Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 With Acute Encephalopathy and Coma: An International Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To report the prevalence of acute encephalopathy and outcomes in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to identify determinants of 90-day outcomes. METHODS: Data from adults with severe COVID-19 and acute encephalopathy were prospectively collected for patients requiring intensive care unit management in 31 university or university-affiliated intensive care units in 6 countries (France, United States, Colombia, Spain, Mexico, and Brazil) between March and September of 2020. Acute encephalopathy was defined, as recently recommended, as subsyndromal delirium or delirium or as a comatose state in case of severely decreased level of consciousness. Logistic multivariable regression was performed to identify factors associated with 90-day outcomes. A Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E) score of 1-4 was considered a poor outcome (indicating death, vegetative state, or severe disability). RESULTS: Of 4,060 patients admitted with COVID-19, 374 (9.2%) experienced acute encephalopathy at or before the intensive care unit (ICU) admission. A total of 199/345 (57.7%) patients had a poor outcome at 90-day follow-up as evaluated by the GOS-E (29 patients were lost to follow-up). On multivariable analysis, age older than 70 years (odds ratio [OR] 4.01, 95% CI 2.25-7.15), presumed fatal comorbidity (OR 3.98, 95% CI 1.68-9.44), Glasgow coma scale score <9 before/at ICU admission (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.22-3.98), vasopressor/inotrope support during ICU stay (OR 3.91, 95% CI 1.97-7.76), renal replacement therapy during ICU stay (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.21-4.50), and CNS ischemic or hemorrhagic complications as acute encephalopathy etiology (OR 3.22, 95% CI 1.41-7.82) were independently associated with higher odds of poor 90-day outcome. Status epilepticus, posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome, and reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome were associated with lower odds of poor 90-day outcome (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03-0.83). DISCUSSION: In this observational study, we found a low prevalence of acute encephalopathy at ICU admission in patients with COVID-19. More than half of patients with COVID-19 presenting with acute encephalopathy had poor outcomes as evaluated by GOS-E. Determinants of poor 90-day outcome were dominated by older age, comorbidities, degree of impairment of consciousness before/at ICU admission, association with other organ failures, and acute encephalopathy etiology. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04320472.

Delivery of high flow oxygen through nasal vs. tracheal cannulas: A bench study.

Background: The use of high flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) has significantly escalated during the COVID-19 pandemic. HFOT can be delivered through both dedicated devices and ICU ventilators. HFOT can be administered to a patient via a nasal cannula (NC). In intubated patients, a tracheal cannula (TC) is used instead. In this study, we aim to compare the work of breathing (WOB) using a TC or NC and to explore whether differences exist among HFOT devices. Methods: Seven HFOT devices (three dedicated and four ICU ventilators) were connected to a manikin head (Laerdal Medical) through a NC (Optiflow 3S, large size, Fisher and Paykel Healthcare) or a TC (OPT 970 Optiflow+, Fisher and Paykel Healthcare). Each device was also attached to a manikin head that was connected to a lung simulator (ASL5000, Ingmar Medical), set at 40 ml/cmH2O compliance, 10 cmH2O/L/s resistance, and sinusoidal inspiratory effort (muscular pressure 10 cmH2O, rate 30 breaths/min). HFOT was delivered at 40 L/min and at 21% inspired oxygen fraction. The total WOB per breath and its resistive and elastic components were automatically analyzed breath by breath over the last 20 breaths by using Campbell's diagram. Results: The WOB and its resistive and elastic components were significantly lower with the TC than with the NC for every device, and systematically lower with the reference device than with others. These differences were, however, very small and may be not clinically relevant. Conclusion: The WOB is lower with the TC than with the NC and with the reference device, compared with the most recent devices.

