ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To assess differences in the use of analgesics, sedatives and neuromuscular-blocking agents (NMBA) in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 or other conditions. METHODS: Retrospective observational cohort study, single-center tertiary Intensive Care Unit. COVID-19 patients with ARDS (March-May 2020) and non-COVID ARDS patients (2017-2020) on mechanical ventilation and receiving sedation for at least 48 h. RESULTS: A total of 39 patients met the inclusion criteria in each group, with similar demographics at baseline. COVID-19 patients had a longer duration of MV (median 22 (IQRs 16-29) vs. 9 (6-18) days; p < 0.01), of sedatives administration (18 (11-22) vs. 5 (4-9) days; p < 0.01) and NMBA therapy (12 (9-16) vs. 3 (2-7) days; p < 0.01). During the first 7 days of sedation, compared to non-COVID patients, COVID patients received more frequently a combination of multiple sedative drugs (76.9% vs. 28.2%; p < 0.01) and a higher NMBA regimen (cisatracurium: 3.0 (2.1-3.7) vs. 1.3 (0.9-1.9) mg/kg/day; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The duration and consumption of sedatives and NMBA was significantly increased in patients with COVID-19 related ARDS than in non-COVID ARDS. Different sedation strategies and protocols might be needed in COVID-19 patients with ARDS, with potential implications on long-term complications and drugs availability.
ABSTRACT
COVID-19 patients suffering from severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) require mechanical ventilation (MV) for respiratory failure. To achieve these ventilatory goals, it has been observed that COVID-19 patients in particular require high regimens and prolonged use of sedatives, analgesics and neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA). Withdrawal from analgo-sedation may induce a "drug withdrawal syndrome" (DWS), i.e., clinical symptoms of anxiety, tremor, agitation, hallucinations and vomiting, as a result of adrenergic activation and hyperalgesia. We describe the epidemiology, mechanisms leading to this syndrome and our strategies to prevent and treat it.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Corpus Callosum/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Magnetic Resonance ImagingABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has been largely used in patients with refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome due to coronavirus disease 2019. Few data on long-term pulmonary function among venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation survivors are available. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational cohort. SETTING: Two mixed medical-surgical tertiary (30 beds) and secondary (22 beds) ICUs. PATIENTS: All critically ill adult coronavirus disease 2019 survivors treated with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation between March 10, and April 30, 2020. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The last available lung function and 6-minute walking tests, performed after a median of 178 days (ranges, 72-232 d) from ICU admission, were analyzed. Among the 32 coronavirus disease 2019 patients treated by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during the study period, 11 (34%; median age 56 yr; median duration of mechanical ventilation and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy of 26 and 15 d, respectively) were successfully weaned and discharged home. Spirometry was performed in nine patients; the volumetric lung function was preserved, that is, median forced vital capacity was 83% of predicted value (51-99% of predicted value), and median forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 82% of predicted value (60-99% of predicted value). Also, the median residual volume and the lung capacity were 100% of predicted value (50-140% of predicted value) and 90% of predicted value (50-100% of predicted value); only the diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide and 6-minute walking test were decreased (58% of predicted value [37-95% of predicted value] and 468 meters (365-625 meters), corresponding to [63-90% of predicted value], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among survivors from severe coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia treated with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, preserved long-term volumetric lung function with decreased diffusion capacity of lung carbon monoxide was observed.
ABSTRACT
Whether the risk of multidrug-resistant bacteria (MDRB) acquisition in the intensive care unit (ICU) is modified by the COVID-19 crisis is unknown. In this single center case control study, we measured the rate of MDRB acquisition in patients admitted in COVID-19 ICU and compared it with patients admitted in the same ICU for subarachnoid hemorrhage (controls) matched 1:1 on length of ICU stay and mechanical ventilation. All patients were systematically and repeatedly screened for MDRB carriage. We compared the rate of MDRB acquisition in COVID-19 patients and in control using a competing risk analysis. Of note, although we tried to match COVID-19 patients with septic shock patients, we were unable due to the longer stay of COVID-19 patients. Among 72 patients admitted to the COVID-19 ICUs, 33% acquired 31 MDRB during ICU stay. The incidence density of MDRB acquisition was 30/1000 patient days. Antimicrobial therapy and exposure time were associated with higher rate of MDRB acquisition. Among the 72 SAH patients, 21% acquired MDRB, with an incidence density was 18/1000 patient days. The septic patients had more comorbidities and a greater number of previous hospitalizations than the COVID-19 patients. The incidence density of MDRB acquisition was 30/1000 patient days. The association between COVID-19 and MDRB acquisition (compared to control) risk did not reach statistical significance in the multivariable competing risk analysis (sHR 1.71 (CI 95% 0.93-3.21)). Thus, we conclude that, despite strong physical isolation, acquisition rate of MDRB in ICU patients was at least similar during the COVID-19 first wave compared to previous period.