Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 90
Filter
1.
BMJ ; 370: m3379, 2020 09 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2316359

ABSTRACT

UPDATES: This is the twelfth version (eleventh update) of the living guideline, replacing earlier versions (available as data supplements). New recommendations will be published as updates to this guideline. CLINICAL QUESTION: What is the role of drugs in the treatment of patients with covid-19? CONTEXT: The evidence base for therapeutics for covid-19 is evolving with numerous randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recently completed and under way. The emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants (such as omicron) and subvariants are also changing the role of therapeutics. This update provides updated recommendations for remdesivir, addresses the use of combination therapy with corticosteroids, interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor blockers, and janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in patients with severe or critical covid-19, and modifies previous recommendations for the neutralising monoclonal antibodies sotrovimab and casirivimab-imdevimab in patients with non-severe covid-19. NEW OR UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS: • Remdesivir: a conditional recommendation for its use in patients with severe covid-19; and a conditional recommendation against its use in patients with critical covid-19. • Concomitant use of IL-6 receptor blockers (tocilizumab or sarilumab) and the JAK inhibitor baricitinib: these drugs may now be combined, in addition to corticosteroids, in patients with severe or critical covid-19. • Sotrovimab and casirivimab-imdevimab: strong recommendations against their use in patients with covid-19, replacing the previous conditional recommendations for their use. UNDERSTANDING THE NEW RECOMMENDATIONS: When moving from new evidence to updated recommendations, the Guideline Development Group (GDG) considered a combination of evidence assessing relative benefits and harms, values and preferences, and feasibility issues. For remdesivir, new trial data were added to a previous subgroup analysis and provided sufficiently trustworthy evidence to demonstrate benefits in patients with severe covid-19, but not critical covid-19. The GDG considered benefits of remdesivir to be modest and of moderate certainty for key outcomes such as mortality and mechanical ventilation, resulting in a conditional recommendation. For baricitinib, the GDG considered clinical trial evidence (RECOVERY) demonstrating reduced risk of death in patients already receiving corticosteroids and IL-6 receptor blockers. The GDG acknowledged that the clinical trials were not representative of the world population and that the risk-benefit balance may be less advantageous, particularly in patients who are immunosuppressed at higher risk of opportunistic infections (such as serious fungal, viral, or bacteria), those already deteriorating where less aggressive or stepwise addition of immunosuppressive medications may be preferred, and in areas where certain pathogens such as HIV or tuberculosis, are of concern. The panel anticipated that there would be situations where clinicians may opt for less aggressive immunosuppressive therapy or to combine medications in a stepwise fashion in patients who are deteriorating. The decision to combine the medications will depend on their availability, and the treating clinician's perception of the risk-benefit balance associated with combination immunosuppressive therapy, particularly in patient populations at risk of opportunistic infections who may have been under-represented in clinical trials. When making a strong recommendation against the use of monoclonal antibodies for patients with covid-19, the GDG considered in vitro neutralisation data demonstrating that sotrovimab and casirivimab-imdevimab evaluated in clinical trials have meaningfully reduced neutralisation activity of the currently circulating variants of SARS-CoV-2 and their subvariants. There was consensus among the panel that the absence of in vitro neutralisation activity strongly suggests absence of clinical effectiveness of these monoclonal antibodies. However, there was also consensus regarding the need for clinical trial evidence in order to confirm clinical efficacy of new monoclonal antibodies that reliably neutralise the circulating strains in vitro. Whether emerging new variants and subvariants might be susceptible to sotrovimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, or other anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies cannot be predicted. PRIOR RECOMMENDATIONS: • Recommended for patients with severe or critical covid-19­strong recommendations for systemic corticosteroids; IL-6 receptor blockers (tocilizumab or sarilumab) in combination with corticosteroids; and baricitinib as an alternative to IL-6 receptor blockers, in combination with corticosteroids. • Recommended for patients with non-severe covid-19 at highest risk of hospitalisation­a strong recommendation for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir; conditional recommendations for molnupiravir and remdesivir. • Not recommended for patients with non-severe covid-19­a conditional recommendation against systemic corticosteroids; a strong recommendation against convalescent plasma; a recommendation against fluvoxamine, except in the context of a clinical trial; and a strong recommendation against colchicine. • Not recommended for patients with non-severe covid-19 at low risk of hospitalisation­a conditional recommendation against nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. • Not recommended for patients with severe or critical covid-19­a recommendation against convalescent plasma except in the context of a clinical trial; and a conditional recommendation against the JAK inhibitors ruxolitinib and tofacitinib. • Not recommended, regardless of covid-19 disease severity­a strong recommendations against hydroxychloroquine and against lopinavir/ritonavir; and a recommendation against ivermectin except in the context of a clinical trial. ABOUT THIS GUIDELINE: This living guideline from the World Health Organization (WHO) incorporates new evidence to dynamically update recommendations for covid-19 therapeutics. The GDG typically evaluates a therapy when the WHO judges sufficient evidence is available to make a recommendation. While the GDG takes an individual patient perspective in making recommendations, it also considers resource implications, acceptability, feasibility, equity, and human rights. This guideline was developed according to standards and methods for trustworthy guidelines, making use of an innovative process to achieve efficiency in dynamic updating of recommendations. The methods are aligned with the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development and according to a pre-approved protocol (planning proposal) by the Guideline Review Committee (GRC). A box at the end of the article outlines key methodological aspects of the guideline process. MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation provides methodological support, including the coordination of living systematic reviews with network meta-analyses to inform the recommendations. The full version of the guideline is available online in MAGICapp and in PDF, with a summary version here in The BMJ. These formats should facilitate adaptation, which is strongly encouraged by WHO to contextualise recommendations in a healthcare system to maximise impact. Future recommendations: Recommendations on anticoagulation are planned for the next update to this guideline.


