Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 24
Filter
1.
J Clin Med ; 12(11)2023 May 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20244256

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) has been extensively used during the COVID-19 surge for patients with acute respiratory failure. However, little data are available about barotrauma during NIRS in patients treated outside the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. METHODS: COVIMIX-2 was an ancillary analysis of the previous COVIMIX study, a large multicenter observational work investigating the frequencies of barotrauma (i.e., pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum) in adult patients with COVID-19 interstitial pneumonia. Only patients treated with NIRS outside the ICU were considered. Baseline characteristics, clinical and radiological disease severity, type of ventilatory support used, blood tests and mortality were recorded. RESULTS: In all, 179 patients were included, 60 of them with barotrauma. They were older and had lower BMI than controls (p < 0.001 and p = 0.045, respectively). Cases had higher respiratory rates and lower PaO2/FiO2 (p = 0.009 and p < 0.001). The frequency of barotrauma was 0.3% [0.1-1.3%], with older age being a risk factor for barotrauma (OR 1.06, p = 0.015). Alveolar-arterial gradient (A-a) DO2 was protective against barotrauma (OR 0.92 [0.87-0.99], p = 0.026). Barotrauma required active treatment, with drainage, in only a minority of cases. The type of NIRS was not explicitly related to the development of barotrauma. Still, an escalation of respiratory support from conventional oxygen therapy, high flow nasal cannula to noninvasive respiratory mask was predictive for in-hospital death (OR 15.51, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: COVIMIX-2 showed a low frequency for barotrauma, around 0.3%. The type of NIRS used seems not to increase this risk. Patients with barotrauma were older, with more severe systemic disease, and showed increased mortality.

2.
Minerva Med ; 2023 Apr 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2284488

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 patients frequently develop respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. Data on long-term survival of patients who had severe COVID-19 are insufficient. We assessed and compared two-year survival, CT imaging, quality of life, and functional recovery of COVID-19 ARDS patients requiring respiratory support with invasive (IMV) versus noninvasive ventilation (NIV). METHODS: Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted up to May 28th, 2020, who required IMV or NIV, and survived to hospital discharge were enrolled. Patients were contacted two years after discharge to assess vital status, functional, psychological, and cognitive outcomes using validated scales. Patients with persistent respiratory symptoms or high burden of residual lung damage at previous CT scan received a two-year chest CT scan. RESULTS: Out of 61 IMV survivors, 98% were alive at two-year follow-up, and 52 completed the questionnaire. Out of 82 survivors receiving NIV only, 94% were alive at two years, and 47 completed the questionnaire. We found no major differences between invasively and noninvasively ventilated patients, with overall acceptable functional recovery. Among the 99 patients completing the questionnaire, 23 have more than moderate exertional dyspnea. Chest CT scans showed that 4 patients (all received IMV) had fibrotic-like changes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received mechanical ventilation due to COVID-19 and were discharged from hospital had a 96% survival rate at the two-year follow-up. There was no difference in overall recovery and quality of life between patients who did and did not require IMV, although respiratory morbidity remains high.

3.
Clin Imaging ; 97: 50-54, 2023 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2270150

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Patients with COVID-19 infection are frequently found to have pulmonary barotrauma. Recent work has identified the Macklin effect as a radiographic sign that often occurs in patients with COVID-19 and may correlate with barotrauma. METHODS: We evaluated chest CT scans in COVID-19 positive mechanically ventilated patients for the Macklin effect and any type of pulmonary barotrauma. Patient charts were reviewed to identify demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: The Macklin effect on chest CT scan was identified in a total of 10/75 (13.3%) COVID-19 positive mechanically ventilated patients; 9 developed barotrauma. Patients with the Macklin effect on chest CT scan had a 90% rate of pneumomediastinum (p < 0.001) and a trend toward a higher rate of pneumothorax (60%, p = 0.09). Pneumothorax was most frequently omolateral to the site of the Macklin effect (83.3%). CONCLUSION: The Macklin effect may be a strong radiographic biomarker for pulmonary barotrauma, most strongly correlating with pneumomediastinum. Studies in ARDS patients without COVID-19 are needed to validate this sign in a broader population. If validated in a broad population, future critical care treatment algorithms may include the Macklin sign for clinical decision making and prognostication.


