Outcomes of non-invasive ventilation as the ceiling of treatment in patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) is effective for symptom relief and respiratory support in patients with respiratory insufficiency, severe comorbidities and no indication to intubation. Experience with NIV as the ceiling of treatment in severely compromised novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients is lacking. METHODS: We evaluated 159 patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory syndrome (ARDS), 38 of whom with NIV as the ceiling of treatment, admitted to an ordinary ward and treated with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and respiratory physiotherapy. Treatment failure and death were correlated with clinical and laboratory parameters in the whole cohort and in patients with NIV as the ceiling of treatment. RESULTS: Patients who had NIV as the ceiling of treatment were elderly, with a low BMI and a high burden of comorbidities, showed clinical and laboratory signs of multi-organ insufficiency on admission and of rapidly deteriorating vital signs during the first week of treatment. NIV failure occurred overall in 77 (48%) patients, and 27/38 patients with NIV as the ceiling of treatment died. Congestive heart failure, chronic benign haematological diseases and inability/refusal to receive respiratory physiotherapy were independently associated to NIV failure and mortality. Need for increased positive end-expiratory pressures and low platelets were associated with NIV failure. Death was associated to cerebrovascular disease, need for CPAP cycles longer than 12h and, in the subgroup of patients with NIV as the ceiling of treatment, was heralded by vital sign deterioration within 48 h. CONCLUSIONS: NIV and physiotherapy are a viable treatment option for patients with severe COVID-19 and severe comorbidities.

Two-year multidisciplinary follow-up of COVID-19 patients requiring invasive and noninvasive respiratory support.

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

High Risk of Secondary Infections Following Thrombotic Complications in Patients With COVID-19.

Background: This study's primary aim was to evaluate the impact of thrombotic complications on the development of secondary infections. The secondary aim was to compare the etiology of secondary infections in patients with and without thrombotic complications. Methods: This was a cohort study (NCT04318366) of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients hospitalized at IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital between February 25 and June 30, 2020. Incidence rates (IRs) were calculated by univariable Poisson regression as the number of cases per 1000 person-days of follow-up (PDFU) with 95% confidence intervals. The cumulative incidence functions of secondary infections according to thrombotic complications were compared with Gray's method accounting for competing risk of death. A multivariable Fine-Gray model was applied to assess factors associated with risk of secondary infections. Results: Overall, 109/904 patients had 176 secondary infections (IR, 10.0; 95% CI, 8.8-11.5; per 1000-PDFU). The IRs of secondary infections among patients with or without thrombotic complications were 15.0 (95% CI, 10.7-21.0) and 9.3 (95% CI, 7.9-11.0) per 1000-PDFU, respectively (P = .017). At multivariable analysis, thrombotic complications were associated with the development of secondary infections (subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.788; 95% CI, 1.018-3.140; P = .043). The etiology of secondary infections was similar in patients with and without thrombotic complications. Conclusions: In patients with COVID-19, thrombotic complications were associated with a high risk of secondary infections.

A novel evidence-based algorithm to predict thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19: preliminary data from a single-center cohort.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-related disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease characterized by systemic inflammation, which might enhance baseline thrombotic risk, especially in hospitalized patients. Little is, however, known about predictors of thrombotic complications in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We prospectively followed up 180 hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Demographics, clinical and laboratory features at presentation and past medical history were tested as predictors of the first thrombotic complication through multivariate Cox regression analysis and a categorical score generated based on the results. RESULTS: Sixty-four thromboses were recorded in 54 patients, of whom seven with thrombosis on admission and 47 with thrombosis during hospitalization. Patients with thrombosis were mainly Caucasian and diabetic, had marked baseline signs of inflammation and organ damage, lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio, higher D-dimer levels and history of major hemorrhages. The latter three variables were independently associated to thrombotic complications and concurred to a 0-5 score, which accounted for 80% of the total sample variability. Patients with three or more points of the newly generated score were at higher risk for thrombotic complications (HR=4.9, P<0.001). Patients with thrombotic complications were more likely to be admitted to intensive care and/or to die (HR=1.9, P=0.036). Five of 180 patients were diagnosed with disseminated intravascular coagulation and three of them died. Eleven minor and no major bleeding events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COVID-19 are at increased risk for thrombosis and might be stratified on admission based on lower Pao2/FiO2 ratio, higher D-dimer levels and history of major hemorrhages.