Subject(s)
Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , World Health Organization , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
3.
JAMA ; 329(14): 1183-1196, 2023 04 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2298507

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective: To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non-critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was organ support-free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS: On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support-free days among critically ill patients was 10 (-1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (-1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support-free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , COVID-19 , Renin-Angiotensin System , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/pharmacology , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/pharmacology , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Bayes Theorem , COVID-19/therapy , Renin-Angiotensin System/drug effects , Hospitalization , COVID-19 Drug Treatment/methods , Critical Illness , Receptors, Chemokine/antagonists & inhibitors
4.
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) ; 11(5), 2023.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2281540

ABSTRACT

Background: During COVID-19 pandemic, restrictions to in-person visiting of caregivers to patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) were applied in many countries. Our aim was to describe the variations in communication and family visiting policies in Italian ICUs during the pandemic. Methods: A secondary analysis from the COVISIT international survey was conducted, focusing on data from Italy. Results: Italian ICUs provided 118 (18%) responses out of 667 responses collected worldwide. A total of 12 Italian ICUs were at the peak of COVID-19 admissions at the time of the survey and 42/118 had 90% or more of patients admitted to ICU affected by COVID-19. During the COVID-19 peak, 74% of Italian ICUs adopted a no-in-person-visiting policy. This remained the most common strategy (67%) at the time of the survey. Information to families was provided by regular phone calls (81% in Italy versus 47% for the rest of the world). Virtual visiting was available for 69% and most commonly performed using devices provided by the ICU (71% in Italy versus 36% outside Italy). Conclusion: Our study showed that restrictions to the ICU applied during the COVID-19 pandemic were still in use at the time of the survey. The main means of communication with caregivers were telephone and virtual meetings.

5.
Clin Chest Med ; 44(2): 435-449, 2023 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2265764

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease-2019 has impacted the world globally. Countries and health care organizations across the globe responded to this unprecedented public health crisis in a varied manner in terms of public health and social measures, vaccination development and rollout, the conduct of research, developments of therapeutics, sharing of information, and in how they continue to deal with the widespread aftermath. This article reviews the various elements of the global response to the pandemic, focusing on the lessons learned and strategies to consider during future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Public Health
6.
Healthcare (Basel) ; 11(5)2023 Feb 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2281541

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During COVID-19 pandemic, restrictions to in-person visiting of caregivers to patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) were applied in many countries. Our aim was to describe the variations in communication and family visiting policies in Italian ICUs during the pandemic. METHODS: A secondary analysis from the COVISIT international survey was conducted, focusing on data from Italy. RESULTS: Italian ICUs provided 118 (18%) responses out of 667 responses collected worldwide. A total of 12 Italian ICUs were at the peak of COVID-19 admissions at the time of the survey and 42/118 had 90% or more of patients admitted to ICU affected by COVID-19. During the COVID-19 peak, 74% of Italian ICUs adopted a no-in-person-visiting policy. This remained the most common strategy (67%) at the time of the survey. Information to families was provided by regular phone calls (81% in Italy versus 47% for the rest of the world). Virtual visiting was available for 69% and most commonly performed using devices provided by the ICU (71% in Italy versus 36% outside Italy). CONCLUSION: Our study showed that restrictions to the ICU applied during the COVID-19 pandemic were still in use at the time of the survey. The main means of communication with caregivers were telephone and virtual meetings.

