Impact of CytoSorb Hemoadsorption on Sedation Requirements in Patients With Severe COVID-19 on Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

Hemoadsorption with CytoSorb has been used as an adjunct in the treatment of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related respiratory failure. It remains unknown if CytoSorb hemoadsorption will alter sedative and analgesic dosing in critically ill patients on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). We conducted a retrospective review of patients with severe COVID-19 requiring VV-ECMO for respiratory support. Patients who were enrolled in a clinical study of CytoSorb were compared with patients on VV-ECMO alone. Data were collected for the 72-hour CytoSorb therapy and an additional 72 hours post-CytoSorb, or a corresponding control time period. Sedative and analgesic doses were totaled for each day and converted to midazolam or fentanyl equivalents, respectively. The primary endpoint, change in sedative and analgesic requirements over time, were compared using a two-way mixed analysis of variance. Of the 30 patients cannulated for VV-ECMO for COVID-19, 4 were excluded, leaving 8 patients in the CytoSorb arm and 18 in the Control. There was no effect of CytoSorb therapy on midazolam equivalents over the 72-hour therapy (p = 0.71) or the 72 hours post-CytoSorb (p = 0.11). In contrast, there was a significant effect of CytoSorb therapy on fentanyl equivalents over the first 72 hours (p = 0.01), but this was not consistent over the 72-hours post-CytoSorb (p = 0.23). CytoSorb therapy led to significant increases in analgesic requirements without impacting sedative requirements. Further research is needed to define the relevance of CytoSorb hemoadsorption on critical care pharmacotherapy.

Efficacy of proning in acute respiratory distress syndrome on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Objectives: Proning patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has been associated with increased survival, although few data exist evaluating the safety and feasibility of proning patients with ARDS on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Methods: A single-institution retrospective review of all patients with ARDS placed on ECMO between March 1 and May 31, 2020, was performed. All proning events were evaluated for complications, as well as change in compliance, sweep, oxygenation, and flow. The primary outcome of this study was the rate major morbidity associated with proning while on ECMO. Results: In total, 30 patients were placed on ECMO for ARDS, with 12 patients (40%) proned while on ECMO. A total of 83 proning episodes occurred, with a median of 7 per patient (interquartile range, 3-9). No ECMO cannula-associated bleeding, cannula displacement, or endotracheal tune dislodgements occurred (0%). Oropharyngeal bleeding occurred twice (50%). Four patients were proned with chest tubes in place, and none had complications (0%). Lung compliance improved after proning in 70 events (84%), from a mean of 15.4 mL/mm Hg preproning to 20.6 mL/mm Hg postproning (P < .0001). Sweep requirement decreased in 36 events (43%). Oxygenation improved in 63 events (76%), from a mean partial pressure of oxygen of 86 preproning to 103 postproning (P < .0001). Mean ECMO flow was unchanged. Conclusions: Proning in patients with ARDS on ECMO is safe with an associated improvement in lung mechanics. With careful planning and coordination, these data support the practice of appropriately proning patients with severe ARDS, even if they are on ECMO.

One-Year Outcomes With Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support for Severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause acute respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. Venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been used in patients in whom conventional mechanical ventilatory support has failed. To date, published data have focused on survival from ECMO and survival to discharge. In addition to survival to discharge, this study reports 1-year follow-up data for patients who were successfully discharged from the hospital. METHODS: A single-institution, retrospective review of all patients with severe COVID-19 who were cannulated for VV-ECMO between March 10, 2020 and May 1, 2020 was performed. A multidisciplinary ECMO team evaluated, selected, and managed patients with ECMO support. The primary outcome of this study was survival to discharge. Available 1-year follow-up data are also reported. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were supported with VV-ECMO, and 27 patients (90%) survived to discharge. All patients were discharged home or to acute rehabilitation on room air, except for 1 patient (3.7%), who required supplemental oxygen therapy. At a median follow-up of 10.8 months (interquartile range [IQR], 8.9-14.4 months) since ECMO cannulation, survival was 86.7%, including 1 patient who underwent lung transplantation. Of the patients discharged from the hospital, 44.4% (12/27) had pulmonary function testing, with a median percent predicted forced expiratory volume of 100% (IQR, 91%-110%). For survivors, a 6-minute walk test was performed in 59.3% (16/27), with a median value of 350 m (IQR, 286-379 m). CONCLUSIONS: A well-defined patient selection and management strategy of VV-ECMO support in patients with severe COVID-19 resulted in exceptional survival to discharge that was sustained at 1-year after ECMO cannulation.