Delivery of high flow oxygen through nasal vs. tracheal cannulas: A bench study

Background The use of high flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) has significantly escalated during the COVID-19 pandemic. HFOT can be delivered through both dedicated devices and ICU ventilators. HFOT can be administered to a patient via a nasal cannula (NC). In intubated patients, a tracheal cannula (TC) is used instead. In this study, we aim to compare the work of breathing (WOB) using a TC or NC and to explore whether differences exist among HFOT devices. Methods Seven HFOT devices (three dedicated and four ICU ventilators) were connected to a manikin head (Laerdal Medical) through a NC (Optiflow 3S, large size, Fisher and Paykel Healthcare) or a TC (OPT 970 Optiflow+, Fisher and Paykel Healthcare). Each device was also attached to a manikin head that was connected to a lung simulator (ASL5000, Ingmar Medical), set at 40 ml/cmH2O compliance, 10 cmH2O/L/s resistance, and sinusoidal inspiratory effort (muscular pressure 10 cmH2O, rate 30 breaths/min). HFOT was delivered at 40 L/min and at 21% inspired oxygen fraction. The total WOB per breath and its resistive and elastic components were automatically analyzed breath by breath over the last 20 breaths by using Campbell's diagram. Results The WOB and its resistive and elastic components were significantly lower with the TC than with the NC for every device, and systematically lower with the reference device than with others. These differences were, however, very small and may be not clinically relevant. Conclusion The WOB is lower with the TC than with the NC and with the reference device, compared with the most recent devices.

Severe SARS-Cov2 pneumonia in vaccinated patients: a multicenter cohort study.

Vaccination reduces risk of infection, hospitalization, and death due to SARS-Cov2. Vaccinated patients may however experience severe SARS-Cov2 disease. The objective was to describe clinical features of vaccinated patients requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission due to SARS-Cov2 infection and compare them to a published cohort of unvaccinated patients. We performed a multicenter cohort study of patients with severe SARS-Cov2 disease admitted to 15 ICUs in France between January and September 2021. 100 consecutive vaccinated patients (68 (68%) men, median age 64 [57-71]) were included. Immunosuppression was reported in 38 (38%) patients. Among available serologies at ICU admission, 64% exhibited an optimal antibody level. Median SOFA score at ICU admission was 4 [4-6.3] and median PaO2/FiO2 ratio was 84 [69-128] mmHg. A total of 79 (79%) and 18 (18%) patients received high flow nasal oxygen and non-invasive mechanical ventilation, respectively. Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) was initiated in 48 (48%) with a median duration of 11 [5-19] days. During a median ICU length-of-stay of 8 [4-20] days, 31 (31%) patients died. Age (OR per 5-years increment 1.38 CI95% [1.02-1.85], p = 0.035), and SOFA at ICU admission (OR 1.40 CI95% [1.14-1.72] per point, p = 0.002) were independently associated with mortality. When compared to a cohort of 1316 unvaccinated patients (72% men, median age 63 [53-71]), vaccinated patients exhibited less frequently diabetes (16 [16%] vs. 351 [27%], p = 0.029) but were more frequently immunosuppressed (38 [38%] vs. 109 (8.3%), p < 0.0001), had more frequently chronic kidney disease (24 [24%] vs. 89 (6.8%), p < 0.0001), chronic heart failure (16 [16%] vs. 58 [4.4%], p < 0.0001), and chronic liver disease (3 [3%] vs. 8 [0.6%], p = 0.037) compared to unvaccinated patients. Despite similar severity, vaccinated patients required less frequently IMV at ICU day 1 and during ICU stay (23 [23%] vs. 785 [59.7%], p < 0.0001, and 48 [48%] vs. 930 [70.7%], p < 0.0001, respectively). There was no difference concerning ICU mortality (31 [31%] vs. 379 [28.8%], p = 0.64). Severe SARS-Cov2 infection after vaccination occurs mainly in patients with immunosuppression, chronic kidney, heart or liver failure. Age and disease severity are independently associated with mortality.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on antifungal consumption: a multicenter retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the context of COVID-19 pandemic, antifungal overuse may have occurred in our hospitals as it has been previously reported for antibacterials. METHODS: To investigate the impact of COVID-19 on antifungal consumption, a multicenter retrospective study including four medical sites and 14 intensive care units (ICU) was performed. Antifungal consumption and incidences of invasive fungal diseases before and during COVID-19 pandemic, for non-COVID-19 patients and COVID-19 patients, were described. RESULTS: An increase in voriconazole consumption was observed in 2020 compared with 2019 for both the whole hospital and the ICU (+ 40.3% and + 63.7%, respectively), whereas the incidence of invasive aspergillosis significantly increased in slightly lower proportions in the ICU (+ 46%). Caspofungin consumption also increased in 2020 compared to 2019 for both the whole hospital and the ICU (+ 34.9% and + 17.0%, respectively) with an increased incidence of invasive candidiasis in the whole hospital and the ICU but in lower proportions (+ 20.0% and + 10.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We observed an increased consumption of antifungals including voriconazole and caspofungin in our hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic and explained in part by an increased incidence of invasive fungal diseases in COVID-19 patients. These results are of utmost importance as it raises concern about the urgent need for appropriate antifungal stewardship activities to control antifungal consumption.