7.
Infection ; 2023 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2271413

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several studies have found an association between diabetes mellitus, disease severity and outcome in COVID-19 patients. Old critically ill patients are particularly at risk. This study aimed to investigate the impact of diabetes mellitus on 90-day mortality in a high-risk cohort of critically ill patients over 70 years of age. METHODS: This multicentre international prospective cohort study was performed in 151 ICUs across 26 countries. We included patients ≥ 70 years of age with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to the intensive care unit from 19th March 2020 through 15th July 2021. Patients were categorized into two groups according to the presence of diabetes mellitus. Primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Kaplan-Meier overall survival curves until day 90 were analysed and compared using the log-rank test. Mixed-effect Weibull regression models were computed to investigate the influence of diabetes mellitus on 90-day mortality. RESULTS: This study included 3420 patients with a median age of 76 years were included. Among these, 37.3% (n = 1277) had a history of diabetes mellitus. Patients with diabetes showed higher rates of frailty (32% vs. 18%) and several comorbidities including chronic heart failure (20% vs. 11%), hypertension (79% vs. 59%) and chronic kidney disease (25% vs. 11%), but not of pulmonary comorbidities (22% vs. 22%). The 90-day mortality was significantly higher in patients with diabetes than those without diabetes (64% vs. 56%, p < 0.001). The association of diabetes and 90-day mortality remained significant (HR 1.18 [1.06-1.31], p = 0.003) after adjustment for age, sex, SOFA-score and other comorbidities in a Weibull regression analysis. CONCLUSION: Diabetes mellitus was a relevant risk factor for 90-day mortality in old critically ill patients with COVID-19. STUDY REGISTRATION: NCT04321265, registered March 19th, 2020.

8.
Cancers (Basel) ; 15(4)2023 Feb 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2252760

ABSTRACT

Despite the adoption of enhanced recovery programs, the reported postoperative length of stay after robotic surgery is 4 days even in highly specialized centers. We report preliminary results of a pilot study for a new protocol of early discharge (on day 2) with telehealth home monitoring after robotic lobectomy for lung cancer. All patients with a caregiver were discharged on postoperative day 2 with a telemonitoring device if they satisfied specific discharge criteria. Teleconsultations were scheduled once in the afternoon of post-operative day 2, twice on postoperative day 3, and then once a day until the chest tube removal. Post-discharge vital signs were recorded by patients at least four times daily through the device and were available for consultation by two surgeons through phone application. In case of sudden variation of vital signs or occurrence of adverse events, a direct telephone line was available for patients as well as a protected re-hospitalization path. Primary outcome was the safety evaluated by the occurrence of post-discharge complications and readmissions. Secondary outcome was the evaluation of resources optimization (hospitalization days) maintaining the standard of care. During the study period, twelve patients satisfied all preoperative clinical criteria to be enrolled in our protocol. Two of twelve enrolled patients were successively excluded because they did not satisfy discharge criteria on postoperative day 2. During telehealth home monitoring a total of 27/427 vital-sign measurements violated the threshold in seven patients. Among the threshold violations, only 1 out of 27 was a critical violation and was managed at home. No postoperative complication occurred neither readmission was needed. A mean number of three hospitalization days was avoided and an estimated economic benefit of about EUR 500 for a single patient was obtained if compared with patients submitted to VATS lobectomy in the same period. These preliminary results confirm that adoption of telemonitoring allows, in selected patients, a safe discharge on postoperative day 2 after robotic surgery for early-stage NSCLC. A potential economic benefit could derive from this protocol if this data will be confirmed in larger sample.

9.
Minerva Urol Nephrol ; 74(1): 77-84, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2268119

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are sex differences in vulnerability to Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The coronavirus S protein mediates viral entry into target cells employing the host cellular serine protease TMPRSS2 for S-protein priming. The TMPRSS2 gene expression is responsive to androgen stimulation and it could partially explain sex differences. We hypothesized that men chronically exposed to 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5ARIs) for benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) have a lower risk of hospitalization for COVID-19. METHODS: This is a population-based case-control study on consecutive patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 virus who required hospitalization for COVID-19 (cases), age-matched to beneficiaries of the Lombardy Regional Health Service (controls). Data were collected by two high-volume COVID-19 regional centers of Lombardy (Italy). The primary outcome was to compare the prevalence of patients chronically exposed to 5ARIs, who required hospitalization for COVID-19, with the one of controls. RESULTS: Overall, 943 males were enrolled; 45 (4.77%) were exposed to 5ARI. COVID-19 patients aged >55 years under 5ARI treatment were significantly less than expected on the basis of the prevalence of 5ARI treatment among age-matched controls (5.57 vs. 8.14%; P=0.0083, 95% CI: 0.75-3.97%). This disproportion was higher for men aged >65 (7.14 vs. 12.31%; P=0.0001, 95% CI: 2.83-6.97%). Eighteen 5ARIs-patients died; the mean age of men who died was higher than those who did not: 75.98±9.29 vs. 64.78±13.57 (P<0.001). Cox-regression and multivariable models did not show correlation between 5ARIs exposure and protection against intensive care unit admission/death. CONCLUSIONS: Men exposed to 5ARIs might be less vulnerable to severe COVID-19, supporting its use in disease prophylaxis.


Subject(s)
5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors , COVID-19 , 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Case-Control Studies , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2
11.
J Clin Med ; 12(3)2023 Jan 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2216476

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Investigating the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after intensive care unit (ICU) discharge is necessary to identify possible modifiable risk factors. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the HRQoL in COVID-19 critically ill patients one year after ICU discharge. METHODS: In this multicenter prospective observational study, COVID-19 patients admitted to nine ICUs from 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021 in Italy were enrolled. One year after ICU discharge, patients were required to fill in short-form health survey 36 (SF-36) and impact of event-revised (IES-R) questionnaire. A multivariate linear or logistic regression analysis to search for factors associated with a lower HRQoL and post-traumatic stress disorded (PTSD) were carried out, respectively. RESULTS: Among 1003 patients screened, 343 (median age 63 years [57-70]) were enrolled. Mechanical ventilation lasted for a median of 10 days [2-20]. Physical functioning (PF 85 [60-95]), physical role (PR 75 [0-100]), emotional role (RE 100 [33-100]), bodily pain (BP 77.5 [45-100]), social functioning (SF 75 [50-100]), general health (GH 55 [35-72]), vitality (VT 55 [40-70]), mental health (MH 68 [52-84]) and health change (HC 50 [25-75]) describe the SF-36 items. A median physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) scores were 45.9 (36.5-53.5) and 51.7 (48.8-54.3), respectively, considering 50 as the normal value of the healthy general population. In all, 109 patients (31.8%) tested positive for post-traumatic stress disorder, also reporting a significantly worse HRQoL in all SF-36 domains. The female gender, history of cardiovascular disease, liver disease and length of hospital stay negatively affected the HRQoL. Weight at follow-up was a risk factor for PTSD (OR 1.02, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The HRQoL in COVID-19 ARDS (C-ARDS) patients was reduced regarding the PCS, while the median MCS value was slightly above normal. Some risk factors for a lower HRQoL have been identified, the presence of PTSD is one of them. Further research is warranted to better identify the possible factors affecting the HRQoL in C-ARDS.

13.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 13(2)2023 Jan 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2199878

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is highly prevalent in critical COVID-19 patients. The diagnosis and staging of AKI are based on serum creatinine (sCr) and urinary output criteria, with limitations in the functional markers. New cell-cycle arrest biomarkers [TIMP2]*[IGFBP7] have been proposed for early detection of AKI, but their role in critically ill COVID-19 patients is poorly understood. METHODS: We conducted an observational study to assess the performance of [TIMP2]*[IGFBP7] for the detection of AKI in critical COVID-19 patients admitted to our intensive care unit (ICU). We sampled urinary [TIMP2]*[IGFBP7] levels at ICU admission, 12 h, 24 h, and 48 h, and compared the results to the development of AKI, as well as baseline and laboratory data. RESULTS: Forty-one patients were enrolled. The median age was 66 years [57-72] and most were males (85%). Thirteen patients (31.7%) developed no/mild stage AKI, 19 patients (46.3%) moderate AKI, and nine patients (22.0%) severe AKI. The ICU mortality was 29.3%. sCr levels in the Emergency Department or at ICU admission were not significantly different according to AKI stage. [TIMP-2]*[IGFBP-7] urinary levels were elevated in severe AKI at 12 h after ICU admission, but not at ICU admission or 24 h or 48 h after ICU admission. CONCLUSION: Urinary biomarkers [TIMP-2]*[IGFBP-7] were generally increased in this population with a high prevalence of AKI, and were higher in patients with severe AKI measured at 12 h from ICU admission. Further studies are needed to evaluate the best timing of these biomarkers in this population.