Managing Scarcity: Innovation and Resilience During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic remains a disruptive force upon the health care system, with particular import for thoracic surgery given the pulmonary pathophysiology and disease implications of the virus. The rapid and severe onset of disease required expedient innovation and change in patient management and novel approaches to care delivery and nimbleness of workforce. In this review, we detail our approaches to patients with COVID-19, including those that required surgical intervention, our expedited and novel approach to bronchoscopy and tracheostomy, and our expansion of telehealth. The pandemic has created a unique opportunity to reflect on our delivery of care in thoracic surgery and apply lessons learned during this time to "rethink" how to optimize resources and deliver excellent and cutting-edge patient care.

Percutaneous Dilational Tracheostomy for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients Requiring Mechanical Ventilation.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of percutaneous dilational tracheostomy in coronavirus disease 2019 patients requiring mechanical ventilation and the risk for healthcare providers. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study; patients were enrolled between March 11, and April 29, 2020. The date of final follow-up was July 30, 2020. We used a propensity score matching approach to compare outcomes. Study outcomes were formulated before data collection and analysis. SETTING: Critical care units at two large metropolitan hospitals in New York City. PATIENTS: Five-hundred forty-one patients with confirmed severe coronavirus disease 2019 respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: Bedside percutaneous dilational tracheostomy with modified visualization and ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Required time for discontinuation off mechanical ventilation, total length of hospitalization, and overall patient survival. Of the 541 patients, 394 patients were eligible for a tracheostomy. One-hundred sixteen were early percutaneous dilational tracheostomies with median time of 9 days after initiation of mechanical ventilation (interquartile range, 7-12 d), whereas 89 were late percutaneous dilational tracheostomies with a median time of 19 days after initiation of mechanical ventilation (interquartile range, 16-24 d). Compared with patients with no tracheostomy, patients with an early percutaneous dilational tracheostomy had a higher probability of discontinuation from mechanical ventilation (absolute difference, 30%; p < 0.001; hazard ratio for successful discontinuation, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.34-5.84; p = 0.006) and a lower mortality (absolute difference, 34%, p < 0.001; hazard ratio for death, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.06-0.22; p < 0.001). Compared with patients with late percutaneous dilational tracheostomy, patients with early percutaneous dilational tracheostomy had higher discontinuation rates from mechanical ventilation (absolute difference 7%; p < 0.35; hazard ratio for successful discontinuation, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.3; p = 0.04) and had a shorter median duration of mechanical ventilation in survivors (absolute difference, -15 d; p < 0.001). None of the healthcare providers who performed all the percutaneous dilational tracheostomies procedures had clinical symptoms or any positive laboratory test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: In coronavirus disease 2019 patients on mechanical ventilation, an early modified percutaneous dilational tracheostomy was safe for patients and healthcare providers and associated with improved clinical outcomes.