Airway Closure and Expiratory Flow Limitation in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is mostly characterized by the loss of aerated lung volume associated with an increase in lung tissue and intense and complex lung inflammation. ARDS has long been associated with the histological pattern of diffuse alveolar damage (DAD). However, DAD is not the unique pathological figure in ARDS and it can also be observed in settings other than ARDS. In the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related ARDS, the impairment of lung microvasculature has been pointed out. The airways, and of notice the small peripheral airways, may contribute to the loss of aeration observed in ARDS. High-resolution lung imaging techniques found that in specific experimental conditions small airway closure was a reality. Furthermore, low-volume ventilator-induced lung injury, also called as atelectrauma, should involve the airways. Atelectrauma is one of the basic tenet subtending the use of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) set at the ventilator in ARDS. Recent data revisited the role of airways in humans with ARDS and provided findings consistent with the expiratory flow limitation and airway closure in a substantial number of patients with ARDS. We discussed the pattern of airway opening pressure disclosed in the inspiratory volume-pressure curves in COVID-19 and in non-COVID-19 related ARDS. In addition, we discussed the functional interplay between airway opening pressure and expiratory flow limitation displayed in the flow-volume curves. We discussed the individualization of the PEEP setting based on these findings.

A 9-mRNA signature measured from whole blood by a prototype PCR panel predicts 28-day mortality upon admission of critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Immune responses affiliated with COVID-19 severity have been characterized and associated with deleterious outcomes. These approaches were mainly based on research tools not usable in routine clinical practice at the bedside. We observed that a multiplex transcriptomic panel prototype termed Immune Profiling Panel (IPP) could capture the dysregulation of immune responses of ICU COVID-19 patients at admission. Nine transcripts were associated with mortality in univariate analysis and this 9-mRNA signature remained significantly associated with mortality in a multivariate analysis that included age, SOFA and Charlson scores. Using a machine learning model with these 9 mRNA, we could predict the 28-day survival status with an Area Under the Receiver Operating Curve (AUROC) of 0.764. Interestingly, adding patients' age to the model resulted in increased performance to predict the 28-day mortality (AUROC reaching 0.839). This prototype IPP demonstrated that such a tool, upon clinical/analytical validation and clearance by regulatory agencies could be used in clinical routine settings to quickly identify patients with higher risk of death requiring thus early aggressive intensive care.

A Bench Comparison of the Effect of High-Flow Oxygen Devices on Work of Breathing.

BACKGROUND: Oxygen therapy via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been extensively used during the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of devices has also increased. We conducted this study to answer the following questions: Do HFNC devices differ from the original device for work of breathing (WOB) and generated PEEP? METHODS: Seven devices were tested on ASL 5000 lung model. Compliance was set to 40 mL/cm H2O and resistance to 10 cm H2O/L/s. The devices were connected to a manikin head via a nasal cannula with FIO2 set at 0.21. The measurements were performed at baseline (manikin head free of nasal cannula) and then with the cannula and the device attached with oxygen flow set at 20, 40, and 60 L/min. WOB and PEEP were assessed at 3 simulated inspiratory efforts (-5, -10, -15 cm H2O muscular pressure) and at 2 breathing frequencies (20 and 30 breaths/min). Data were expressed as median (first-third quartiles) and compared with nonparametric tests to the Optiflow device taken as reference. RESULTS: Baseline WOB and PEEP were comparable between devices. Over all the conditions tested, WOB was 4.2 (1.0-9.4) J/min with the reference device, and the relative variations from it were 0, -3 (2-4), 1 (0-1), -2 (1-2), -1 (1-2), and -1 (1-2)% with Airvo 2, G5, HM80, T60, V500, and V60 Plus devices, respectively, (P < .05 Kruskal-Wallis test). PEEP was 0.9 (0.3-1.5) cm H2O with Optiflow, and the relative differences were -28 (22-33), -41 (38-46), -30 (26-36), -31 (28-34), -37 (32-42), and -24 (21-34)% with Airvo 2, G5, HM80, T60, V500, and V60 Plus devices, respectively, (P < .05 Kruskal-Wallis test). CONCLUSIONS: WOB was marginally higher and PEEP marginally lower with devices as compared to the reference device.

