Tocilizumab Outcomes in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients Admitted to the ICU and the Role of Non-Tocilizumab COVID-19-Specific Medical Therapeutics.

BACKGROUND: Tocilizumab is a monoclonal antibody proposed to manage cytokine release syndrome (CRS) associated with severe COVID-19. Previously published reports have shown that tocilizumab may improve the clinical outcomes of critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. However, no precise data about the role of other medical therapeutics concurrently used for COVID-19 on this outcome have been published. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the overall outcome of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU who received tocilizumab with the outcome of matched patients who did not receive tocilizumab while controlling for other confounders, including medical therapeutics for critically ill patients admitted to ICUs. METHODS: A prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study was conducted among critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU of 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia between 1 March 2020, and October 31, 2020. Propensity-score matching was utilized to compare patients who received tocilizumab to patients who did not. In addition, the log-rank test was used to compare the 28 day hospital survival of patients who received tocilizumab with those who did not. Then, a multivariate logistic regression analysis of the matched groups was performed to evaluate the impact of the remaining concurrent medical therapeutics that could not be excluded via matching 28 day hospital survival rates. The primary outcome measure was patients' overall 28 day hospital survival, and the secondary outcomes were ICU length of stay and ICU survival to hospital discharge. RESULTS: A total of 1470 unmatched patients were included, of whom 426 received tocilizumab. The total number of propensity-matched patients was 1278. Overall, 28 day hospital survival revealed a significant difference between the unmatched non-tocilizumab group (586; 56.1%) and the tocilizumab group (269; 63.1%) (p-value = 0.016), and this difference increased even more in the propensity-matched analysis between the non-tocilizumab group (466.7; 54.6%) and the tocilizumab group (269; 63.1%) (p-value = 0.005). The matching model successfully matched the two groups' common medical therapeutics used to treat COVID-19. Two medical therapeutics remained significantly different, favoring the tocilizumab group. A multivariate logistic regression was performed for the 28 day hospital survival in the propensity-matched patients. It showed that neither steroids (OR: 1.07 (95% CI: 0.75-1.53)) (p = 0.697) nor favipiravir (OR: 1.08 (95% CI: 0.61-1.9)) (p = 0.799) remained as a predictor for an increase in 28 day survival. CONCLUSION: The tocilizumab treatment in critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU improved the overall 28 day hospital survival, which might not be influenced by the concurrent use of other COVID-19 medical therapeutics, although further research is needed to confirm this.

Effect of Tocilizumab on "Ventilator Free Days" Composite Outcome in SARS-CoV-2 Patients: A Retrospective Competing Risk Analysis.

Background: SARS-CoV-2 infection demonstrates a wide range of severity. More severe cases demonstrate a cytokine storm with elevated serum interleukin-6, hence IL-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab was tried for the management of severe cases. Aims: Effect of tocilizumab on ventilator-free days among critically ill SARS-CoV-2 patients. Method: Retrospective propensity score matching study, comparing mechanically ventilated patients who received tocilizumab to a control group. Results: 29 patients in the intervention group were compared to 29 controls. Matched groups were similar. Ventilator-free days were more numerous in the intervention group (SHR 2.7, 95% CI: 1.2 - 6.3; p = 0.02), ICU mortality rate was not different (37.9% versus 62%, p = 0.1), actual ventilator-free periods were significantly longer in tocilizumab group (mean difference 4.7 days; p = 0.02). Sensitivity analysis showed a significantly lower hazard ratio of death in tocilizumab group (HR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.25 - 0.97; p = 0.04). There was no difference in positive cultures among groups (55.2% in tocilizumab group versus 34.5% in the control; p = 0.1). Conclusion: Tocilizumab may improve the composite outcome of ventilator-free days at day 28 among mechanically ventilated SARS-CoV-2 patients; it is associated with significantly longer actual ventilator-free periods, and insignificantly lower mortality and higher superinfection.