Hemoadsorption for management of patients on veno-venous ECMO support for severe COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) develop a profound cytokine-mediated pro-inflammatory response. This study reports outcomes in 10 patients with COVID-19 supported on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) who were selected for the emergency use of a hemoadsorption column integrated in the ECMO circuit. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pre and posttreatment, clinical data, and inflammatory markers were assessed to determine the safety and feasibility of using this system and to evaluate the clinical effect. RESULTS: During hemoadsorption, median levels of interleukin (IL)-2R, IL-6, and IL-10 decreased by 54%, 86%, and 64%, respectively. Reductions in other markers were observed for lactate dehydrogenase (-49%), ferritin (-46%), d-dimer (-7%), C-reactive protein (-55%), procalcitonin (-76%), and lactate (-44%). Vasoactive-inotrope scores decreased significantly over the treatment interval (-80%). The median hospital length of stay was 53 days (36-85) and at 90-days post cannulation, survival was 90% which was similar to a group of patients without the use of hemoadsorption. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of hemoadsorption to VV-ECMO in patients with severe COVID-19 is feasible and reduces measured cytokine levels. However, in this small series, the precise impact on the overall clinical course and survival benefit still remains unknown.

Dynamic Management of Lung Cancer Care During Surging COVID-19.

Management of patients with lung cancer continues to be challenging during the COVID-19 pandemic, due to the increased risk of complications in this subset of patients. During the COVID-19 surge in New York City, New York University Langone Health adopted triage strategies to help with care for lung cancer patients, with good surgical outcomes and no transmission of COVID-19 to patients or healthcare workers. Here, we will review current recommendations regarding screening and management of lung cancer patients during both a non-surge phase and surge phase of COVID-19.

Thoracic surgery outcomes for patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVE: As the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic continues, appropriate management of thoracic complications from Coronavirus Disease 2019 needs to be determined. Our objective is to evaluate which complications occurring in patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 require thoracic surgery and to report the early outcomes. METHODS: This study is a single-institution retrospective case series at New York University Langone Health Manhattan campus evaluating patients with confirmed Coronavirus Disease 2019 infection who were hospitalized and required thoracic surgery from March 13 to July 18, 2020. RESULTS: From March 13 to August 8, 2020, 1954 patients were admitted to New York University Langone Health for Coronavirus Disease 2019. Of these patients, 13 (0.7%) required thoracic surgery. Two patients (15%) required surgery for complicated pneumothoraces, 5 patients (38%) underwent pneumatocele resection, 1 patient (8%) had an empyema requiring decortication, and 5 patients (38%) developed a hemothorax that required surgery. Three patients (23%) died after surgery, 9 patients (69%) were discharged, and 1 patient (8%) remains in the hospital. No healthcare providers were positive for Coronavirus Disease 2019 after the surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Given the 77% survival, with a majority of patients already discharged from the hospital, thoracic surgery is feasible for the small percent of patients hospitalized with Coronavirus Disease 2019 who underwent surgery for complex pneumothorax, pneumatocele, empyema, or hemothorax. Our experience also supports the safety of surgical intervention for healthcare providers who operate on patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019.

Novel Pre- and Postoperative Care Using Telemedicine.

The use of telemedicine and telehealth services has grown exponentially over the past decade and has become increasingly relevant and necessary during the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. There remains ample opportunity to electronically connect cardiothoracic surgeons with their patients during both preoperative and postoperative visits. In this review, we examine the various implementations of telemedicine within thoracic surgery and explore future applications in this quickly developing field.

Safety of patients and providers in lung cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in patient reluctance to seek care due to fear of contracting the virus, especially in New York City which was the epicentre during the surge. The primary objectives of this study are to evaluate the safety of patients who have undergone pulmonary resection for lung cancer as well as provider safety, using COVID-19 testing, symptoms and early patient outcomes. METHODS: Patients with confirmed or suspected pulmonary malignancy who underwent resection from 13 March to 4 May 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Between 13 March and 4 May 2020, 2087 COVID-19 patients were admitted, with a median daily census of 299, to one of our Manhattan campuses (80% of hospital capacity). During this time, 21 patients (median age 72 years) out of 45 eligible surgical candidates underwent pulmonary resection-13 lobectomies, 6 segmentectomies and 2 pneumonectomies were performed by the same providers who were caring for COVID-19 patients. None of the patients developed major complications, 5 had minor complications, and the median length of hospital stay was 2 days. No previously COVID-19-negative patient (n = 20/21) or healthcare provider (n = 9: 3 surgeons, 3 surgical assistants, 3 anaesthesiologists) developed symptoms of or tested positive for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Pulmonary resection for lung cancer is safe in selected patients, even when performed by providers who care for COVID-19 patients in a hospital with a large COVID-19 census. None of our patients or providers developed symptoms of COVID-19 and no patient experienced major morbidity or mortality.