Frailty as a predictor of mortality in COVID-19 patients receiving CPAP for respiratory insufficiency.

OBJECTIVE: Exploring the association between frailty and mortality in a cohort of patients with COVID-19 respiratory insufficiency treated with continuous positive airway pressure. METHODS: Frailty was measured using a Frailty Index (FI) created by using the baseline assessment data on comorbidities and body mass index and baseline blood test results (including pH, lactate dehydrogenase, renal and liver function, inflammatory indexes and anemia). FI > 0.25 identified frail individuals. RESULTS: Among the 159 included individuals (81% men, median age of 68) frailty was detected in 69% of the patients (median FI score 0.3 ± 0.08). Frailty was associated to an increased mortality (adjusted HR 1.99, 95% CI 1.02-3.88, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is highly prevalent among patients with COVID-19, predicts poorer outcomes independently of age. A personalization of care balancing the risk and benefit of treatments (especially the invasive ones) in such complex patients is pivotal.

Influence of reduced muscle mass and quality on ventilator weaning and complications during intensive care unit stay in COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Sarcopenia, a loss of muscle mass, quality and function, which is particularly evident in respiratory muscles, has been associated with many clinical adverse outcomes. In this study, we aimed at evaluating the role of reduced muscle mass and quality in predicting ventilation weaning, complications, length of intensive care unit (ICU) and of hospital stay and mortality in patients admitted to ICU for SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonia. METHODS: This was an observational study based on a review of medical records of all adult patients admitted to the ICU of a tertiary hospital in Milan and intubated for SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonia during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Muscle mass and quality measurement were retrieved from routine thoracic CT scans, when sections passing through the first, second or third lumbar vertebra were available. RESULTS: A total of 81 patients were enrolled. Muscle mass was associated with successful extubation (OR 1.02, 95% C.I. 1.00-1.03, p = 0.017), shorter ICU stay (OR 0.97, 95% C.I. 0.95-0.99, p = 0.03) and decreased hospital mortality (HR 0.98, 95% C.I. 0.96-0.99, p = 0.02). Muscle density was associated with successful extubation (OR 1.07, 95% C.I. 1.01-1.14; p = 0.02) and had an inverse association with the number of complications in ICU (Β -0.07, 95% C.I. -0.13 - -0.002, p = 0.03), length of hospitalization (Β -1.36, 95% C.I. -2.21 - -0.51, p = 0.002) and in-hospital mortality (HR 0.88, 95% C.I. 0.78-0.99, p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Leveraging routine CT imaging to measure muscle mass and quality might constitute a simple, inexpensive and powerful tool to predict survival and disease course in patients with COVID-19. Preserving muscle mass during hospitalisation might have an adjuvant role in facilitating remission from COVID-19.

Thromboembolism risk among patients with diabetes/stress hyperglycemia and COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Individuals with diabetes/stress hyperglycemia carry an increased risk for adverse clinical outcome in case of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether this risk is, at least in part, modulated by an increase of thromboembolic complications. METHODS: We prospectively followed 180 hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to the Internal Medicine Units of San Raffaele Hospital. Data from 11 out of 180 patients were considered incomplete and excluded from the analysis. We analysed inflammation, tissue damage biomarkers, hemostatic parameters, thrombotic events (TEs) and clinical outcome according to the presence of diabetes/stress hyperglycemia. RESULTS: Among 169 patients, 51 (30.2%) had diabetes/stress hyperglycemia. Diabetes/stress hyperglycemia and fasting blood glucose (FBG) were associated with increased inflammation and tissue damage circulating markers, higher D-dimer levels, increased prothrombin time and lower antithrombin III activity. Forty-eight venous and 10 arterial TEs were identified in 49 (29%) patients. Diabetes/stress hyperglycemia (HR 2.71, p = 0.001), fasting blood glucose (HR 4.32, p < 0.001) and glucose variability (HR 1.6, p < 0.009) were all associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic complication. TEs significantly increased the risk for an adverse clinical outcome only in the presence of diabetes/stress hyperglycemia (HR 3.05, p = 0.010) or fasting blood glucose ≥7 mmol/L (HR 3.07, p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Thromboembolism risk is higher among patients with diabetes/stress hyperglycemia and COVID-19 pneumonia and is associated to poor clinical outcome. In case of SARS-Cov-2 infection patients with diabetes/stress hyperglycemia could be considered for a more intensive prophylactic anticoagulation regimen.