Prone Positioning and Neuromuscular Blocking Agents as Adjunctive Therapies in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) and prone position (PP) are two major adjunctive therapies that can improve outcome in moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. NMBA should be used once lung-protective mechanical ventilation has been set, for 48 hours or less and as a continuous intravenous infusion. PP should be used as early as possible for long sessions; in COVID-19 its use has exploded. In nonintubated patients, PP might reduce the rate of intubation but not mortality. The goal of this article is to perform a narrative review on the pathophysiological rationale, the clinical effects, and the clinical use and recommendations of both NMBA and PP.

Recombinant human interleukin-7 reverses T cell exhaustion ex vivo in critically ill COVID-19 patients

BackgroundLymphopenia is a hallmark of severe coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). Similar alterations have been described in bacterial sepsis and therapeutic strategies targeting T cell function such as recombinant human interleukin 7 (rhIL-7) have been proposed in this clinical context. As COVID-19 is a viral sepsis, the objectives of this study were to characterize T lymphocyte response over time in severe COVID-19 patients and to assess the effect of ex vivo administration of rhIL-7.ResultsPeripheral blood mononuclear cells from COVID-19 patients hospitalized in intensive care unit (ICU) were collected at admission and after 20 days. Transcriptomic profile was evaluated through NanoString technology. Inhibitory immune checkpoints expressions were determined by flow cytometry. T lymphocyte proliferation and IFN-γ production were evaluated after ex vivo stimulation in the presence or not of rhIL-7. COVID-19 ICU patients were markedly lymphopenic at admission. Mononuclear cells presented with inhibited transcriptomic profile prevalently with impaired T cell activation pathways. CD4 + and CD8 + T cells presented with over-expression of co-inhibitory molecules PD-1, PD-L1, CTLA-4 and TIM-3. CD4 + and CD8 + T cell proliferation and IFN-γ production were markedly altered in samples collected at ICU admission. These alterations, characteristic of a T cell exhaustion state, were more pronounced at ICU admission and alleviated over time. Treatment with rhIL-7 ex vivo significantly improved both T cell proliferation and IFN-γ production in cells from COVID-19 patients.ConclusionsSevere COVID-19 patients present with features of profound T cell exhaustion upon ICU admission which can be reversed ex vivo by rhIL-7. These results reinforce our understanding of severe COVID-19 pathophysiology and opens novel therapeutic avenues to treat such critically ill patients based of immunomodulation approaches. Defining the appropriate timing for initiating such immune-adjuvant therapy in clinical setting and the pertinent markers for a careful selection of patients are now warranted to confirm the ex vivo results described so far.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04392401 Registered 18 May 2020, http:// clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04392401.

Outcomes of Patients With Active Cancer and COVID-19 in the Intensive-Care Unit: A Multicenter Ambispective Study.

Background: Several studies report an increased susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer patients. However, data in the intensive care unit (ICU) are scarce. Research Question: We aimed to investigate the association between active cancer and mortality among patients requiring organ support in the ICU. Study Design and Methods: In this ambispective study encompassing 17 hospitals in France, we included all adult active cancer patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring organ support and admitted in ICU. For each cancer patient, we included 3 non cancer patients as controls. Patients were matched at the same ratio using the inverse probability weighting approach based on a propensity score assessing the probability of cancer at admission. Mortality at day 60 after ICU admission was compared between cancer patients and non-cancer patients using primary logistic regression analysis and secondary multivariable analyses. Results: Between March 12, 2020 and March 8, 2021, 2608 patients were admitted with SARS-CoV-2 infection in our study, accounting for 2.8% of the total population of patients with SARS-CoV-2 admitted in all French ICUs within the same period. Among them, 105 (n=4%) presented with cancer (51 patients had hematological malignancy and 54 patients had solid tumors). 409 of 420 patients were included in the propensity score matching process, of whom 307 patients in the non-cancer group and 102 patients in the cancer group. 145 patients (35%) died in the ICU at day 60, 59 (56%) with cancer and 86 (27%) without cancer. In the primary logistic regression analysis, the odds ratio for death associated to cancer was 2.3 (95%CI 1.24 - 4.28, p=0.0082) higher for cancer patients than for a non-cancer patient at ICU admission. Exploratory multivariable analyses showed that solid tumor (OR: 2.344 (0.87-6.31), p=0.062) and hematological malignancies (OR: 4.144 (1.24-13.83), p=0.062) were independently associated with mortality. Interpretation: Patients with cancer and requiring ICU admission for SARS-CoV-2 infection had an increased mortality, hematological malignancy harboring the higher risk in comparison to solid tumors.

Prone Position in COVID-19 and -COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: An International Multicenter Observational Comparative Study.

OBJECTIVES: Prone position is used in acute respiratory distress syndrome and in coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, it is unclear how responders may be identified and whether an oxygenation response improves outcome. The objective of this study was to quantify the response to prone position, describe the differences between coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute respiratory distress syndrome, and explore variables associated with survival. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational, multicenter, international cohort study. SETTING: Seven ICUs in Italy, United Kingdom, and France. PATIENTS: Three hundred seventy-six adults (220 coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome and 156 acute respiratory distress syndrome). INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Preproning, a greater proportion of coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients had severe disease (53% vs 40%), worse Pao2/Fio2 (13.0 kPa [interquartile range, 10.5-15.5 kPa] vs 14.1 kPa [interquartile range, 10.5-18.6 kPa]; p = 0.017) but greater compliance (38 mL/cm H2O [interquartile range, 27-53 mL/cm H2O] vs 31 mL/cm H2O [interquartile range, 21-37 mL/cm H2O]; p < 0.001). Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome had a longer median time from intubation to prone position (2.0 d [interquartile range, 0.7-5.0 d] vs 1.0 d [interquartile range, 0.5-2.9 d]; p = 0.03). The proportion of responders, defined by an increase in Pao2/Fio2 greater than or equal to 2.67 kPa (20 mm Hg), upon proning, was similar between acute respiratory distress syndrome and coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome (79% vs 76%; p = 0.5). Responders had earlier prone position (1.4 d [interquartile range, 0.7-4.2 d] vs 2.5 d [interquartile range, 0.8-6.2 d]; p = 0.06)]. Prone position less than 24 hours from intubation achieved greater improvement in oxygenation (11 kPa [interquartile range, 4-21 kPa] vs 7 kPa [interquartile range, 2-13 kPa]; p = 0.002). The variables independently associated with the "responder" category were Pao2/Fio2 preproning (odds ratio, 0.89 kPa-1 [95% CI, 0.85-0.93 kPa-1]; p < 0.001) and interval between intubation and proning (odds ratio, 0.94 d-1 [95% CI, 0.89-0.99 d-1]; p = 0.019). The overall mortality was 45%, with no significant difference observed between acute respiratory distress syndrome and coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome. Variables independently associated with mortality included age (odds ratio, 1.03 yr-1 [95% CI, 1.01-1.05 yr-1]; p < 0.001); interval between hospital admission and proning (odds ratio, 1.04 d-1 [95% CI, 1.002-1.084 d-1]; p = 0.047); and change in Pao2/Fio2 on proning (odds ratio, 0.97 kPa-1 [95% CI, 0.95-0.99 kPa-1]; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Prone position, particularly when delivered early, achieved a significant oxygenation response in ~80% of coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome, similar to acute respiratory distress syndrome. This response was independently associated with improved survival.

Association of COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome With Symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Family Members After ICU Discharge.

IMPORTANCE: Persistent physical and mental disorders are frequent in survivors of COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, data on these disorders among family members are scarce. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between patient hospitalization for COVID-19 ARDS vs ARDS from other causes and the risk of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD)-related symptoms in family members. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective cohort study in 23 intensive care units (ICUs) in France (January 2020 to June 2020 with final follow-up ending in October 2020). ARDS survivors and family members (1 family member per patient) were enrolled. EXPOSURES: Family members of patients hospitalized for ARDS due to COVID-19 vs ARDS due to other causes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was family member symptoms of PTSD at 90 days after ICU discharge, measured by the Impact of Events Scale-Revised (score range, 0 [best] to 88 [worst]; presence of PTSD symptoms defined by score >22). Secondary outcomes were family member symptoms of anxiety and depression at 90 days assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (score range, 0 [best] to 42 [worst]; presence of anxiety or depression symptoms defined by subscale scores ≥7). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine the association between COVID-19 status and outcomes. RESULTS: Among 602 family members and 307 patients prospectively enrolled, 517 (86%) family members (median [IQR] age, 51 [40-63] years; 72% women; 48% spouses; 26% bereaved because of the study patient's death; 303 [50%] family members of COVID-19 patients) and 273 (89%) patients (median [IQR] age, 61 [50-69] years; 34% women; 181 [59%] with COVID-19) completed the day-90 assessment. Compared with non-COVID-19 ARDS, family members of patients with COVID-19 ARDS had a significantly higher prevalence of symptoms of PTSD (35% [103/293] vs 19% [40/211]; difference, 16% [95% CI, 8%-24%]; P < .001), symptoms of anxiety (41% [121/294] vs 34% [70/207]; difference, 8% [95% CI, 0%-16%]; P= .05), and symptoms of depression (31% [91/291] vs 18% [37/209]; difference, 13% [95% CI, 6%-21%]; P< .001). In multivariable models adjusting for age, sex, and level of social support, COVID-19 ARDS was significantly associated with increased risk of PTSD-related symptoms in family members (odds ratio, 2.05 [95% CI, 1.30 to 3.23]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among family members of patients hospitalized in the ICU with ARDS, COVID-19 disease, as compared with other causes of ARDS, was significantly associated with increased risk of symptoms of PTSD at 90 days after ICU discharge. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04341519.

T cell response against SARS-CoV-2 persists after one year in patients surviving severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: In critically ill COVID-19 patients, the initial response to SARS-CoV-2 infection is characterized by major immune dysfunctions. The capacity of these severe patients to mount a robust and persistent SARS-CoV-2 specific T cell response despite the presence of severe immune alterations during the ICU stay is unknown. METHODS: Critically ill COVID-19 patients were sampled five times during the ICU stay and 9 and 13 months afterwards. Immune monitoring included counts of lymphocyte subpopulations, HLA-DR expression on monocytes, plasma IL-6 and IL-10 concentrations, anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels and T cell proliferation in response to three SARS-CoV-2 antigens. FINDINGS: Despite the presence of major lymphopenia and decreased monocyte HLA-DR expression during the ICU stay, convalescent critically ill COVID-19 patients consistently generated adaptive and humoral immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 maintained for more than one year after hospital discharge. Patients with long hospital stays presented with stronger anti-SARS-CoV-2 specific T cell response but no difference in anti-SARS-CoV2 IgG levels. INTERPRETATION: Convalescent critically ill COVID-19 patients consistently generated a memory immune response against SARS-CoV-2 maintained for more than one year after hospital discharge. In recovered individuals, the intensity of SARS-CoV-2 specific T cell response was dependent on length of hospital stay. FUNDING: This observational study was supported by funds from the Hospices Civils de Lyon, Fondation HCL, Claude Bernard Lyon 1 University and Région Auvergne Rhône-Alpes and by partial funding by REACTing (Research and ACTion targeting emerging infectious diseases) INSERM, France and a donation from Fondation AnBer (http://fondationanber.fr/).

Intravenous immunoglobulins in patients with COVID-19-associated moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ICAR): multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a major complication of COVID-19 and is associated with high mortality and morbidity. We aimed to assess whether intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) could improve outcomes by reducing inflammation-mediated lung injury. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, done at 43 centres in France, we randomly assigned patients (1:1) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for up to 72 h with PCR confirmed COVID-19 and associated moderate-to-severe ARDS to receive either IVIG (2 g/kg over 4 days) or placebo. Random assignment was done with a web-based system and was stratified according to the participating centre and the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation before inclusion in the trial (<12 h, 12-24 h, and >24-72 h), and treatment was administered within the first 96 h of invasive mechanical ventilation. To minimise the risk of adverse events, the IVIG administration was divided into four perfusions of 0·5 g/kg each administered over at least 8 hours. Patients in the placebo group received an equivalent volume of sodium chloride 0·9% (10 mL/kg) over the same period. The primary outcome was the number of ventilation-free days by day 28, assessed according to the intention-to-treat principle. This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04350580. FINDINGS: Between April 3, and October 20, 2020, 146 patients (43 [29%] women) were eligible for inclusion and randomly assigned: 69 (47%) patients to the IVIG group and 77 (53%) to the placebo group. The intention-to-treat analysis showed no statistical difference in the median number of ventilation-free days at day 28 between the IVIG group (0·0 [IQR 0·0-8·0]) and the placebo group (0·0 [0·0-6·0]; difference estimate 0·0 [0·0-0·0]; p=0·21). Serious adverse events were more frequent in the IVIG group (78 events in 22 [32%] patients) than in the placebo group (47 events in 15 [20%] patients; p=0·089). INTERPRETATION: In patients with COVID-19 who received invasive mechanical ventilation for moderate-to-severe ARDS, IVIG did not improve clinical outcomes at day 28 and tended to be associated with an increased frequency of serious adverse events, although not significant. The effect of IVIGs on earlier disease stages of COVID-19 should be assessed in future trials. FUNDING: Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique.