Subject(s)
Barotrauma , COVID-19 , Lung Injury , Mediastinal Emphysema , Pneumothorax , Humans , Pneumothorax/epidemiology , Mediastinal Emphysema/diagnostic imaging , Mediastinal Emphysema/etiology , Mediastinal Emphysema/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , Barotrauma/epidemiology
4.
Respir Med ; 210: 107178, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2251731

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Recent studies suggested that Macklin sign is a predictor of barotrauma in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We performed a systematic review to further characterize the clinical role of Macklin. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register and Embase were searched for studies reporting data on Macklin. Studies without data on chest CT, pediatric studies, non-human and cadaver studies, case reports and series including <5 patients were excluded. The primary objective was to assess the number of patients with Macklin sign and barotrauma. Secondary objectives were: occurrence of Macklin in different populations, clinical use of Macklin, prognostic impact of Macklin. RESULTS: Seven studies enrolling 979 patients were included. Macklin was present in 4-22% of COVID-19 patients. It was associated with barotrauma in 124/138 (89.8%) of cases. Macklin sign preceded barotrauma in 65/69 cases (94.2%) 3-8 days in advance. Four studies used Macklin as pathophysiological explanation for barotrauma, two studies as a predictor of barotrauma and one as a decision-making tool. Two studies suggested that Macklin is a strong predictor of barotrauma in ARDS patients and one study used Macklin sign to candidate high-risk ARDS patients to awake extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). A possible correlation between Macklin and worse prognosis was suggested in two studies on COVID-19 and blunt chest trauma. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing evidence suggests that Macklin sign anticipate barotrauma in patients with ARDS and there are initial reports on use of Macklin as a decision-making tool. Further studies investigating the role of Macklin sign in ARDS are justified.


Subject(s)
Barotrauma , COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Thoracic Injuries , Wounds, Nonpenetrating , Humans , Child , Thoracic Injuries/complications , COVID-19/complications , Wounds, Nonpenetrating/complications , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Barotrauma/complications , Barotrauma/epidemiology , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects
5.
Lung ; 201(2): 135-147, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2234415

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: International COVID-19 guidelines recommend thromboprophylaxis for non-critically ill inpatients to prevent thrombotic complications. It is still debated whether full-dose thromboprophylaxis reduces all-cause mortality. The main aim of this updated systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effect of full-dose heparin-based thromboprophylaxis on survival in hospitalized non-critically ill COVID-19 patients. METHODS: A systematic review was performed across Pubmed/Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials, Clinicaltrials.gov, and medRxiv.org from inception to November 2022. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing full-dose heparin-based anticoagulation to prophylactic or intermediate dose anticoagulation or standard treatment in hospitalized non-critically ill COVID-19 patients. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was applied. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at the longest follow-up available. RESULTS: We identified 6 multicenter RCTs involving 3297 patients from 13 countries across 4 continents. The rate of all-cause mortality was 6.2% (103/1662) in the full-dose group vs 7.7% (126/1635) in the prophylactic or intermediate dose group (Risk Ratio [RR] = 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.59-0.98; P = 0.037). The probabilities of any mortality difference and of NNT ≤ 100 were estimated at 98.2% and 84.5%, respectively. The risk of bias was low for all included RCTs and the strength of the evidence was "moderate." CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis of high-quality multicenter RCTs suggests that full-dose anticoagulation with heparin or low molecular weight heparin reduces all-cause mortality in hospitalized non-critically ill COVID-19 patients. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, review no. CRD42022348993.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heparin , Humans , Heparin/therapeutic use , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/therapeutic use , Blood Coagulation , Multicenter Studies as Topic
8.
J Clin Med ; 11(23)2022 Nov 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2143301