Lobectomy for Hemorrhagic Lobar Infarction in a Patient With COVID-19.

Patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 from infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 mount a profound inflammatory response and are predisposed to thrombotic complications. Pulmonary vein thrombosis is a rare disease process resulting in pulmonary congestion, infarction, and potential mortality. This report describes a patient with coronavirus disease 2019 requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for hypoxic respiratory failure who developed hemorrhagic infarction of the right lower lobe. During emergency exploration the patient was found to have a right inferior vein thrombosis and marked lobar hemorrhage mandating lobectomy.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support in Severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a worldwide pandemic with a high mortality rate among patients requiring mechanical ventilation. The limited data that exist regarding the utility of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in these critically ill patients show poor overall outcomes. This report describes our institutional practice regarding the application and management of ECMO support for patients with COVID-19 and reports promising early outcomes. METHODS: All critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19 evaluated for ECMO support from March 10, 2020, to April 24, 2020, were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were evaluated for ECMO support based on a partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio of less than 150 mm Hg or pH of less than 7.25 with a partial pressure of arterial carbon dioxide exceeding 60 mm Hg with no life-limiting comorbidities. Patients were cannulated at bedside and were managed with protective lung ventilation, early tracheostomy, bronchoscopies, and proning, as clinically indicated. RESULTS: Among 321 patients intubated for COVID-19, 77 patients (24%) were evaluated for ECMO support, and 27 patients (8.4%) were placed on ECMO. All patients were supported with venovenous ECMO. Current survival is 96.3%, with only 1 death to date in more than 350 days of total ECMO support. Thirteen patients (48.1%) remain on ECMO support, and 13 patients (48.1%) have been successfully decannulated. Seven patients (25.9%) have been discharged from the hospital. Six patients (22.2%) remain in the hospital, of which 4 are on room air. No health care workers who participated in ECMO cannulation developed symptoms of or tested positive for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: The early outcomes presented here suggest that the judicious use of ECMO support in severe COVID-19 may be clinically beneficial.

Novel Percutaneous Tracheostomy for Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) is a worldwide pandemic, with many patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Tracheostomy is not recommended by current guidelines as it is considered a superspreading event owing to aerosolization that unduly risks health care workers. METHODS: Patients with severe COVID-19 who were on mechanical ventilation for 5 days or longer were evaluated for percutaneous dilational tracheostomy. We developed a novel percutaneous tracheostomy technique that placed the bronchoscope alongside the endotracheal tube, not inside it. That improved visualization during the procedure and continued standard mechanical ventilation after positioning the inflated endotracheal tube cuff in the distal trachea. This technique offers a significant mitigation for the risk of virus aerosolization during the procedure. RESULTS: From March 10 to April 15, 2020, 270 patients with COVID-19 required invasive mechanical ventilation at New York University Langone Health Manhattan's campus; of those, 98 patients underwent percutaneous dilational tracheostomy. The mean time from intubation to the procedure was 10.6 ± 5 days. Currently, 32 patients (33%) do not require mechanical ventilatory support, 19 (19%) have their tracheostomy tube downsized, and 8 (8%) were decannulated. Forty patients (41%) remain on full ventilator support, and 19 (19%) are weaning from mechanical ventilation. Seven patients (7%) died as a result of respiratory and multiorgan failure. Tracheostomy-related bleeding was the most common complication (5 patients). None of health care providers has had symptoms or tested positive for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Our percutaneous tracheostomy technique appears to be safe and effective for COVID-19 patients and safe for health care workers.