QTc interval prolongation, inflammation, and mortality in patients with COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Systemic inflammation has been associated with corrected QT (QTc) interval prolongation. The role of inflammation on QTc prolongation in COVID-19 patients was investigated. METHODS: Patients with a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute (Milan, Italy) between March 14, 2020, and March 30, 2020 were included. QTc-I was defined as the QTc interval by Bazett formula in the first ECG performed during the hospitalization, before any new drug treatment; QTc-II was the QTc in the ECG performed after the initiation of hydroxychloroquine drug treatment. RESULTS: QTc-I was long in 45 patients (45%) and normal in 55 patients (55%). Patients with long QTc-I were older and more frequently males. C-Reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) count at hospitalization were higher in patients with long QTc-I and long QTc-II. QTc-I was significantly correlated with CRP levels at hospitalization. After a median follow-up of 83 days, 14 patients (14%) died. There were no deaths attributed to ventricular arrhythmias. Patients with long QTc-I and long QTc-II had a shorter survival, compared with normal QTc-I and QTc-II patients, respectively. In Cox multivariate analysis, independent predictors of mortality were age (HR = 1.1, CI 95% 1.04-1.18, p = 0.002) and CRP at ECG II (HR 1.1, CI 95% 1.0-1.1, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: QTc at hospitalization is a simple risk marker of mortality risk in COVID-19 patients and reflects the myocardial inflammatory status.

Two-months quality of life of COVID-19 invasively ventilated survivors; an Italian single-center study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 disease can lead to severe functional impairments after discharge. We assessed the quality of life of invasively ventilated COVID-19 ARDS survivors. METHODS: We carried out a prospective follow-up study of the patients admitted to the Intensive Care Units (ICUs) of a teaching hospital. Patients affected by COVID-19 ARDS who required invasive ventilation and were successfully discharged home were assessed through the telephone administration of validated tests. We explored survival, functional outcomes, return to work, quality of life, cognitive and psychological sequelae. The main variables of interest were the following: demographics, severity scores, laboratory values, comorbidities, schooling, working status, treatments received during ICU stay, complications, and psychological, cognitive, functional outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 116 consecutive invasively ventilated patients, overall survival was 65/116 (56%) with no death occurring after hospital discharge. Forty-two patients were already discharged home with a median follow-up time of 61 (51-71) days after ICU discharge and 39 of them accepted to be interviewed. Only one patient (1/39) experienced cognitive decline. The vast majority of patients reported no difficulty in walking (32/35:82%), self-care (33/39:85%), and usual activities (30/39:78%). All patients were either malnourished (15/39:38%) or at risk for malnutrition (24/39:62%). Exertional dyspnea was present in 20/39 (51%) patients. 19/39 (49%) reported alterations in senses of smell and/or taste either before or after hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Invasively ventilated COVID-19 ARDS survivors have an overall good recovery at a 2-months follow-up which is better than what was previously reported in non-COVID-19 ARDS patients.

Interleukin-6 blockade with sarilumab in severe COVID-19 pneumonia with systemic hyperinflammation: an open-label cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and efficacy of interleukin (IL)-6 blockade with sarilumab in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyperinflammation. METHODS: We conducted an open-label study of sarilumab in severe COVID-19 pneumonia (PaO2/FiO2 <300 mm Hg) with hyperinflammation (elevated inflammatory markers and serum IL-6 levels). Sarilumab 400 mg was administered intravenously in addition to standard of care and results were compared with contemporary matched patients treated with standard of care alone. Clinical improvement, mortality, safety and predictors of response were assessed at 28 days. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were treated with sarilumab and 28 contemporary patients receiving standard of care alone were used as controls. At day 28 of follow-up, 61% of patients treated with sarilumab experienced clinical improvement and 7% died. These findings were not significantly different from the comparison group (clinical improvement 64%, mortality 18%; p=NS). Baseline PaO2/FiO2 ratio >100 mm Hg and lung consolidation <17% at CT scan predicted clinical improvement in patients treated with sarilumab. Median time to clinical improvement in patients with lung consolidation <17% was shorter after sarilumab (10 days) than after standard treatment (24 days; p=0.01). The rate of infection and pulmonary thrombosis was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: At day 28, overall clinical improvement and mortality in patients with severe COVID-19 were not significantly different between sarilumab and standard of care. Sarilumab was associated with faster recovery in a subset of patients showing minor lung consolidation at baseline.