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum are associated with high mortality in invasively ventilated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients; however, the mortality rates among non-intubated patients remain unknown. We aimed to analyze the clinical features of COVID-19-associated pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum in non-intubated patients and identify risk factors for mortality. Methods: We searched PubMed Scopus and Embase from January 2020 to December 2021. We performed a pooled analysis of 151 patients with no invasive mechanical ventilation history from 17 case series and 87 case reports. Subsequently, we developed a novel scoring system to predict in-hospital mortality; the system was further validated in multinational cohorts from ten countries (n = 133). Results: Clinical scenarios included pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum at presentation (n = 68), pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum onset during hospitalization (n = 65), and pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum development after recent COVID-19 treatment (n = 18). Significant differences were not observed in clinical outcomes between patients with pneumomediastinum and pneumothorax (±pneumomediastinum). The overall mortality rate of pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum was 23.2%. Risk factor analysis revealed that comorbidities bilateral pneumothorax and fever at pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum presentation were predictors for mortality. In the new scoring system, i.e., the CoBiF system, the area under the curve which was used to assess the predictability of mortality was 0.887. External validation results were also promising (area under the curve: 0.709). Conclusions: The presence of comorbidity bilateral pneumothorax and fever on presentation are significantly associated with poor prognosis in COVID-19 patients with spontaneous pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum. The CoBiF score can predict mortality in clinical settings as well as simplify the identification and appropriate management of patients at high risk.

9.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 54(3): 420-430, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1971785

ABSTRACT

Arterial and venous thrombotic events in COVID-19 cause significant morbidity and mortality among patients. Although international guidelines agree on the need for anticoagulation, it is unclear whether full-dose heparin anticoagulation confers additional benefits over prophylactic-dose anticoagulation. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of heparin full-dose anticoagulation in hospitalized non-critically ill COVID-19 patients. We searched Pubmed/Medline, EMBASE, Clinicaltrials.gov, medRxiv.org and Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials dated up to April 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing full-dose heparin anticoagulation to prophylactic-dose anticoagulation or standard treatment in hospitalized non-critically ill COVID-19 patients were included in our pooled analysis. The primary endpoint was the rate of major thrombotic events and the co-primary endpoint was the rate of major bleeding events. We identified 4 studies, all of them multicenter, randomizing 2926 patients. Major thrombotic events were 23/1524 (1.5%) in full-dose heparin anticoagulation versus 57/1402 (4.0%) in prophylactic-dose [relative risk (RR) 0.39; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25-0.62; p˂0.01; I2 = 0%]. Clinical relevant bleeding events occurred in 1.7% (26/1524) among patients treated with heparin full anticoagulation dose compared to 1.1% (15/1403) in prophylactic-dose group (RR 1.60; 95% CI 0.85-3.03; p = 0.15; I2 = 20%). Mortality was 6.6% (101/1524) versus 8.6% (121/1402) (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.33-1.19; p = 0.15). In this meta-analysis of high quality multicenter randomized trials, full-dose anticoagulation with heparin was associated with lower rate of major thrombotic events without differences in bleeding risk and mortality in hospitalized non critically ill COVID-19 patients.Study registration PROSPERO, review no. CRD42022301874.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Thrombosis , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Heparin/adverse effects , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/therapeutic use , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Thrombosis/prevention & control
11.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 36(8 Pt B): 2975-2982, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1830213

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of an awake venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) management strategy in preventing clinically relevant barotrauma in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) at high risk for pneumothorax (PNX)/pneumomediastinum (PMD), defined as the detection of the Macklin-like effect on chest computed tomography (CT) scan. DESIGN: A case series. SETTING: At the intensive care unit of a tertiary-care institution. PARTICIPANTS: Seven patients with COVID-19-associated severe ARDS and Macklin-like radiologic sign on baseline chest CT. INTERVENTIONS: Primary VV-ECMO under spontaneous breathing instead of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). All patients received noninvasive ventilation or oxygen through a high-flow nasal cannula before and during ECMO support. The study authors collected data on cannulation strategy, clinical management, and outcome. Failure of awake VV-ECMO strategy was defined as the need for IMV due to worsening respiratory failure or delirium/agitation. The primary outcome was the development of PNX/PMD. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: No patient developed PNX/PMD. The awake VV-ECMO strategy failed in 1 patient (14.3%). Severe complications were observed in 4 (57.1%) patients and were noted as the following: intracranial bleeding in 1 patient (14.3%), septic shock in 2 patients (28.6%), and secondary pulmonary infections in 3 patients (42.8%). Two patients died (28.6%), whereas 5 were successfully weaned off VV-ECMO and were discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: VV-ECMO in awake and spontaneously breathing patients with severe COVID-19 ARDS may be a feasible and safe strategy to prevent the development of PNX/PMD in patients at high risk for this complication.


