The Response of Emergency Departments (EDs) to the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Experience of 5 EDs in a Paris-Based Academic Hospital Trust.

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has imposed unforeseen and unprecedented constraints on emergency departments (EDs). In this study, we detail the organizational and managerial tools recently implemented among 5 academic EDs in a French region particularly affected by COVID-19 and analyze how EDs responded to the COVID-19-related disease burden during different phases of the epidemic. Initially, they focused on the early detection of suspected cases by identifying 3 predominant COVID-19 syndromes. During this diagnostic process, patients were placed in respiratory isolation (facial mask before triage) and droplet isolation (ED rooms). A 3-level strategy for triage, clinical pathways in the EDs, and the organization of hospital spaces was based on the real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) COVID-19 positivity rate, with ED strategies adapted to the exigencies of each level. This crisis demonstrated hospitals' adaptability and capacity to mobilize in the face of new risks, with hospitals and EDs coordinating their management to reallocate resources, optimize interoperability, and rethink patient pathways. This report on their processes may assist hospitals and EDs in areas currently spared by the new variants.

Agreement of respiratory viruses' detection between nasopharyngeal swab and bronchoalveolar lavage in adults admitted for pneumonia: a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the high diagnostic accuracy of the nasopharyngeal swab (including in intensive care unit (ICU) patients). This study aimed to compare nasopharyngeal swab and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) results for non-SARS-CoV-2 viruses in patients with suspected pneumonia. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed in one French academic hospital on consecutive adults from 2012 to 2018 and tested nasopharyngeal swab and BAL within 24 hours by using multiplex PCR. The agreement in pathogen detection between nasopharyngeal swab and BAL was evaluated. RESULTS: Patients were primarily men (n = 178/276, 64.5%), with a median age of 60 years (IQR: 51-68 years). Of the 276 patients, 169 (61%) were admitted to the ICU for acute respiratory distress. We detected at least one respiratory virus in 34.4% of the nasopharyngeal swabs (n = 95/276) and 29.0% of BAL (n = 80/276). Two or more viruses were detected in 2.5% of the nasopharyngeal swabs (n = 7/276) and 2.2% of BAL (n = 6/276). Rhinovirus/enteroviruses were the most frequently detected viral group in 10.2% (n = 29/285) of the nasopharyngeal swabs and 9.5% (n = 27/285) of BAL, followed by influenza A, detected in 5.6% (n = 16/285) of the nasopharyngeal swabs and 4.9% (n = 14/285) of BAL. Overall agreement was 83.7% (n = 231/276 (95% CI [78.7%, 87.7%])) (i.e. same pathogen or pathogen combination was identified in the nasopharyngeal swab and BAL for 231 patients). Rhinovirus/enterovirus (n = 29/231) and respiratory syncytial virus (n = 13/231) had the lowest agreement of 62.1% (n = 18/29 (95% CI [42.4%-78.7%])) and 61.5% (n = 8/13 (95% CI [32.3%-84.9%])), respectively). CONCLUSIONS: There was a good agreement between nasopharyngeal swabs and BAL in detecting respiratory viruses among adult patients with suspected pneumonia. However, these data still encourage BAL in the case of a negative nasopharyngeal swab.

Dual Monoclonal Antibodies on Sars-Cov-2 Alpha and Delta Variants: Clinical and Virological Efficacy.

Monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) targeting the Spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 is a key strategy to prevent severe COVID-19. Here, the efficacy of two monoclonal antibody bitherapies against SARS-CoV-2 was assessed on 92 patients at high risk of severe COVID-19 between March and October 2021 (Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Paris, France). Nine patients died despite appropriate management. From 14 days following treatment initiation, we observed a slower viral load decay for patients treated with the bitherapy Bamlanivimab/Etsevimab compared to the Casirivimab/Imdevimab association therapy (P = 0.045). The emergence of several mutations on the Spike protein known to diminish antiviral efficacy was observed from 1 to 3 weeks after infusion. The Q493R mutation was frequently selected, located in a region of joint structural overlap by Bamlanivimab/Etsevimab antibodies. Despite that this study was done on former SARS-CoV-2 variants (Alpha and Delta), the results provide new insights into resistance mechanisms in SARS-CoV-2 antibodies neutralization escape and should be considered for current and novel variants. IMPORTANCE Monoclonal antibody bitherapies (MAbs) are commonly prescribed to treat severe SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, and the rapid growth of resistance mutation emergence is alarming globally. To explore this issue, we conducted both clinical and genomic analyses of SARS-CoV-2 in a series of patients treated in 2021. We first noticed that the two dual therapies prescribed during the study had different kinetics of viral load decay. Rapidly after initiation of the treatments, resistance mutations emerged in the interface between the MAbs and the target Spike glycoprotein, demonstrating the importance to continuously screen the viral genome during treatment course. Taken together, the results highlight that viral mutations may emerge under selective pressure, conferring a putative competitive advantage, and could rapidly spread, as observed for the Omicron variant.

Comparison of Patients Infected With Delta Versus Omicron COVID-19 Variants Presenting to Paris Emergency Departments : A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: At the end of 2021, the B.1.1.529 SARS-CoV-2 variant (Omicron) wave superseded the B.1.617.2 variant (Delta) wave. OBJECTIVE: To compare baseline characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection with the Delta variant versus the Omicron variant in the emergency department (ED). DESIGN: Retrospective chart reviews. SETTING: 13 adult EDs in academic hospitals in the Paris area from 29 November 2021 to 10 January 2022. PATIENTS: Patients with a positive reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test result for SARS-CoV-2 and variant identification. MEASUREMENTS: Main outcome measures were baseline clinical and biological characteristics at ED presentation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 3728 patients had a positive RT-PCR test result for SARS-CoV-2 during the study period; 1716 patients who had a variant determination (818 Delta and 898 Omicron) were included. Median age was 58 years, and 49% were women. Patients infected with the Omicron variant were younger (54 vs. 62 years; difference, 8.0 years [95% CI, 4.6 to 11.4 years]), had a lower rate of obesity (8.0% vs. 12.5%; difference, 4.5 percentage points [CI, 1.5 to 7.5 percentage points]), were more vaccinated (65% vs. 39% for 1 dose and 22% vs. 11% for 3 doses), had a lower rate of dyspnea (26% vs. 50%; difference, 23.6 percentage points [CI, 19.0 to 28.2 percentage points]), and had a higher rate of discharge home from the ED (59% vs. 37%; difference, 21.9 percentage points [-26.5 to -17.1 percentage points]). Compared with Delta, Omicron infection was independently associated with a lower risk for ICU admission (adjusted difference, 11.4 percentage points [CI, 8.4 to 14.4 percentage points]), mechanical ventilation (adjusted difference, 3.6 percentage points [CI, 1.7 to 5.6 percentage points]), and in-hospital mortality (adjusted difference, 4.2 percentage points [CI, 2.0 to 6.5 percentage points]). LIMITATION: Patients with COVID-19 illness and no SARS-CoV-2 variant determination in the ED were excluded. CONCLUSION: Compared with the Delta variant, infection with the Omicron variant in patients in the ED had different clinical and biological patterns and was associated with better in-hospital outcomes, including higher survival. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Feasibility of large-scale eOSCES: the simultaneous evaluation of 500 medical students during a mock examination.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led health schools to cancel many on-site training and exams. Teachers were looking for the best option to carry out online OSCEs, and Zoom was the obvious choice since many schools have used it to pursue education purposes. METHODS: We conducted a feasibility study during the 2020-2021 college year divided into six pilot phases and the large-scale eOSCEs on Zoom on June 30th, 2021. We developed a specific application allowing us to mass create Zoom meetings and built an entire organization, including a technical support system (an SOS room and catching-up rooms) and teachers' training sessions. We assessed satisfaction via an online survey. RESULTS: On June 30th, 531/794 fifth-year medical students (67%) participated in a large-scale mock exam distributed in 135 Zoom meeting rooms with the mobilization of 298 teachers who either participated in the Zoom meetings as standardized patients (N =135, 45%) or examiners (N =135, 45%) or as supervisors in the catching-up rooms (N =16, 6%) or the SOS room (N =12, 4%). In addition, 32/270 teachers (12%) experienced difficulties connecting to their Zoom meetings and sought the help of an SOS room member. Furthermore, 40/531 students (7%) were either late to their station or had technical difficulties and declared those issues online and were welcomed in one of the catching-up rooms to perform their eOSCE stations. Additionally, 518/531 students (98%) completed the entire circuit of three stations, and 225/531 students (42%) answered the online survey. Among them, 194/225 (86%) found eOSCES helpful for training and expressed their satisfaction with this experience. CONCLUSION: Organizing large-scale eOSCEs on Zoom is feasible with the appropriate tools. In addition, eOCSEs should be considered complementary to on-site OSCEs and to train medical students in telemedicine.