Favipiravir Efficacy And Safety For The Treatment Of Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Corona virus disease is caused by the enveloped, single stranded RNA virus known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) becoming the deadliest disease of the century. Its global outbreak has led researchers to develop drugs or vaccines to prevent the spread of the disease. Favipiravir is an approved orally administered antiviral drug that selectively inhibits RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, used off-label to treat COVID-19. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of this drug for severe COVID-19 infection. METHODS: This was an observational retrospective study, carried out at the ICU of King Saud Medical City (KSMC) from June 2020 to August 2020. Including a total of one thousand six hundred and ninety-nine patients (n=1699). Categorized into a treatment group (193 patients) who received Favipiravir along with standard care, and non-treatment group (1506 patients) who received standard care only. RESULTS: ICU all-cause mortality was similar in both groups i.e., (Treated group 38.3% Vs Untreated group 39.4%, 95% CI of difference: -6.6% to +8.4%; p = 0.8). The subgroup analysis of survivors as compared to deceased in the treatment group showed that survivors had significantly lower age, international normalising ratio (INR), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and creatinine. The mean ICU length of stay (LOS) was shorter for survivors compared to deceased (11.2± 8.03 Vs 16.7±9.8 days respectively), while hospital LOS was almost similar between the two groups. Advanced age (OR 1.03 [95% CI: 1.01-1.06]; p=0.004), higher INR and BUN were significantly associated with increased odds of mortality. Comparison of lab investigations at day 1 and day 10 in the treatment group (regardless of outcome) showed that there was a significant increase in Alanine transaminase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALK), and Bilirubin, while an insignificant trend of increase in Aspartate transaminase (AST) and creatinine was recorded. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, Favipiravir showed better therapeutic responses in patients with severe COVID-19 infection, in terms of average duration of stay in the intensive care unit and was well tolerated in the younger age, but showed no mortality benefit. However, elevated levels of inflammatory markers, including increased ALT, AST, BUN, bilirubin, and creatinine, needs to be carefully examined.

"Ventilator-free days" composite outcome in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection treated with tocilizumab: A retrospective competing risk analysis.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection demonstrates a wide range of severity, with more severe cases presenting with a cytokine storm with elevated serum interleukin-6; hence, the interleukin-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab was used for the management of severe cases. OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect of tocilizumab on ventilator-free day composite outcomes among critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: This retrospective propensity score-matching study compared mechanically ventilated patients who received tocilizumab to a control group. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients in the intervention group were compared to 29 controls. The matched groups were similar. The ventilator-free days composite outcome was higher in the intervention group (sub-distribution hazard ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2-6.3; p = 0.02), the mortality rate in the intensive care unit was not different (37.9% vs 62%, p = 0.1), and actual ventilator-free days were significantly longer in the tocilizumab group (mean difference 4.7 days; p = 0.02). Sensitivity analysis showed a significantly lower hazard ratio for death in the tocilizumab group (HR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.25-0.97; p = 0.04). Positive cultures were not significantly different among the groups (55.2% vs 34.5% in the tocilizumab and control groups, respectively; p = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Tocilizumab may improve the composite outcome of ventilator-free days at day 28 among mechanically ventilated patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. It is associated with significantly longer actual ventilator-free days, insignificantly lower mortality, and higher superinfection.

