Unchanged Characteristics and Survival among Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients during First, Second, and Third Waves: A Prospective Observational Cohort.

BACKGROUND: This study was carried out to compare characteristics and outcomes in patients with acute respiratory failure related to COVID-19 during first, second, and third waves. METHODS: We included consecutive adults admitted to the intensive care unit between March 2020 and July 2021. We compared three groups defined by the epidemic intake phase: waves 1 (W1), 2 (W2), and 3 (W3). RESULTS: We included 289 patients. Two hundred and eight (72%) patients were men with a median age of 63 years (IQR: 54-72), of whom 68 (23.6%) died in hospital. High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) was inversely associated with the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) in multivariate analysis (p = 0.003) but not dexamethasone (p = 0.25). The day-90 mortality rate did not vary from W1 (27.4%) to W2 (23.9%) and W3 (22%), p = 0.67. By multivariate analysis, older age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.94/year, p < 0.001), immunodeficiency (OR: 0.33, p = 0.04), acute kidney injury (OR: 0.26, p < 0.001), and invasive MV (OR: 0.13, p < 0.001) were inversely associated with higher day-90 survival as opposed to the use of intermediate heparin thromboprophylaxis dose (OR: 3.21, p = 0.006). HFNO use and dexamethasone were not associated with higher day-90 survival (p = 0.24 and p = 0.56, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19, survival did not change between first, second, and third waves while the use of invasive MV decreased. HFNO or intravenous steroids were not associated with better outcomes, whereas the use of intermediate dose of heparin for thromboprophylaxis was associated with higher day-90 survival. Larger multicentric studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Association of ventilator type with hospital mortality in critically ill patients with SARS-CoV2 infection: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the association between ventilator type and hospital mortality in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) related to COVID-19 (SARS-CoV2 infection), a single-center prospective observational study in France. RESULTS: We prospectively included consecutive adults admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of a university-affiliated tertiary hospital for ARDS related to proven COVID-19, between March 2020 and July 2021. All patients were intubated. We compared two patient groups defined by whether an ICU ventilator or a less sophisticated ventilator such as a sophisticated turbine-based transport ventilator was used. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted. Cox multivariate regression was performed to identify associations between patient characteristics and hospital mortality. We included 189 patients (140 [74.1%] men) with a median age of 65 years [IQR, 55-73], of whom 61 (32.3%) died before hospital discharge. By multivariate analysis, factors associated with in-hospital mortality were age ≥ 70 years (HR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.24-3.59; P = 0.006), immunodeficiency (HR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.16-5.09; P = 0.02) and serum creatinine ≥ 100 µmol/L (HR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.77-5.10; P < 0.001) but not ventilator type. As compared to conventional ICU (equipped with ICU and anesthesiology ventilators), management in transient ICU (equipped with non-ICU turbine-based ventilators) was associated neither with a longer duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (18 [IQR, 11-32] vs. 21 [13-37] days, respectively; P = 0.39) nor with a longer ICU stay (24 [IQR, 14-40] vs. 27 [15-44] days, respectively; P = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: In ventilated patients with ARDS due to COVID-19, management in transient ICU equipped with non-ICU sophisticated turbine-based ventilators was not associated with worse outcomes compared to standard ICU, equipped with ICU ventilators. Although our study design is not powered to demonstrate any difference in outcome, our results after adjustment do not suggest any signal of harm when using these transport type ventilators as an alternative to ICU ventilators during COVID-19 surge.

Prolonged in-hospital stay and higher mortality after Covid-19 among patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma treated with B-cell depleting immunotherapy.

Prolonged Covid-19 is an emerging issue for patients with lymphoma or immune deficiency. We aimed to examine prolonged length of in-hospital stay (LOS) due to Covid-19 among patients with lymphoma and assess its determinants and outcomes. Adult patients with lymphoma admitted for Covid-19 to 16 French hospitals in March and April, 2020 were included. Length of in-hospital stay was analyzed as a competitor vs death. The study included 111 patients. The median age was 65 years (range, 19-92). Ninety-four patients (85%) had B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Within the 12 months prior to hospitalization for Covid-19, 79 patients (71%) were treated for their lymphoma. Among them, 63 (57%) received an anti-CD20 therapy. Fourteen patients (12%) had relapsed/refractory disease. The median LOS was 14 days (range, 1-235). After a median follow-up of 191 days (3-260), the 6-month overall survival was 69%. In multivariable analyses, recent administration of anti-CD20 therapy was associated with prolonged LOS (subdistribution hazard ratio 2.26, 95% confidence interval 1.42-3.6, p < 0.001) and higher risk of death (hazard ratio 2.17, 95% confidence interval 1.04-4.52, p = 0.039). An age ≥ 70 years and relapsed/refractory lymphoma were also associated with prolonged LOS and decreased overall survival. In conclusion, an age ≥ 70 years, a relapsed/refractory lymphoma and recent administration of anti-CD20 therapy are risk factors for prolonged LOS and death for lymphoma patients hospitalized for Covid-19. These findings may contribute to guide the management of lymphoma during the pandemic, support evaluating specific therapeutic approaches, and raise questions on the efficacy and timing of vaccination of this particular population.