Subject(s)
Barotrauma , COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Barotrauma/epidemiology , Barotrauma/etiology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Humans , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Wakefulness
12.
Respir Med ; 197: 106853, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1796148

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To validate the role of Macklin effect on chest CT imaging in predicting subsequent occurrence of pneumomediastinum/pneumothorax (PMD/PNX) in COVID-19 patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is an observational, case-control study. Consecutive COVID-19 patients who underwent chest CT scan at hospital admission during the study time period (October 1st, 2020-April 31st, 2021) were identified. Macklin effect accuracy for prediction of spontaneous barotrauma was measured in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV). RESULTS: Overall, 981 COVID-19 patients underwent chest CT scan at hospital arrival during the study time period; 698 patients had radiological signs of interstitial pneumonia and were considered for further evaluation. Among these, Macklin effect was found in 33 (4.7%), including all 32 patients who suffered from barotrauma lately during hospital stay (true positive rate: 96.9%); only 1/33 with Macklin effect did not develop barotrauma (false positive rate: 3.1%). No barotrauma event was recorded in patients without Macklin effect on baseline chest CT scan. Macklin effect yielded a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 89.1-100), a specificity of 99.85% (95% CI: 99.2-100), a PPV of 96.7% (95% CI: 80.8-99.5), a NPV of 100% and an accuracy of 99.8% (95% CI: 99.2-100) in predicting PMD/PNX, with a mean advance of 3.2 ± 2.5 days. Moreover, all Macklin-positive patients developed ARDS requiring ICU admission and, in 90.1% of cases, invasive mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Macklin effect has high accuracy in predicting PMD/PNX in COVID-19 patients; it is also an excellent predictor of disease severity.


Subject(s)
Barotrauma , COVID-19 , Mediastinal Emphysema , Pneumothorax , Barotrauma/complications , Barotrauma/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Case-Control Studies , Humans , Mediastinal Emphysema/diagnostic imaging , Mediastinal Emphysema/epidemiology , Mediastinal Emphysema/etiology , Pneumothorax/epidemiology , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
13.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 36(8 Pt B): 2961-2967, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1795642

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To compare heparin-based anticoagulation and bivalirudin-based anticoagulation within the context of critically ill patients with a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. DESIGN: An observational study. SETTING: At the intensive care unit of a university hospital. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Critically ill patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection receiving full anticoagulation with heparin or bivalirudin. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-three patients received full anticoagulation with bivalirudin and 60 with heparin. Despite patients in the bivalirudin group having higher mortality risk scores (SAPS II 60 ± 16 v 39 ±7, p < 0.001) and a higher need for extracorporeal support compared to the heparin group, hospital mortality was comparable (57% v 45, p = 0.3). No difference in thromboembolic complications was observed, and bleeding events were more frequent in patients treated with bivalirudin (65% v 40%, p = 0.01). Similar results were confirmed in the subgroup analysis of patients undergoing intravenous anticoagulation; in addition to comparable thrombotic complications occurrence and thrombocytopenia rate, however, no difference in the bleeding rate was observed (65% v 35%, p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Although heparin is the most used anticoagulant in the intensive care setting, bivalirudin-based anticoagulation was safe and effective in a cohort of critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2. Bivalirudin may be given full consideration as an anticoagulation strategy for critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2, especially in those with thrombocytopenia and on extracorporeal support.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Thrombocytopenia , Anticoagulants , Antithrombins/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , Critical Illness/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Fibrinolytic Agents , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Heparin/adverse effects , Hirudins , Humans , Recombinant Proteins/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombocytopenia/chemically induced
14.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 36(5): 1354-1363, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1537350