Machine learning decision tree algorithm role for predicting mortality in critically ill adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and is currently a major cause of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions globally. The role of machine learning in the ICU is evolving but currently limited to diagnostic and prognostic values. A decision tree (DT) algorithm is a simple and intuitive machine learning method that provides sequential nonlinear analysis of variables. It is simple and might be a valuable tool for bedside physicians during COVID-19 to predict ICU outcomes and help in critical decision-making like end-of-life decisions and bed allocation in the event of limited ICU bed capacities. Herein, we utilized a machine learning DT algorithm to describe the association of a predefined set of variables and 28-day ICU outcome in adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. We highlight the value of utilizing a machine learning DT algorithm in the ICU at the time of a COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This was a prospective and multicenter cohort study involving 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia. We included critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU between March 1, 2020, and October 31, 2020. The predictors of 28-day ICU mortality were identified using two predictive models: conventional logistic regression and DT analyses. RESULTS: There were 1468 critically ill COVID-19 patients included in the study. The 28-day ICU mortality was 540 (36.8 %), and the 90-day mortality was 600 (40.9 %). The DT algorithm identified five variables that were integrated into the algorithm to predict 28-day ICU outcomes: need for intubation, need for vasopressors, age, gender, and PaO2/FiO2 ratio. CONCLUSION: DT is a simple tool that might be utilized in the ICU to identify critically ill COVID-19 patients who are at high risk of 28-day ICU mortality. However, further studies and external validation are still required.

Mortality and Pulmonary Embolism in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome From COVID-19 vs. Non-COVID-19.

Purpose: There may be a difference in respiratory mechanics, inflammatory markers, and pulmonary emboli in COVID-19 associated ARDS vs. ARDS from other etiologies. Our purpose was to determine differences in respiratory mechanics, inflammatory markers, and incidence of pulmonary embolism in patients with and without COVID-19 associated ARDS admitted in the same period and treated with a similar ventilation strategy. Methods: A cohort study of COVID-19 associated ARDS and non COVID-19 patients in a Saudi Arabian center between June 1 and 15, 2020. We measured respiratory mechanics (ventilatory ratio (VR), recruitability index (RI), markers of inflammation, and computed tomography pulmonary angiograms. Results: Forty-two patients with COVID-19 and 43 non-COVID patients with ARDS comprised the cohort. The incidence of "recruitable" patients using the recruitment/inflation ratio was slightly lower in COVID-19 patients (62 vs. 86%; p = 0.01). Fifteen COVID-19 ARDS patients (35.7%) developed a pulmonary embolism as compared to 4 (9.3%) in other ARDS patients (p = 0.003). In COVID-19 patients, a D-Dimer ≥ 5.0 mcg/ml had a 73% (95% CI 45-92%) sensitivity and 89% (95% CI 71-98%) specificity for predicting pulmonary embolism. Crude 60-day mortality was higher in COVID-19 patients (35 vs. 15%; p = 0.039) but three multivariate analysis showed that independent predictors of 60-day mortality included the ventilatory ratio (OR 3.67, 95% CI 1.61-8.35), PaO2/FIO2 ratio (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.87-0.99), IL-6 (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.03), and D-dimer (OR 7.26, 95% CI 1.11-47.30) but not COVID-19 infection. Conclusion: COVID-19 patients were slightly less recruitable and had a higher incidence of pulmonary embolism than those with ARDS from other etiologies. A high D-dimer was predictive of pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 infection was not an independent predictor of 60-day mortality in the presence of ARDS.

Renal Tubular Acidosis in Critically Ill Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection associated with multisystemic involvement including renal manifestations has been described in the literature. The recent data show a high mortality rate of 60%-90% once renal function begins to deteriorate. We report on three patients who were admitted to intensive care unit due to severe COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome and developed distal renal tubular acidosis. The three COVID-19 patients had hyperchloremic acidosis which was investigated thoroughly through a biochemical analysis of arterial blood gases and urine test as well as serological tests for autoimmune diseases and chronic infections, in addition to renal ultrasound. Metabolic acidosis was managed through repeated doses of intravenous sodium bicarbonate therapy; however, continuous renal replacement therapy was initiated for two refractory cases. We found that severe COVID-19 infection may be accompanied by hyperchloremic acidosis due to the cytopathic damage of the distal renal tubules, making the buffering system nonefficient and if not managed adequately, it may lead to poor prognosis.