Systematic review on the association between respiratory virus real-time PCR cycle threshold values and clinical presentation or outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: It is unclear whether real-time (rt)-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values can be utilized to guide clinical and infection-control decisions. This systematic review assesses the association between respiratory pathogen rt-PCR Ct values and clinical presentation or outcomes. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane library databases on 14-17 January 2020 for studies reporting the presence or absence of an association between Ct values and clinical presentation or outcomes, excluding animal studies, reviews, meta-analyses, and non-English language studies. RESULTS: Among 33 studies identified (reporting on between 9 and 4918 participants by pathogen), influenza (n = 11 studies; 4918 participants), human rhinovirus (HRV, n = 11; 2012) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV, n = 8; 3290) were the most-studied pathogens. Low influenza Ct values were associated with mortality in 1/3 studies, with increased disease severity/duration or ICU admission in 3/9, and with increased hospitalization or length of hospital stay (LOS) in 1/6. Low HRV Ct values were associated with increased disease severity/duration or ICU admission in 3/10 studies, and with increased hospitalization or LOS in 1/3. Low RSV Ct values were associated with increased disease severity/duration or ICU admission in 3/6 studies, and with increased hospitalization or LOS in 4/4. Contradictory associations were also identified for other respiratory pathogens. CONCLUSIONS: Respiratory infection Ct values may inform clinical and infection-control decisions. However, the study heterogeneity observed in this review highlights the need for standardized workflows to utilize Ct values as a proxy of genomic load and confirm their value for respiratory infection management.

Place des virus respiratoires dans les pneumonies aiguës communautaires de l'adulte : quels changements depuis la Covid-19 ? Respiratory viruses in community-acquired pneumonia in adults : what's new since Covid-19 ?

L’émergence du SARS-CoV-2 a renforcé l'intérêt pour la place des virus respiratoires, dans les pneumonies aiguës communautaires, en mettant en exergue de nombreux points encore mal connus tels que la part des infections asymptomatiques, les interactions entre virus respiratoires et pathogènes non viraux, leurs périodes d'incubation, leur pathogénicité ou encore la durée d'excrétion variable. La présentation clinique et radiologique des pneumonies aiguës communautaires ne permet pas toujours de distinguer l'origine virale de l'origine bactérienne. L'absence de réelle conséquence thérapeutique semble un frein à l'utilisation des PCR multiplex dans la pratique quotidienne. Toutefois, l'amélioration en termes de délai de rendu des résultats et du nombre de pathogènes inclus dans les panels, ainsi que l'accumulation récente de données épidémiologiques et cliniques, devraient aider à rationaliser l'utilisation de ces tests, faciliter l'interprétation de leurs résultats et guider l'utilisation des molécules antivirales en développement.

Place des virus respiratoires dans les pneumonies aiguës communautaires de l'adulte : quels changements depuis la Covid-19 ?

Résumé L’émergence du SARS-CoV-2 a renforcé l'intérêt pour la place des virus respiratoires, dans les pneumonies aiguës communautaires, en mettant en exergue de nombreux points encore mal connus tels que la part des infections asymptomatiques, les interactions entre virus respiratoires et pathogènes non viraux, leurs périodes d'incubation, leur pathogénicité ou encore la durée d'excrétion variable. La présentation clinique et radiologique des pneumonies aiguës communautaires ne permet pas toujours de distinguer l'origine virale de l'origine bactérienne. L'absence de réelle conséquence thérapeutique semble un frein à l'utilisation des PCR multiplex dans la pratique quotidienne. Toutefois, l'amélioration en termes de délai de rendu des résultats et du nombre de pathogènes inclus dans les panels, ainsi que l'accumulation récente de données épidémiologiques et cliniques, devraient aider à rationaliser l'utilisation de ces tests, faciliter l'interprétation de leurs résultats et guider l'utilisation des molécules antivirales en développement. The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 has reinforced the growing interest in the role of respiratory viruses in community-acquired pneumonia, in highlighting many points that are still poorly understood, such as the proportion of asymptomatic infections, the interactions between respiratory viruses and non-viral pathogens, their incubation periods and pathogenicity, and the variable duration of excretion. The clinical and radiological presentation of acute community-acquired pneumonia does not always make it possible to distinguish viral from bacterial etiology. The lack of therapeutic options in viral infections seems to be a brake on the use of multiplex PCR in daily practice. The improvement of turnaround time and number of pathogens included in the panels, as well as the growing body of epidemiological and clinical data, should help rationalize the use of these tests, facilitate the interpretation of their results and guide the use of antiviral treatments in development.

Added value of rapid respiratory syndromic testing at point of care versus central laboratory testing: a controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Virus-associated respiratory infections are in the spotlight with the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and the expanding use of multiplex PCR (mPCR). The impact of molecular testing as a point-of-care test (POCT) in the emergency department (ED) is still unclear. OBJECTIVES: To compare the impact of a syndromic test performed in the ED as a POCT and in the central laboratory on length of stay (LOS), antibiotic use and single-room assignment. METHODS: From 19 November 2019 to 9 March 2020, adults with acute respiratory illness seeking care in the ED of a large hospital were enrolled, with mPCR performed with a weekly alternation in the ED as a POCT (week A) or in the central laboratory (week B). RESULTS: 474 patients were analysed: 275 during A weeks and 199 during B weeks. Patient characteristics were similar. The hospital LOS (median 7 days during week A versus 7 days during week B, P = 0.29), the proportion of patients with ED-LOS <1 day (63% versus 60%, P = 0.57) and ED antibiotic prescription (59% versus 58%, P = 0.92) were not significantly different. Patients in the POCT arm were more frequently assigned a single room when having a positive PCR for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus and metapneumovirus [52/70 (74%) versus 19/38 (50%) in the central testing arm, P = 0.012]. CONCLUSIONS: Syndromic testing performed in the ED compared with the central laboratory failed to reduce the LOS or antibiotic consumption in patients with acute respiratory illness, but was associated with an increased single-room assignment among patients in whom a significant respiratory pathogen was detected.

Long-Term Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infectiousness Among Three Immunocompromised Patients: From Prolonged Viral Shedding to SARS-CoV-2 Superinfection.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for stopping coronavirus disease 2019 patient isolation are mainly symptom-based, with isolation for 10 to 20 days depending on their condition. METHODS: In this study, we describe 3 deeply immunocompromised patients, each with different clinical evolutions. We observed (1) the patients' epidemiological, clinical, and serological data, (2) infectiousness using viral culture, and (3) viral mutations accumulated over time. RESULTS: Asymptomatic carriage, symptom resolution, or superinfection with a second severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 strain were observed, all leading to prolonged infectious viral shedding for several months. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding underlying mechanisms and frequency of prolonged infectiousness is crucial to adapt current guidelines and strengthen the use of systematic polymerase chain reaction testing before stopping isolation in immunocompromised populations.

Viral epidemiology and SARS-CoV-2 co-infections with other respiratory viruses during the first COVID-19 wave in Paris, France.

OBJECTIVES: Our work assessed the prevalence of co-infections in patients with SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: All patients hospitalized in a Parisian hospital during the first wave of COVID-19 were tested by multiplex PCR if they presented ILI symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 806 patients (21%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2, 755 (20%) were positive for other respiratory viruses. Among the SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, 49 (6%) had viral co-infections. They presented similar age, symptoms, except for fever (P = .013) and headaches (P = .048), than single SARS-CoV-2 infections. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2-infected patients presenting viral co-infections had similar clinical characteristics and prognosis than patients solely infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Correction: Characteristics associated with COVID-19 or other respiratory viruses' infections at a single-center emergency department.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243261.].

Observer agreement and clinical significance of chest CT reporting in patients suspected of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: To assess interobserver agreement and clinical significance of chest CT reporting in patients suspected of COVID-19. METHODS: From 16 to 24 March 2020, 241 consecutive patients addressed to hospital for COVID-19 suspicion had both chest CT and SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. Eight observers (2 thoracic and 2 general senior radiologists, 2 junior radiologists, and 2 emergency physicians) retrospectively categorized each CT into one out of 4 categories (evocative, compatible for COVID-19 pneumonia, not evocative, and normal). Observer agreement for categorization between all readers and pairs of readers with similar experience was evaluated with the Kappa coefficient. The results of a consensus categorization were correlated to RT-PCR. RESULTS: Observer agreement across the 4 categories was good between all readers (κ value 0.61 95% CI 0.60-0.63) and moderate to good between pairs of readers (0.54-0.75). It was very good (κ 0.81 95% CI 0.79-0.83), fair (κ 0.32 95% CI 0.29-0.34), moderate (κ 0.56 95% CI 0.54-0.58), and moderate (0.58 95% CI 0.56-0.61) for the categories evocative, compatible, not evocative, and normal, respectively. RT-PCR was positive in 97%, 50%, 31%, and 11% of cases in the respective categories. Observer agreement was lower (p < 0.001) and RT-PCR positive cases less frequently categorized evocative in the presence of an underlying pulmonary disease (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Interobserver agreement for chest CT reporting using categorization of findings is good in patients suspected of COVID-19. Among patients considered for hospitalization in an epidemic context, CT categorized evocative is highly predictive of COVID-19, whereas the predictive value of CT decreases between the categories compatible and not evocative. KEY POINTS: • In patients suspected of COVID-19, interobserver agreement for chest CT reporting into categories is good, and very good to categorize CT "evocative." • Chest CT can participate in estimating the likelihood of COVID-19 in patients presenting to hospital during the outbreak, CT categorized "evocative" being highly predictive of the disease whereas almost a third of patients with CT "not evocative" had a positive RT-PCR in our study. • Observer agreement is lower and CTs of positive RT-PCR cases less frequently "evocative" in presence of an underlying pulmonary disease.

Characteristics associated with COVID-19 or other respiratory viruses' infections at a single-center emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Rapid identification of patients with high suspicion of COVID-19 will become a challenge with the co-circulation of multiple respiratory viruses (RVs). We have identified clinical or biological characteristics to help distinguish SARS-CoV-2 from other RVs. METHODS: We used a prospective cohort including all consecutive patients admitted through the emergency department's (ED) and presenting respiratory symptoms from November 2019 to April 2020. Patients were tested for RV using multiplex polymerase chain reaction (mPCR) and SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. RESULTS: 203/508 patients were positive for an RV during the non-SARS-CoV-2 epidemic period (November to February), and 268/596 patients were SARS-CoV-2 positive during the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic (March to April). Younger age, male gender, fever, absence of expectoration and absence of chronic lung disease were statistically associated with SARS-CoV-2 detection. Combining these variables allowed for the distinguishing of SARS-CoV-2 infections with 83, 65, 75 and 76% sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV, respectively. CONCLUSION: Patients' characteristics associated with a positive PCR are common between SARS-CoV-2 and other RVs, but a simple discrimination of strong SARS-CoV-2 suspicion with a limited set of clinical features seems possible. Such scoring could be useful but has to be prospectively evaluated and will not eliminate the need for rapid PCR assays.

Evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel, the First Rapid Multiplex PCR Commercial Assay for SARS-CoV-2 Detection.

In the race to contain severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), efficient detection and triage of infected patients must rely on rapid and reliable testing. In this work, we performed the first evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx respiratory SARS-CoV-2 panel (QIAstat-SARS) for SARS-CoV-2 detection. This assay is the first rapid multiplex PCR (mPCR) assay, including SARS-CoV-2 detection, and is fully compatible with a non-PCR-trained laboratory or point-of-care (PoC) testing. This evaluation was performed using 69 primary clinical samples (66 nasopharyngeal swabs [NPS], 1 bronchoalveolar lavage fluid sample [BAL], 1 tracheal aspirate sample, and 1 bronchial aspirate sample) comparing SARS-CoV-2 detection with the currently WHO-recommended reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) (WHO-RT-PCR) workflow. Additionally, a comparative limit of detection (LoD) assessment was performed for QIAstat-SARS and WHO-RT-PCR using a quantified clinical sample. Compatibility of sample pretreatment for viral neutralization or viscous samples with the QIAstat-SARS system were also tested. The QIAstat-Dx respiratory SARS-CoV-2 panel demonstrated a sensitivity comparable to that of the WHO-recommended assay with a limit of detection at 1,000 copies/ml. The overall percent agreement between QIAstat-Dx SARS and WHO-RT-PCR on 69 clinical samples was 97% with a sensitivity of 100% (40/40) and specificity at 93% (27/29). No cross-reaction was encountered for any other respiratory viruses or bacteria included in the panel. The QIAstat-SARS rapid multiplex PCR panel provides a highly sensitive, robust, and accurate assay for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2. This assay allows rapid decisions even in non-PCR-trained laboratory or point-of-care testing, allowing innovative organization.

Analysis of Emergency Department Visits and Hospital Activity during Influenza Season, COVID-19 Epidemic, and Lockdown Periods in View of Managing a Future Disaster Risk: A Multicenter Observational Study.

ED-visits and through-ED admissions to medical/surgical wards (MSW) and intensive care unit (ICU) during influenza, COVID-19 and lockdown periods were evaluated in a four-hospital prospective observational study from November 2018 to March 2020. ED visit characteristics and main diagnostic categories were assessed. Analysis of 368,262 ED-visits highlighted a significantly increasing trend in ED-visits during influenza followed by a significantly decreasing trend after lockdown. For MSW-admissions, a pattern of growth during influenza was followed by a fall that began during COVID-19 pandemic and intensified during the lockdown. For ICU-admissions, a significant rise during the COVID-19 pandemic was followed by diminution during the lockdown period. During lockdown, significantly diminishing trends were shown for all diagnostic categories (between -40.8% and -73.6%), except influenza-like illness/COVID cases (+31.6%), Pulmonary embolism/deep vein thrombosis (+33.5%) and frequent users (+188.0%). The present study confirms an increase in demand during the influenza epidemic and during the initial phase of the COVID-19 epidemic, but a drop in activity during the lockdown, mainly related to non-COVID conditions. Syndromic surveillance of ILI cases in ED is a tool for monitoring influenza and COVID-19, and it can predict ED activity and the need for MSW and ICU beds.

Lipoprotein concentrations over time in the intensive care unit COVID-19 patients: Results from the ApoCOVID study.

INTRODUCTION: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus2 has caused a global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). High-density lipoproteins (HDLs), particles chiefly known for their reverse cholesterol transport function, also display pleiotropic properties, including anti-inflammatory or antioxidant functions. HDLs and low-density lipoproteins (LDLs) can neutralize lipopolysaccharides and increase bacterial clearance. HDL cholesterol (HDL-C) and LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) decrease during bacterial sepsis, and an association has been reported between low lipoprotein levels and poor patient outcomes. The goal of this study was to characterize the lipoprotein profiles of severe ICU patients hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia and to assess their changes during bacterial ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) superinfection. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted in a university hospital ICU. All consecutive patients admitted for COVID-19 pneumonia were included. Lipoprotein levels were assessed at admission and daily thereafter. The assessed outcomes were survival at 28 days and the incidence of VAP. RESULTS: A total of 48 patients were included. Upon admission, lipoprotein concentrations were low, typically under the reference values ([HDL-C] = 0.7[0.5-0.9] mmol/L; [LDL-C] = 1.8[1.3-2.3] mmol/L). A statistically significant increase in HDL-C and LDL-C over time during the ICU stay was found. There was no relationship between HDL-C and LDL-C concentrations and mortality on day 28 (log-rank p = 0.554 and p = 0.083, respectively). A comparison of alive and dead patients on day 28 did not reveal any differences in HDL-C and LDL-C concentrations over time. Bacterial VAP was frequent (64%). An association was observed between HDL-C and LDL-C concentrations on the day of the first VAP diagnosis and mortality ([HDL-C] = 0.6[0.5-0.9] mmol/L in survivors vs. [HDL-C] = 0.5[0.3-0.6] mmol/L in nonsurvivors, p = 0.036; [LDL-C] = 2.2[1.9-3.0] mmol/L in survivors vs. [LDL-C] = 1.3[0.9-2.0] mmol/L in nonsurvivors, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: HDL-C and LDL-C concentrations upon ICU admission are low in severe COVID-19 pneumonia patients but are not associated with poor outcomes. However, low lipoprotein concentrations in the case of bacterial superinfection during ICU hospitalization are associated with mortality, which reinforces the potential role of these particles during bacterial sepsis.

COVID-19 Preparedness Among Emergency Departments: A Cross-Sectional Study in France.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate hospital and emergency department (ED) preparedness in France facing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) rapid growth epidemic-phase, and to determine the link between preparedness and responsiveness. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, from March 7 to March 11, 2020, all heads of ED departments in France were contacted to answer an electronic survey, including 23 questions. Quality, Organization, Training, Resources, Management, Interoperability, and Responsiveness were evaluated by calculating scores (10 points). Multivariate analysis of variance was used to compare scores. Spearman's correlation coefficient and multifaceted regression analysis were performed between Responsiveness and dimensions scores. RESULTS: A total of 287 of 636 French EDs were included (45.1%). Calculated scores showed (median): Quality 5.38; Organization 6.4; Training 4.6; Resources 4.13; Management 2.38; Interoperability 4.0; Responsiveness 6.25; seasonal influenza score was 5. Significant differences between scores as a function of hospital and ED main characteristics were found. Furthermore, we found significant correlations (P < 0.01) between Responsiveness and all preparedness dimensions. Organization (adjusted-R2 0.2897), Management (aR2 0.321), and Interoperability (aR2 0.422) were significantly associated with Responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Preparedness in all its dimensions is low, indicating vulnerability. Preparedness and responsiveness face a certain and ongoing risk are close linked, and that Organizational, Management, and Interoperability dimensions are main determinants.