14.
Crit Care Med ; 48(6): e440-e469, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2152192

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed. METHODS: We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations. RESULTS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which four are best practice statements, nine are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for six questions. The topics were: 1) infection control, 2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, 3) hemodynamic support, 4) ventilatory support, and 5) COVID-19 therapy. CONCLUSION: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new evidence in further releases of these guidelines.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Critical Illness , Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures/standards , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/standards , Intensive Care Units/standards , Pandemics , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiration, Artificial/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Shock/therapy
15.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(10): e2238871, 2022 10 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2084948

ABSTRACT

Importance: Data on the association of COVID-19 vaccination with intensive care unit (ICU) admission and outcomes of patients with SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonia are scarce. Objective: To evaluate whether COVID-19 vaccination is associated with preventing ICU admission for COVID-19 pneumonia and to compare baseline characteristics and outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients admitted to an ICU. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study on regional data sets reports: (1) daily number of administered vaccines and (2) data of all consecutive patients admitted to an ICU in Lombardy, Italy, from August 1 to December 15, 2021 (Delta variant predominant). Vaccinated patients received either mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) or adenoviral vector vaccines (ChAdOx1-S or Ad26.COV2). Incident rate ratios (IRRs) were computed from August 1, 2021, to January 31, 2022; ICU and baseline characteristics and outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients admitted to an ICU were analyzed from August 1 to December 15, 2021. Exposures: COVID-19 vaccination status (no vaccination, mRNA vaccine, adenoviral vector vaccine). Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidence IRR of ICU admission was evaluated, comparing vaccinated people with unvaccinated, adjusted for age and sex. The baseline characteristics at ICU admission of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients were investigated. The association between vaccination status at ICU admission and mortality at ICU and hospital discharge were also studied, adjusting for possible confounders. Results: Among the 10 107 674 inhabitants of Lombardy, Italy, at the time of this study, the median [IQR] age was 48 [28-64] years and 5 154 914 (51.0%) were female. Of the 7 863 417 individuals who were vaccinated (median [IQR] age: 53 [33-68] years; 4 010 343 [51.4%] female), 6 251 417 (79.5%) received an mRNA vaccine, 550 439 (7.0%) received an adenoviral vector vaccine, and 1 061 561 (13.5%) received a mix of vaccines and 4 497 875 (57.2%) were boosted. Compared with unvaccinated people, IRR of individuals who received an mRNA vaccine within 120 days from the last dose was 0.03 (95% CI, 0.03-0.04; P < .001), whereas IRR of individuals who received an adenoviral vector vaccine after 120 days was 0.21 (95% CI, 0.19-0.24; P < .001). There were 553 patients admitted to an ICU for COVID-19 pneumonia during the study period: 139 patients (25.1%) were vaccinated and 414 (74.9%) were unvaccinated. Compared with unvaccinated patients, vaccinated patients were older (median [IQR]: 72 [66-76] vs 60 [51-69] years; P < .001), primarily male individuals (110 patients [79.1%] vs 252 patients [60.9%]; P < .001), with more comorbidities (median [IQR]: 2 [1-3] vs 0 [0-1] comorbidities; P < .001) and had higher ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen (Pao2) and fraction of inspiratory oxygen (FiO2) at ICU admission (median [IQR]: 138 [100-180] vs 120 [90-158] mm Hg; P = .007). Factors associated with ICU and hospital mortality were higher age, premorbid heart disease, lower Pao2/FiO2 at ICU admission, and female sex (this factor only for ICU mortality). ICU and hospital mortality were similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, mRNA and adenoviral vector vaccines were associated with significantly lower risk of ICU admission for COVID-19 pneumonia. ICU and hospital mortality were not associated with vaccinated status. These findings suggest a substantial reduction of the risk of developing COVID-19-related severe acute respiratory failure requiring ICU admission among vaccinated people.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pneumonia , Humans , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Critical Illness/therapy , COVID-19 Vaccines , Retrospective Studies , Cohort Studies , BNT162 Vaccine , Intensive Care Units , Pneumonia/epidemiology , Oxygen
17.
Int J Med Inform ; 164: 104807, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2076190