Comparison of severity of immunized versus non-immunized COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU: A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Vaccines against COVID-19 show high efficacy, yet, infection is still being detected among immunized patients, although with blunted severity. The purpose of this study was to assess the severity of COVID-19 infection among immunized versus non-immunized COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU. METHOD: A prospective observational cohort study, including all COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care unit between January 1st, 2021 and June 30th, 2021 were eligible for inclusion. A comparison of severity upon hospitalization of immunized versus non-immunized patients on a 7-level ordinal scale was conducted, using ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS: 592 patients were enrolled, 524 (88.5%) non-immunized, 63 (10.6%) partially immunized, and 5 (0.9%) fully immunized, partially and fully immunized patients were grouped together. Majority of immunized patients (86.7%) were symptomatic before 21 days of immunization. Non-immunized group had fewer patients in the lower severity categories, while more patients in the higher severity categories compared to immunized group. At least one dose of immunization was associated with reduction of odds of moving up severity scale (OR = 0.2 [95% CI: 0.15-0.4]; p < 0.001) in a well fitted ordinal logistic regression model. At least one dose of immunization was associated with lower adjusted odds of 30 day all-cause mortality (OR = 0.45 [95% CI: 0.23-0.89]; p = 0.02). Non-immunized group had higher mortality rate (43.9% versus 29.4% [95% CI: 1.5 to 25.8]; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Most COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU were non-immunized, most of the partially immunized patients got infected before immunity could develop, and fully immunized patients were likely non-responders. At least one dose of immunization significantly decreases severity of the disease across all ordinal severity categories, and is significantly associated with lower 30 day all-cause mortality. Accordingly, immunization status may have to be considered when deciding on disposition of COVID-19 patients at the point of triage.

Helmet Non-Invasive Ventilation for COVID-19 Patients (Helmet-COVID): study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) delivered by helmet has been used for respiratory support of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia. The aim of this study was to compare helmet NIV with usual care versus usual care alone to reduce mortality. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel randomised controlled trial that compares helmet NIV with usual care to usual care alone in a 1:1 ratio. A total of 320 patients will be enrolled in this study. The primary outcome is 28-day all-cause mortality. The primary outcome will be compared between the two study groups in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol cohorts. An interim analysis will be conducted for both safety and effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approvals are obtained from the institutional review boards of each participating institution. Our findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences and meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04477668.

Peripheral neuropathy in severe COVID-19 resolved with therapeutic plasma exchange.

Peripheral neuropathies including Guillain-Barré syndrome may be linked to life-threatening COVID-19. Plasma exchange is a safe rescue therapy in severe COVID-19 with associated neurological manifestations and thromboinflammation.

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.

Therapeutic plasma exchange in patients with life-threatening COVID-19: a randomised controlled clinical trial.

Assessment of efficacy of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) following life-threatening COVID-19. This was an open-label, randomised clinical trial of ICU patients with life-threatening COVID-19 (positive RT-qPCR plus ARDS, sepsis, organ failure, hyperinflammation). Study was terminated after 87/120 patients enrolled. Standard treatment plus TPE (n = 43) versus standard treatment (n = 44), and stratified by PaO2/FiO2 ratio (>150 vs. ≤150), were compared. Primary outcomes were 35-day mortality and TPE safety. Secondary outcomes were association between TPE and mortality, improvement in SOFA score, change in inflammatory biomarkers, days on mechanical ventilation (MV), and ICU length of stay (LOS). Eighty-seven patients [median age 49 (IQR 34-63) years; 82.8% male] were randomised (44 standard care; 43 standard care plus TPE). Days on MV (P = 0.007) and ICU LOS (P = 0.02) were lower in the TPE group. 35-Day mortality was non-significantly lower in the TPE group (20.9% vs. 34.1%; Kaplan-Meier, P = 0.582). TPE was associated with increased lymphocytes and ADAMTS-13 activity and decreased serum lactate, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, d-dimers and interleukin-6. Multivariable regression analysis provided several predictors of 35-day mortality: PaO2/FiO2 ratio (HR, 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.00; P = 0.02]; ADAMTS-13 activity (HR, 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.98; P = 0.01); pulmonary embolism (HR, 3.57, 95% CI 1.43-8.92; P = 0.007). Post-hoc analysis revealed a significant reduction in SOFA score for TPE patients (P < 0.05). In critically-ill COVID-19 patients, addition of TPE to standard ICU therapy was associated with faster clinical recovery and no increased 35-day mortality.