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Patients with COVID-19 frequently develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Data on long-term survival of these patients are lacking. The authors investigated 1-year survival, quality of life, and functional recovery of patients with COVID-19 ARDS requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Tertiary-care university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with COVID-19 ARDS receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and discharged alive from hospital. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were contacted by phone after 1 year. Functional, cognitive, and psychological outcomes were explored through a questionnaire and assessed using validated scales. Patients were offered the possibility to undergo a follow-up chest computed tomography (CT) scan. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The study included all adult (age ≥18 years) patients with COVID-19-related ARDS admitted to an ICU of the authors' institution between February 25, 2020, and April 27, 2020, who received at least 1 day of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Of 116 patients who received IMV, 61 (52.6%) survived to hospital discharge. These survivors were assessed 1 year after discharge and 56 completed a battery of tests of cognition, activities of daily living, and interaction with family members. They had overall good functional recovery, with >80% reporting good recovery and no difficulties in usual activities. A total of 52 (93%) of patients had no dyspnea at rest. Severe anxiety/depression was reported by 5 (8.9%) patients. Comparing 2-month and 1-year data, the authors observed the most significant improvements in the areas of working status and exertional dyspnea. One-year chest CT scans were available for 36 patients; fibrotic-like changes were present in 4 patients. CONCLUSIONS: All patients who survived the acute phase of COVID-19 and were discharged from the hospital were alive at the 1-year follow up, and the vast majority of them had good overall recovery and quality of life.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiration, Artificial , Activities of Daily Living , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Quality of Life , SARS-CoV-2
15.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand ; 66(2): 223-231, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511269

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome (COVID-19 ARDS) is a disease that often requires invasive ventilation. Little is known about COVID-19 ARDS sequelae. We assessed the mid-term lung status of COVID-19 survivors and investigated factors associated with pulmonary sequelae. METHODS: All adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit from 25th February to 27th April 2020 were included. Lung function was evaluated through chest CT scan and pulmonary function tests (PFT). Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of persisting lung alterations. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients (75%) completed lung assessment. Chest CT scan was performed after a median (interquartile range) time of 97 (89-105) days, whilst PFT after 142 (133-160) days. The median age was 58 (52-65) years and most patients were male (90%). The median duration of mechanical ventilation was 11 (6-16) days. Median tidal volume/ideal body weight (TV/IBW) was 6.8 (5.71-7.67) ml/Kg. 59% and 63% of patients showed radiological and functional lung sequelae, respectively. The diffusion capacity of carbon monoxide (DLCO ) was reduced by 59%, with a median per cent of predicted DLCO of 72.1 (57.9-93.9) %. Mean TV/IBW during invasive ventilation emerged as an independent predictor of persistent CT scan abnormalities, whilst the duration of mechanical ventilation was an independent predictor of both CT and PFT abnormalities. The extension of lung involvement at hospital admission (evaluated through Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema, RALE score) independently predicted the risk of persistent alterations in PFTs. CONCLUSIONS: Both the extent of lung parenchymal involvement and mechanical ventilation protocols predict morphological and functional lung abnormalities months after COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Male , Middle Aged , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Survivors
16.
Ann Intensive Care ; 11(1): 152, 2021 Oct 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1496221

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: COVID-19 is characterized by dysregulated immune response, respiratory failure and a relevant mortality rate among hospitalized patients. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is involved in COVID-19-associated cytokine storm, and several trials investigated whether its inhibition could improve patients' outcome. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials (RCT) to test this hypothesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two independent investigators searched PubMed, Scopus, ClnicalTrials.gov and medRxiv up to September 1st, 2021. Inclusion criteria were: administration of tocilizumab or sarilumab; COVID-19 adult patients with pneumonia; and being a RCT. Primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up. Secondary outcomes included intubation rate and incidence of adverse events. Two independent investigators extracted data from eligible trials. RESULTS: Of the 763 studies assessed, 15 RCTs were included (9,320 patients), all were multicentre, and the majority open-label vs standard treatment. IL-6 inhibitors were associated with reduced all-cause mortality at the longest follow-up (1315/5,380 [24.4%] in the IL-6 inhibitors group versus 1080/3,814 [28.3%] in the control group, RR = 0.90; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.96; p for effect = 0.003, I2 = 0%, with 13 studies included), with reduction in 28/30-day mortality and intubation rates, and with no increase in adverse events and secondary infections. CONCLUSION: IL-6 inhibitors reduced longest follow-up mortality and intubation in COVID-19 patients. Findings need to be confirmed in high-quality RCTs.