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: COVID-19 disease frequently affects the lungs leading to bilateral viral pneumonia, progressing in some cases to severe respiratory failure requiring ICU admission and mechanical ventilation. Risk stratification at ICU admission is fundamental for resource allocation and decision making. We assessed performances of three machine learning approaches to predict mortality in COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU using early operative data from the Lombardy ICU Network. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from Lombardy ICU network. A logistic regression, balanced logistic regression and random forest were built to predict survival on two datasets: dataset A included patient demographics, medications before admission and comorbidities, and dataset B included respiratory data the first day in ICU. RESULTS: Models were trained on 1484 patients on four outcomes (7/14/21/28 days) and reached the greatest predictive performance at 28 days (F1-score: 0.75 and AUC: 0.80). Age, number of comorbidities and male gender were strongly associated with mortality. On dataset B, mode of ventilatory assistance at ICU admission and fraction of inspired oxygen were associated with an increase in prediction performances. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning techniques might be useful in emergency phases to reach good predictive performances maintaining interpretability to gain knowledge on complex situations and enhance patient management and resources.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Supervised Machine Learning
18.
Curr Opin Crit Care ; 28(6): 652-659, 2022 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2063071

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To describe different strategies adopted during coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic to cope with the shortage of mechanical ventilators. RECENT FINDINGS: Short-term interventions aimed to increase ventilator supply and decrease demand. They included: redistributing and centralizing patients, repurposing operating rooms into intensive care units (ICUs) and boosting ventilator production and using stocks and back-ups; support by the critical care outreach team to optimize treatment of patients in the ward and permit early discharge from the ICU, ethical allocation of mechanical ventilators to patients who could benefit more from intensive treatment and short term ICU trials for selected patients with uncertain prognosis, respectively. Long-term strategies included education and training of non-ICU physicians and nurses to the care of critically-ill patients and measures to decrease viral spread among the population and the progression from mild to severe disease. SUMMARY: The experience and evidence gained during the current pandemic is of paramount importance for physicians and law-makers to plan in advance an appropriate response to any future similar crisis. Intensive care unit, hospital, national and international policies can all be improved to build systems capable of treating an unexpectedly large number of patients, while keeping a high standard of safety.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/therapy , Ventilators, Mechanical , Pandemics , Intensive Care Units , Critical Care
19.
Intensive Crit Care Nurs ; 65: 103053, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2015365
20.
Br J Anaesth ; 129(5): 801-814, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2003898

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Survivors of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are at risk of long-term comorbidities. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and physical and psychological impairments in ARDS survivors from 3 months to 5 yr follow-up after ICU discharge. METHODS: Systematic search of PubMed, AMED, BNI, and CINAHL databases from January 2000 to date. The primary outcome was HRQoL. Secondary outcomes included physical, pulmonary, and cognitive function, mental health, and return to work. A secondary analysis compared classical ARDS with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus disease-2 (SARS-CoV-2) ARDS. RESULTS: Forty-eight papers met inclusion criteria including 11 693 patients; of those 85% (n=9992) had classical ARDS and 14% (n=1632) had SARS-CoV-2 ARDS. The 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component summary score mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 46 (41-50) at 3 months, 39 (36-41) at 6 months, and 40 (38-43) at 12 months. The SF-36 mental component summary mean score was 53 (48-57) at 3 months, 45 (40-50) at 6 months, and 44 (42-47) at 12 months. SF-36 values were lower than those found in the normal population up to 5 yr. The predictive distance walked in 6 min was 57% (45-69), 63% (56-69), and 66% (62-70) at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Classical ARDS and SARS-CoV-2 ARDS showed no difference in HRQoL and physical function; however, patients with classical ARDS had higher incidence of anxiety and depression (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: ARDS survivors can experience reduced HRQoL and physical and mental health impairment. These symptoms might not recover completely up to 5 yr after ICU discharge. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42021296506.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Humans , Quality of Life/psychology , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/complications , Survivors/psychology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL