ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The role of positive pressure ventilation, central venous pressure (CVP) and inflammation on the occurrence of acute kidney injury (AKI) have been poorly described in mechanically ventilated patient secondary to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This was a monocenter retrospective cohort study of consecutive ventilated COVID-19 patients admitted in a French surgical intensive care unit between March 2020 and July 2020. Worsening renal function (WRF) was defined as development of a new AKI or a persistent AKI during the 5 days after mechanical ventilation initiation. We studied the association between WRF and ventilatory parameters including positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), CVP, and leukocytes count. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients were included, 12 (21%) presented WRF. Daily PEEP, 5 days mean PEEP and daily CVP values were not associated with occurrence of WRF. 5 days mean CVP was higher in the WRF group compared to patients without WRF (median [IQR], 12 mm Hg [11-13] vs. 10 mm Hg [9-12]; P=0.03). Multivariate models with adjustment on leukocytes and Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II confirmed the association between CVP value and risk of WRF (odd ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-4.33). Leukocytes count was also associated with occurrence of WRF in the WRF group (14 G/L [11-18]) and the no-WRF group (9 G/L [8-11]) (P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients, PEEP levels did not appear to influence occurrence of WRF. High CVP levels and leukocytes count are associated with risk of WRF.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Almitrine, a drug enhancing hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction, has been proposed as a rescue therapy for refractory hypoxemia in Covid related Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (C-ARDS). We aimed at investigating the response to almitrine depending on the cause of ARDS (Covid vs Non Covid). METHODS: Monocenter retrospective study from 2014 to 2021. All patients diagnosed with moderate to severe ARDS and treated with almitrine as rescue therapy for refractory hypoxemia were studied. Factor independently associated with oxygenation response to almitrine infusion were determined. RESULTS: 60 patients with ARDS and treated with almitrine were analyzed, 36 (60%) due to SARS-CoV2 infection and 24 (40%) due to other causes. Baseline PaO2/FiO2 was 78 [61-101] mmHg, 76% had at least one prone positioning before the start of almitrine infusion. Median PaO2/FiO2 increased by +38 [7-142] mmHg (+61% [10-151]) after almitrine infusion. PaO2/FiO2 increased by +134 [12-186] mmHg in non-Covid ARDS (NC-ARDS) and by +19 [8-87] mmHg in C-ARDS. The increase in PaO2/FiO2 was lower in C-ARDS than in NC-ARDS (p=0.013). In multivariable analysis, C-ARDS, non-invasive ventilation and concomitant use of norepinephrine were independently associated with a decreased oxygenation response to almitrine infusion. CONCLUSIONS: Our study reports a highly variable response to almitrine infusion in ARDS patients with refractory hypoxemia. Independent factors associated with a reduced oxygenation response to almitrine infusion were: Covid ARDS, concomitant use of norepinephrine, and non-invasive ventilatory strategy.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Hemodynamics , Humans , Inflammation/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Although clinical presentation of coronavirus disease 2019 has been extensively described, immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 remains yet not fully understood. Similarities with bacterial sepsis were observed; however, few studies specifically addressed differences of immune response between both conditions. Here, we report a longitudinal analysis of the immune response in coronavirus disease 2019 patients, its correlation with outcome, and comparison between severe coronavirus disease 2019 patients and septic patients. DESIGN: Longitudinal, retrospective observational study. SETTING: Tertiary-care hospital during the first 2020 coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak in France. PATIENTS: All successive patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection admitted to the emergency department, medical ward, and ICU with at least one available immunophenotyping performed during hospital stay. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Between March and April 2020, 247 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 were included and compared with a historical cohort of 108 severe septic patients. Nonsevere coronavirus disease 2019 patients (n = 153) presented normal or slightly altered immune profiles. Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (n = 94) immune profile differed from sepsis. Coronavirus disease 2019 exhibited profound and prolonged lymphopenia (mostly on CD3, CD4, CD8, and NK cells), neutrophilia, and human leukocyte antigen D receptor expression on CD14+ monocytes down-regulation. Surprisingly, coronavirus disease 2019 patients presented a unique profile of B cells expansion, basophilia, and eosinophilia. Lymphopenia, human leukocyte antigen D receptor expression on CD14+ monocytes down-regulation, and neutrophilia were associated with a worsened outcome, whereas basophilia and eosinophilia were associated with survival. Circulating immune cell kinetics differed between severe coronavirus disease 2019 and sepsis, lack of correction of immune alterations in coronavirus disease 2019 patients during the first 2 weeks of ICU admission was associated with death and nosocomial infections. CONCLUSIONS: Circulating immune cells profile differs between mild and severe coronavirus disease 2019 patients. Severe coronavirus disease 2019 is associated with a unique immune profile as compared with sepsis. Several immune features are associated with outcome. Thus, immune monitoring of coronavirus disease 2019 might be of help for patient management.