17.
Crit Care Med ; 50(3): 491-500, 2022 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462522

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: There are concerns of a high barotrauma rate in coronavirus disease 2019 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. However, a few studies were published, and reported rates were highly variable. We performed a systematic literature review to identify rates of barotrauma, pneumothorax, and pneumomediastinum in coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. DATA SOURCE: PubMed and Scopus were searched for studies reporting barotrauma event rate in adult coronavirus disease 2019 patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. STUDY SELECTION: We included all studies investigating adult patients with coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation. Case reports, studies performed outside ICU setting, and pediatric studies were excluded. Two investigators independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators abstracted data on study characteristics, rate of pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum and overall barotrauma events, and mortality. When available, data from noncoronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients were also collected. Pooled estimates for barotrauma, pneumothorax, and pneumomediastinum were calculated. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 13 studies with 1,814 invasively ventilated coronavirus disease 2019 patients and 493 noncoronavirus disease 2019 patients were included. A total of 266/1,814 patients (14.7%) had at least one barotrauma event (pooled estimates, 16.1% [95% CI, 11.8-20.4%]). Pneumothorax occurred in 132/1,435 patients (pooled estimates, 10.7%; 95% CI, 6.7-14.7%), whereas pneumomediastinum occurred in 162/1,432 patients (pooled estimates, 11.2%; 95% CI, 8.0-14.3%). Mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 patients who developed barotrauma was 111/198 patients (pooled estimates, 61.6%; 95% CI, 50.2-73.0%). In noncoronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients, barotrauma occurred in 31/493 patients (6.3%; pooled estimates, 5.7%; 95% CI, -2.1% to 13.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Barotrauma occurs in one out of six coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and is associated with a mortality rate of about 60%. Barotrauma rate may be higher than noncoronavirus disease 2019 controls.


Subject(s)
Barotrauma/etiology , COVID-19/therapy , Mediastinal Emphysema/etiology , Pneumothorax/etiology , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Barotrauma/mortality , COVID-19/mortality , Humans , Mediastinal Emphysema/mortality , Pneumothorax/mortality , SARS-CoV-2
18.
J Crit Care ; 66: 14-19, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1351740

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To determine whether Macklin effect (a linear collection of air contiguous to the bronchovascular sheath) on baseline CT imaging is an accurate predictor for subsequent pneumomediastinum (PMD)/pneumothorax (PNX) development in invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is an observational, case-control study. From a prospectively acquired database, all consecutive invasively ventilated COVID-19 ARDS patients who underwent at least one baseline chest CT scan during the study time period (February 25th, 2020-December 31st, 2020) were identified; those who had tracheal lesion or already had PMD/PNX at the time of the first available chest imaging were excluded. RESULTS: 37/173 (21.4%) patients enrolled had PMD/PNX; specifically, 20 (11.5%) had PMD, 10 (5.8%) PNX, 7 (4%) both. 33/37 patients with subsequent PMD/PNX had Macklin effect on baseline CT (89.2%, true positives) 8.5 days [range, 1-18] before the first actual radiological evidence of PMD/PNX. Conversely, 6/136 patients without PMD/PNX (4.4%, false positives) demonstrated Macklin effect (p < 0.001). Macklin effect yielded a sensitivity of 89.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 74.6-96.9), a specificity of 95.6% (95% CI: 90.6-98.4), a positive predictive value (PV) of 84.5% (95% CI: 71.3-92.3), a negative PV of 97.1% (95% CI: 74.6-96.9) and an accuracy of 94.2% (95% CI: 89.6-97.2) in predicting PMD/PNX (AUC:0.924). CONCLUSIONS: Macklin effect accurately predicts, 8.5 days in advance, PMD/PNX development in COVID-19 ARDS patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mediastinal Emphysema , Pneumothorax , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Case-Control Studies , Humans , Mediastinal Emphysema/diagnostic imaging , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL