affected with COVID-19 should be of prime concern, particularly in healthcare settings with limited resources. Thus, in this study, we aimed to develop a novel approach to triage COVID-19 patients and attempt to prioritize their hospital admission using Lung Ultrasonography (LUS). The efficacy of LUS in triaging suspected COVID-19 patients and assessing the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia was evaluated; the findings were then compared with those obtained by chest computed tomography (CT). METHODS: This multicenter, cross-sectional study comprised 243 COVID-19 patients who presented to the emergency department in 3 major university hospitals in Egypt. LUS was performed by an experienced emergency or chest physician, according to the local protocol of each hospital. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were then collected from each patient. Each patient was subjected to chest CT scans and LUS. RESULTS: The mean age of the 243 patients was 46.7 ± 10.4 years. Ground-glass opacity, subpleural consolidation, translobar consolidation, and crazy paving were reported in the chest CT scans of 54.3%, 15.2%, 11.1%, and 8.6% of the patients, respectively. B-line artifacts were observed in 81.1% of the patients (confluent pattern, 18.9%). The LUS findings completely coincided with the CT findings (Kappa agreement value, 0.77) in 197 patients (81.1%) and offered a diagnostic sensitivity of 74%, diagnostic specificity of 97.9%, positive predictive value of 90.2%, and negative predictive value of 93.6% for the COVID-19 patients. Following the addition of O2 saturation to the lung imaging findings, the ultrasound method was able to demonstrate 100% sensitivity and specificity in accurately differentiating between severe and non-severe lung diseases. CONCLUSION: LUS with oxygen saturation might prove to be effective in prioritizing the hospital admission of COVID-19 patients, particularly in healthcare settings with limited resources.