A Retrospective Analysis of Thromboembolic Phenomena in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have shown an increased prevalence of thromboembolic disease in critically ill patients with the novel SARS-CoV-2 disease (COVID-19). However, the use of enhanced anticoagulation therapy in these patients remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of thromboembolic phenomena (TEP) and hemorrhagic events (HEs) in intensive care unit (ICU) COVID-19 patients. METHODS: One hundred and sixty ICU patients with COVID-19 were enrolled. Clinical examination results, laboratory data, and imaging studies (computed tomography/Doppler ultrasound scans) for these patients were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Outcome measures including days on mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, and day-28 mortality were recorded. RESULTS: Sixty patients (37.5%) developed TEP including thirty patients with deep vein thrombosis, 55 patients with pulmonary embolism, and 7 patients with arterial thromboembolism. Cardiac arrhythmias, lymphocytopenia, and increased D-dimers were more frequently observed in the TEP group compared to the non-TEP group of patients (all p < 0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of a cutoff D-dimer level of 3.0 µg/mL for predicting PE were 74.5%, 95.1%, 86.8%, and 91.9%, respectively. Thirteen patients experienced HEs, which were more frequently observed in the TEP group (p < 0.05). Twenty-eight-day mortality was higher in the TEP group (60%) compared to the non-TEP group (30%) of patients (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The rates of TEP and HEs in mechanically ventilated critically ill COVID-19 patients were 37. 5% and 8.1%. Twenty-eight-day mortality was higher in the TEP group (60%) compared to the non-TEP group (30%) of patients.

COVID-19 with spontaneous pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, and subcutaneous emphysema in the intensive care unit: Two case reports.

Real-Time-reverse-transcription-Polymerase-Chain-Reaction from nasopharyngeal swabs and chest computed tomography (CT) depicting typically bilateral ground-glass opacities with a peripheral and/or posterior distribution are mandatory in the diagnosis of COVID-19. COVID-19 pneumonia may present though with atypical features such as pleural and pericardial effusions, lymphadenopathy, cavitations, and CT halo sign. In these two case-reports, COVID-19 presented as pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum and subcutaneous emphysema in critically ill patients. These disorders may require treatment or can be even self-limiting. Clinicians should be aware of their potential effects on the cardiorespiratory status of critically ill COVID-19 patients. Finally, pneumothorax can be promptly diagnosed by means of lung ultrasound. Although operator dependent, lung ultrasound is a useful bedside diagnostic tool that could alleviate the risk of cross-infection related to COVID-19 patient transport.

Plasma exchange in the treatment of complex COVID-19-related critical illness: controversies and perspectives.

COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), emerged in Wuhan, China, and has spread worldwide, resulting in over 73 million cases and more than 1 600 000 deaths as of December 2020. Although the disease is asymptomatic in most cases, some patients develop life-threatening disease characterised by acute respiratory distress syndrome, sepsis, multisystem organ failure (MSOF), extrapulmonary manifestations, thromboembolic disease and associated cytokine release syndrome. The rationale for applying therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) early in the course of fulminant COVID-19 is the suppression of thromboinflammation and amelioration of microangiopathy, thus preventing the ensuing MSOF. In the course of complicated critical illness due to COVID-19, immune dysregulation may be as important as viral replication itself. Moreover, the natural course of SARS-CoV-2 infection remains obscure, as re-infections and/or recurrently positive real-time PCR results have been reported. Although concerns still exist regarding its potential immunosuppressive effects and safety, TPE shows promise in the management of life-threatening COVID-19 as documented by various pilot studies, which remain to be confirmed by future randomised controlled trials. However, current data suggest that TPE could be an adjunctive rescue therapy in complex COVID-19 critical illness.