Feasibility of non-invasive respiratory drive and breathing pattern evaluation using CPAP in COVID-19 patients.

PURPOSE: Increased respiratory drive and respiratory effort are major features of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) and might help to predict the need for intubation. We aimed to explore the feasibility of a non-invasive respiratory drive evaluation and describe how these parameters may help to predict the need for intubation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study. All consecutive patients with COVID-19-related AHRF requiring high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) were screened for inclusion. Physiologic data (including: occlusion pressure (P0.1), tidal volume (Vt), inspiratory time (Ti), peak and mean inspiratory flow (Vt/Ti)) were collected during a short continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) session. Measurements were repeated once, 12-24 h later. RESULTS: Measurements were completed in 31 patients after the screening of 45 patients (70%). P0.1 was high (4.4 [2.7-5.1]), but it was not significantly higher in patients who were intubated. The Vt (p = .006), Vt/Ti (p = .019), minute ventilation (p = .006), and Ti/Ttot (p = .003) were higher among intubated patients compared to non-intubated patients. Intubated patients had a significant increase in their diaphragm thickening fraction, Vt, and Vt/Ti over time. CONCLUSIONS: Non-invasive assessment of respiratory drive was feasible in patients with AHRF and showed an increased P0.1, although it was not predictive of intubation.

A retrospective comparison of COVID-19 and seasonal influenza mortality and outcomes in the ICUs of a French university hospital.

BACKGROUND: SARS-Cov-2 (COVID-19) has become a major worldwide health concern since its appearance in China at the end of 2019. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the intrinsic mortality and burden of COVID-19 and seasonal influenza pneumonia in ICUs in the city of Lyon, France. DESIGN: A retrospective study. SETTING: Six ICUs in a single institution in Lyon, France. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients admitted to an ICU with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia from 27 February to 4 April 2020 (COVID-19 group) and seasonal influenza pneumonia from 1 November 2015 to 30 April 2019 (influenza group). A total of 350 patients were included in the COVID-19 group (18 refused to consent) and 325 in the influenza group (one refused to consent). Diagnosis was confirmed by RT-PCR. Follow-up was completed on 1 April 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Differences in 90-day adjusted-mortality between the COVID-19 and influenza groups were evaluated using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: COVID-19 patients were younger, mostly men and had a higher median BMI, and comorbidities, including immunosuppressive condition or respiratory history were less frequent. In univariate analysis, no significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding in-ICU mortality, 30, 60 and 90-day mortality. After Cox modelling adjusted on age, sex, BMI, cancer, sepsis-related organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, simplified acute physiology score SAPS II score, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and myocardial infarction, the probability of death associated with COVID-19 was significantly higher in comparison to seasonal influenza [hazard ratio 1.57, 95% CI (1.14 to 2.17); P = 0.006]. The clinical course and morbidity profile of both groups was markedly different; COVID-19 patients had less severe illness at admission (SAPS II score, 37 [28 to 48] vs. 48 [39 to 61], P < 0.001 and SOFA score, 4 [2 to 8] vs. 8 [5 to 11], P < 0.001), but the disease was more severe considering ICU length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, PEEP level and prone positioning requirement. CONCLUSION: After ICU admission, COVID-19 was associated with an increased risk of death compared with seasonal influenza. Patient characteristics, clinical course and morbidity profile of these diseases is markedly different.