Worse survival in patients with right ventricular dysfunction and COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A multicenter study from the ORACLE Group.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the impact of right ventricular dysfunction on the outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 requiring veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. METHODS: Six academic centers conducted a retrospective analysis of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 stratified by support with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during the first wave of the pandemic (March to August 2020). Echocardiograms performed for clinical indications were reviewed for right and left ventricular function. Baseline characteristics, hospitalization characteristics, and survival were compared. RESULTS: The cohort included 424 mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19, 126 of whom were cannulated for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Right ventricular dysfunction was observed in 38.1% of patients who received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and 27.4% of patients who did not receive extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with an echocardiogram. Biventricular dysfunction was observed in 5.5% of patients who received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Baseline patient characteristics were similar in both the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and non-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cohorts stratified by the presence of right ventricular dysfunction. In the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cohort, right ventricular dysfunction was associated with increased inotrope use (66.7% vs 24.4%, P < .001), bleeding complications (77.1% vs 53.8%, P = .015), and worse survival independent of left ventricular dysfunction (39.6% vs 64.1%, P = .012). There was no significant difference in days ventilated before extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, length of hospital stay, hours on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, duration of mechanical ventilation, vasopressor use, inhaled pulmonary vasodilator use, infectious complications, clotting complications, or stroke. The cohort without extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cohort demonstrated no statistically significant differences in in-hospital outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of right ventricular dysfunction in patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome supported with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Additional studies are required to determine if mitigating right ventricular dysfunction in patients requiring veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation improves mortality.

Early posthospitalization recovery after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in survivors of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the influence of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) on outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 during the first 120 days after hospital discharge. METHODS: Five academic centers conducted a retrospective analysis of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 admitted during March through May 2020. Survivors had access to a multidisciplinary postintensive care recovery clinic. Physical, psychological, and cognitive deficits were measured using validated instruments and compared based on ECMO status. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty two mechanically ventilated patients were compared with 46 patients cannulated for venovenous ECMO. Patients receiving ECMO were younger and traveled farther but there was no significant difference in gender, race, or body mass index. ECMO patients were mechanically ventilated for longer durations (median, 26 days [interquartile range, 19.5-41 days] vs 13 days [interquartile range, 7-20 days]) and were more likely to receive inhaled pulmonary vasodilators, neuromuscular blockade, investigational COVID-19 therapies, blood transfusions, and inotropes. Patients receiving ECMO experienced greater bleeding and clotting events (P < .01). However, survival at discharge was similar (69.6% vs 70.6%). Of the 217 survivors, 65.0% had documented follow-up within 120 days. Overall, 95.5% were residing at home, 25.7% had returned to work or usual activity, and 23.1% were still using supplemental oxygen; these rates did not differ significantly based on ECMO status. Rates of physical, psychological, and cognitive deficits were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that COVID-19 survivors experience significant physical, psychological, and cognitive deficits following intensive care unit admission. Despite a more complex critical illness course, longer average duration of mechanical ventilation, and longer average length of stay, patients treated with venovenous ECMO had similar survival at discharge and outcomes within 120 days of discharge.

Galectin-3 as a potential prognostic biomarker of severe COVID-19 in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients.

Severe COVID-19 is associated with a systemic hyperinflammatory response leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multi-organ failure, and death. Galectin-3 is a ß-galactoside binding lectin known to drive neutrophil infiltration and the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines contributing to airway inflammation. Thus, we aimed to investigate the potential of galectin-3 as a biomarker of severe COVID-19 outcomes. We prospectively included 156 patients with RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19. A severe outcome was defined as the requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and/or in-hospital death. A non-severe outcome was defined as discharge without IMV requirement. We used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine the prognostic ability of serum galectin-3 for a severe outcome. Galectin-3 levels discriminated well between severe and non-severe outcomes and correlated with markers of COVID-19 severity, (CRP, NLR, D-dimer, and neutrophil count). Using a forward-stepwise logistic regression analysis we identified galectin-3 [odds ratio (OR) 3.68 (95% CI 1.47-9.20), p < 0.01] to be an independent predictor of severe outcome. Furthermore, galectin-3 in combination with CRP, albumin and CT pulmonary affection > 50%, had significantly improved ability to predict severe outcomes [AUC 0.85 (95% CI 0.79-0.91, p < 0.0001)]. Based on the evidence presented here, we recommend clinicians measure galectin-3 levels upon admission to facilitate allocation of appropriate resources in a timely manner to COVID-19 patients at highest risk of severe outcome.

Measuring the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on solid organ transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has uniquely affected the United States. We hypothesize that transplantation would be uniquely affected. METHODS: In this population-based cohort study, adult transplantation data were examined as time series data. Autoregressive-integrated-moving-average models of transplantation rates were developed using data from 1990 to 2019 to forecast the 2020 expected rates in a theoretical scenario if the pandemic did not occur to generate observed-to-expected (O/E) ratios. RESULTS: 32,594 transplants were expected in 2020, and only 30,566 occurred (O/E 0.94, CI 0.88-0.99). 58,152 waitlist registrations were expected and 50,241 occurred (O/E 0.86, CI 0.80-0.94). O/E ratios of transplants were kidney 0.92 (0.86-0.98), liver 0.96 (0.89-1.04), heart 1.05 (0.91-1.23), and lung 0.92 (0.82-1.04). O/E ratios of registrations were kidney 0.84 (0.77-0.93), liver 0.95 (0.86-1.06), heart 0.99 (0.85-1.18), and lung 0.80 (0.70-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a significant deficit in transplantation. The impact was strongest in kidney transplantation and waitlist registration.

Estimating the Impact of Statewide Policies to Reduce Spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Real Time, Colorado, USA.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic necessitated rapid local public health response, but studies examining the impact of social distancing policies on SARS-CoV-2 transmission have struggled to capture regional-level dynamics. We developed a susceptible-exposed-infected-recovered transmission model, parameterized to Colorado, USA‒specific data, to estimate the impact of coronavirus disease‒related policy measures on mobility and SARS-CoV-2 transmission in real time. During March‒June 2020, we estimated unknown parameter values and generated scenario-based projections of future clinical care needs. Early coronavirus disease policy measures, including a stay-at-home order, were accompanied by substantial decreases in mobility and reduced the effective reproductive number well below 1. When some restrictions were eased in late April, mobility increased to near baseline levels, but transmission remained low (effective reproductive number <1) through early June. Over time, our model parameters were adjusted to more closely reflect reality in Colorado, leading to modest changes in estimates of intervention effects and more conservative long-term projections.