28-day prognostic value of coronary artery calcification burden in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: From pathophysiological mechanisms to risk stratification, much debate and discussion persist regarding the coronary artery disease as a risk factor for adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the role of coronary artery calcification (CAC) burden by non-gated chest computed tomography (CT) for the prediction of 28-day mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: Consecutive critically ill adult patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 admitted to ICU who underwent non-contrast non-gated chest CT performed for pneumonia assessment between March and June 2020 (n â€‹= â€‹768) were identified. Patients were stratified in four groups: (a) CAC â€‹= â€‹0, (b) CAC 1-100, (c) CAC 101-300, and (d) CAC >300. RESULTS: CAC was detected in 376 patients (49%), of whom 218 (58%) showed CAC >300. CAC >300 was independently associated with ICU mortality at 28 days after admission (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36-2.36, p â€‹< â€‹0.001), and incrementally improved prediction of death over a model with clinical features and biomarkers assessed within the first 24h in ICU (likelihood ratio test â€‹= â€‹140 vs. 123, respectively, p â€‹< â€‹0.001). In the final cohort, 286 (37%) patients died within 28 days of ICU admission. CONCLUSION: In critically ill patients with COVID-19, a high CAC burden quantified with a non-gated chest CT performed for COVID-19 pneumonia assessment is an independent predictor of 28-day mortality, with an incremental prognostic value over a comprehensive clinical assessment during the first 24h in ICU.

Mortality over time among COVID-19 patients hospitalized during the first surge of the pandemic: A large cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Capacity strain negatively impacts patient outcome, and the effects of patient surge are a continuous threat during the COVID-19 pandemic. Evaluating changes in mortality over time enables evidence-based resource planning, thus improving patient outcome. Our aim was to describe baseline risk factors associated with mortality among COVID-19 hospitalized patients and to compare mortality rates over time. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in the largest referral hospital for COVID-19 patients in Sao Paulo, Brazil. We investigated risk factors associated with mortality during hospitalization. Independent variables included age group, sex, the Charlson Comorbidity Index, admission period according to the stage of the first wave of the epidemic (early, peak, and late), and intubation. RESULTS: We included 2949 consecutive COVID-19 patients. 1895 of them were admitted to the ICU, and 1473 required mechanical ventilation. Median length of stay in the ICU was 10 (IQR 5-17) days. Overall mortality rate was 35%, and the adjusted odds ratios for mortality increased with age, male sex, higher Charlson Comorbidity index, need for mechanical ventilation, and being admitted to the hospital during the wave peak of the epidemic. Being admitted to the hospital during the wave peak was associated with a 33% higher risk of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital mortality was independently affected by the epidemic period. The recognition of modifiable operational variables associated with patient outcome highlights the importance of a preparedness plan and institutional protocols that include evidence-based practices and allocation of resources.

Technical performance of a lateral flow immunoassay for detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG in the outpatient follow-up of non-severe cases and at different times after vaccination: comparison with enzyme and chemiluminescent immunoassays.

This study assessed the technical performance of a rapid lateral flow immunochromatographic assay (LFIA) for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG and compared LFIA results with chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA) results and an in-house enzyme immunoassay (EIA). To this end, a total of 216 whole blood or serum samples from three groups were analyzed: the first group was composed of 68 true negative cases corresponding to blood bank donors, healthy young volunteers, and eight pediatric patients diagnosed with other coronavirus infections. The serum samples from these participants were obtained and stored in a pre-COVID-19 period, thus they were not expected to have COVID-19. In the second group of true positive cases, we chose to replace natural cases of COVID-19 by 96 participants who were expected to have produced anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies 30-60 days after the vaccine booster dose. The serum samples were collected on the same day that LFIA were tested either by EIA or CLIA. The third study group was composed of 52 participants (12 adults and 40 children) who did or did not have anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies due to specific clinical scenarios. The 12 adults had been vaccinated more than seven months before LFIA testing, and the 40 children had non-severe COVID-19 diagnosed using RT-PCR during the acute phase of infection. They were referred for outpatient follow-up and during this period the serum samples were collected and tested by CLIA and LFIA. All tests were performed by the same healthcare operator and there was no variation of LFIA results when tests were performed on finger prick whole blood or serum samples, so that results were grouped for analysis. LFIA's sensitivity in detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies was 90%, specificity 97.6%, efficiency 93%, PPV 98.3%, NPV 86.6%, and likelihood ratio for a positive or a negative result were 37.5 and 0.01 respectively. There was a good agreement (Kappa index of 0.677) between LFIA results and serological (EIA or CLIA) results. In conclusion, LFIA analyzed in this study showed a good technical performance and agreement with reference serological assays (EIA or CLIA), therefore it can be recommended for use in the outpatient follow-up of non-severe cases of COVID-19 and to assess anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody production induced by vaccination and the antibodies decrease over time. However, LFIAs should be confirmed by using reference serological assays whenever possible.

Clinical, sociodemographic and environmental factors impact post-COVID-19 syndrome.

Background: Sociodemographic and environmental factors are associated with incidence, severity, and mortality of COVID-19. However, little is known about the role of such factors in persisting symptoms among recovering patients. We designed a cohort study of hospitalized COVID-19 survivors to describe persistent symptoms and identify factors associated with post-COVID-19 syndrome. Methods: We included patients hospitalized between March to August 2020 who were alive six months after hospitalization. We collected individual and clinical characteristics during hospitalization and at follow-up assessed ten symptoms with standardized scales, 19 yes/no symptoms, a functional status and a quality-of-life scale and performed four clinical tests. We examined individual exposure to greenspace and air pollution and considered neighbourhood´s population density and socioeconomic conditions as contextual factors in multilevel regression analysis. Results: We included 749 patients with a median follow-up of 200 (IQR = 185-235) days, and 618 (83%) had at least one of the ten symptoms measured with scales. Pain (41%), fatigue (38%) and posttraumatic stress disorder (35%) were the most frequent. COVID-19 severity, comorbidities, BMI, female sex, younger age, and low socioeconomic position were associated with different symptoms. Exposure to ambient air pollution was associated with higher dyspnoea and fatigue scores and lower functional status. Conclusions: We identified a high frequency of persistent symptoms among COVID-19 survivors that were associated with clinical, sociodemographic, and environmental variables. These findings indicate that most patients recovering from COVID-19 will need post-discharge care, and an additional burden to health care systems, especially in LMICs, should be expected.

Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Joint guideline of Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia. / Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19: Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia.

OBJECTIVE: Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. CONCLUSION: To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use.

OBJETIVOS: Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas ou propostas para a COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é elaborar recomendações para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. MÉTODOS: Um grupo de 27 membros, formado por especialistas, representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas, integra essa diretriz. Foi utilizado o método de elaboração de diretrizes rápidas, tomando por base a adoção e/ou a adaptação de recomendações a partir de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT), apoiadas pela plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. RESULTADOS: Foram geradas 16 recomendações. Entre elas, estão recomendações fortes para o uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar, para o uso de anticoagulantes em doses de profilaxia para tromboembolismo e para não uso de antibacterianos nos pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana. Não foi possível fazer uma recomendação quanto à utilização do tocilizumabe em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 em uso de oxigênio, pelas incertezas na disponibilidade e de acesso ao medicamento. Foi feita recomendação para não usar azitromicina, casirivimabe + imdevimabe, cloroquina, colchicina, hidroxicloroquina, ivermectina, lopinavir/ ritonavir, plasma convalescente e rendesivir. CONCLUSÃO: Até o momento, poucas terapias se provaram efetivas no tratamento do paciente hospitalizado com COVID-19, sendo recomendados apenas corticosteroides e profilaxia para tromboembolismo. Diversos medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes, devendo ser descartados, de forma a oferecer o melhor tratamento pelos princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover economia de recursos não eficazes.

Impact of prone positioning on patients with COVID-19 and ARDS on invasive mechanical ventilation: a multicenter cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that lead to a positive oxygenation response and predictive factors of mortality after prone positioning. METHODS: This was a retrospective, multicenter, cohort study involving seven hospitals in Brazil. Inclusion criteria were being > 18 years of age with a suspected or confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, being on invasive mechanical ventilation, having a PaO2/FIO2 ratio < 150 mmHg, and being submitted to prone positioning. After the first prone positioning session, a 20 mmHg improvement in the PaO2/FIO2 ratio was defined as a positive response. RESULTS: The study involved 574 patients, 412 (72%) of whom responded positively to the first prone positioning session. Multiple logistic regression showed that responders had lower Simplified Acute Physiology Score III (SAPS III)/SOFA scores and lower D-dimer levels (p = 0.01; p = 0.04; and p = 0.04, respectively). It was suggested that initial SAPS III and initial PaO2/FIO2 were predictors of oxygenation response. The mortality rate was 69.3%. Increased risk of mortality was associated with age (OR = 1.04 [95 CI: 1.01-1.06]), time to first prone positioning session (OR = 1.18 [95 CI: 1.06-1.31]), number of sessions (OR = 1.31 [95% CI: 1.00-1.72]), proportion of pulmonary impairment (OR = 1.55 [95% CI: 1.02-2.35]), and immunosuppression (OR = 3.83 [95% CI: 1.35-10.86]). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that most patients in our sample had a positive oxygenation response after the first prone positioning session. However, the mortality rate was high, probably due to the health status and the number of comorbidities of the patients, as well as the severity of their disease. Our results also suggest that SAPS III and the initial PaO2/FIO2 predict the oxygenation response; in addition, age, time to first prone positioning, number of sessions, pulmonary impairment, and immunosuppression can predict mortality.

Brazilian guidelines for the treatment of outpatients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. A joint guideline of the Brazilian Association of Emergency Medicine (ABRAMEDE), Brazilian Medical Association (AMB), Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery (SBACV), Brazilian Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology (SBGG), Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI), Brazilian Society of Family and Community Medicine (SBFMC), and Brazilian Thoracic Society (SBPT).

BACKGROUND: Several therapies have been used or proposed for the treatment of COVID-19, although their effectiveness and safety have not been properly evaluated. The purpose of this document is to provide recommendations to support decisions about the drug treatment of outpatients with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: A panel consisting of experts from different clinical fields, representatives of the Brazilian Ministry of Health, and methodologists (37 members in total) was responsible for preparing these guidelines. A rapid guideline development method was used, based on the adoption and/or adaptation of recommendations from existing international guidelines combined with additional structured searches for primary studies and new recommendations whenever necessary (GRADE-ADOLOPMENT). The rating of quality of evidence and the drafting of recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Ten technologies were evaluated, and 10 recommendations were prepared. Recommendations were made against the use of anticoagulants, azithromycin, budesonide, colchicine, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine alone or combined with azithromycin, ivermectin, nitazoxanide, and convalescent plasma. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of monoclonal antibodies in outpatients, as their benefit is uncertain and their cost is high, with limitations of availability and implementation. CONCLUSION: To date, few therapies have demonstrated effectiveness in the treatment of outpatients with COVID-19. Recommendations are restricted to what should not be used, in order to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource savings by aboiding ineffective treatments.

Timing to Intubation COVID-19 Patients: Can We Put It Off until Tomorrow?

BACKGROUND: The decision to intubate COVID-19 patients receiving non-invasive respiratory support is challenging, requiring a fine balance between early intubation and risks of invasive mechanical ventilation versus the adverse effects of delaying intubation. This present study analyzes the association between intubation day and mortality in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We performed a unicentric retrospective cohort study considering all COVID-19 patients consecutively admitted between March 2020 and August 2020 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 28 days after intubation, and a Cox model was used to evaluate the effect of time from onset of symptoms to intubation in mortality. RESULTS: A total of 592 (20%) patients of 3020 admitted with COVID-19 were intubated during study period, and 310 patients who were intubated deceased 28 days after intubation. Each additional day between the onset of symptoms and intubation was significantly associated with higher in-hospital death (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.018; 95% CI, 1.005-1.03). CONCLUSION: Among patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 who were intubated and mechanically ventilated, delaying intubation in the course of symptoms may be associated with higher mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was approved by the local Ethics Committee (opinion number 3.990.817; CAAE: 30417520.0.0000.0068).

Distinct Outcomes in COVID-19 Patients with Positive or Negative RT-PCR Test.

Identification of the SARS-CoV-2 virus by RT-PCR from a nasopharyngeal swab sample is a common test for diagnosing COVID-19. However, some patients present clinical, laboratorial, and radiological evidence of COVID-19 infection with negative RT-PCR result(s). Thus, we assessed whether positive results were associated with intubation and mortality. This study was conducted in a Brazilian tertiary hospital from March to August of 2020. All patients had clinical, laboratory, and radiological diagnosis of COVID-19. They were divided into two groups: positive (+) RT-PCR group, with 2292 participants, and negative (-) RT-PCR group, with 706 participants. Patients with negative RT-PCR testing and an alternative most probable diagnosis were excluded from the study. The RT-PCR(+) group presented increased risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and 28-day mortality, when compared to the RT-PCR(-) group. A positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR result was independently associated with intubation and 28 day in-hospital mortality. Accordingly, we concluded that patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis based on clinical data, despite a negative RT-PCR test from nasopharyngeal samples, presented more favorable outcomes than patients with positive RT-PCR test(s).

Cancer-Related Characteristics Associated With Invasive Mechanical Ventilation or In-Hospital Mortality in Patients With COVID-19 Admitted to ICU: A Cohort Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Coexistence of cancer and COVID-19 is associated with worse outcomes. However, the studies on cancer-related characteristics associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes have shown controversial results. The objective of the study was to evaluate cancer-related characteristics associated with invasive mechanical ventilation use or in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: We designed a cohort multicenter study including adults with active cancer admitted to ICU due to COVID-19. Seven cancer-related characteristics (cancer status, type of cancer, metastasis occurrence, recent chemotherapy, recent immunotherapy, lung tumor, and performance status) were introduced in a multilevel logistic regression model as first-level variables and hospital was introduced as second-level variable (random effect). Confounders were identified using directed acyclic graphs. RESULTS: We included 274 patients. Required to undergo invasive mechanical ventilation were 176 patients (64.2%) and none of the cancer-related characteristics were associated with mechanical ventilation use. Approximately 155 patients died in hospital (56.6%) and poor performance status, measured with the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score was associated with increased in-hospital mortality, with odds ratio = 3.54 (1.60-7.88, 95% CI) for ECOG =2 and odds ratio = 3.40 (1.60-7.22, 95% CI) for ECOG = 3 to 4. Cancer status, cancer type, metastatic tumor, lung cancer, and recent chemotherapy or immunotherapy were not associated with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with active cancer and COVID-19 admitted to ICU, poor performance status was associated with in-hospital mortality but not with mechanical ventilation use. Cancer status, cancer type, metastatic tumor, lung cancer, and recent chemotherapy or immunotherapy were not associated with invasive mechanical ventilation use or in-hospital mortality.

Differences in children and adolescents with SARS-CoV-2 infection: a cohort study in a Brazilian tertiary referral hospital.

OBJECTIVES: To compare demographic/clinical/laboratory/treatments and outcomes among children and adolescents with laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study that included patients diagnosed with pediatric COVID-19 (aged <18 years) between April 11, 2020 and April 22, 2021. During this period, 102/5,951 (1.7%) of all admissions occurred in neonates, children, and adolescents. Furthermore, 3,962 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection samples were processed in patients aged <18 years, and laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 155 (4%) inpatients and outpatients. Six/155 pediatric patients were excluded from the study. Therefore, the final group included 149 children and adolescents (n=97 inpatients and 52 outpatients) with positive SARS-CoV-2 results. RESULTS: The frequencies of sore throat, anosmia, dysgeusia, headache, myalgia, nausea, lymphopenia, pre-existing chronic conditions, immunosuppressive conditions, and autoimmune diseases were significantly reduced in children and adolescents (p<0.05). Likewise, the frequencies of enoxaparin use (p=0.037), current immunosuppressant use (p=0.008), vasoactive agents (p=0.045), arterial hypotension (p<0.001), and shock (p=0.024) were significantly lower in children than in adolescents. Logistic regression analysis showed that adolescents with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 had increased odds ratios (ORs) for sore throat (OR 13.054; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.750-61.977; p=0.001), nausea (OR 8.875; 95% CI 1.660-47.446; p=0.011), and lymphopenia (OR 3.575; 95% CI 1.355-9.430; p=0.010), but also had less hospitalizations (OR 0.355; 95% CI 0.138-0.916; p=0.032). The additional logistic regression analysis on patients with preexisting chronic conditions (n=108) showed that death as an outcome was significantly associated with pediatric severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) (OR 22.300; 95% CI 2.341-212.421; p=0.007) and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) (OR 11.261; 95% CI 1.189-106. 581; p=0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Half of the laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases occurred in adolescents. Individuals belonging to this age group had an acute systemic involvement of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Pediatric SARS and MIS-C were the most important factors associated with the mortality rate in pediatric chronic conditions with COVID-19.

Tracking the time course of pathological patterns of lung injury in severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary involvement in COVID-19 is characterized pathologically by diffuse alveolar damage (DAD) and thrombosis, leading to the clinical picture of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. The direct action of SARS-CoV-2 in lung cells and the dysregulated immuno-coagulative pathways activated in ARDS influence pulmonary involvement in severe COVID, that might be modulated by disease duration and individual factors. In this study we assessed the proportions of different lung pathology patterns in severe COVID-19 patients along the disease evolution and individual characteristics. METHODS: We analysed lung tissue from 41 COVID-19 patients that died in the period March-June 2020 and were submitted to a minimally invasive autopsy. Eight pulmonary regions were sampled. Pulmonary pathologists analysed the H&E stained slides, performing semiquantitative scores on the following parameters: exudative, intermediate or advanced DAD, bronchopneumonia, alveolar haemorrhage, infarct (%), arteriolar (number) or capillary thrombosis (yes/no). Histopathological data were correlated with demographic-clinical variables and periods of symptoms-hospital stay. RESULTS: Patient´s age varied from 22 to 88 years (18f/23 m), with hospital admission varying from 0 to 40 days. All patients had different proportions of DAD in their biopsies. Ninety percent of the patients presented pulmonary microthrombosis. The proportion of exudative DAD was higher in the period 0-8 days of hospital admission till death, whereas advanced DAD was higher after 17 days of hospital admission. In the group of patients that died within eight days of hospital admission, elderly patients had less proportion of the exudative pattern and increased proportions of the intermediate patterns. Obese patients had lower proportion of advanced DAD pattern in their biopsies, and lower than patients with overweight. Clustering analysis showed that patterns of vascular lesions (microthrombosis, infarction) clustered together, but not the other patterns. The vascular pattern was not influenced by demographic or clinical parameters, including time of disease progression. CONCLUSION: Patients with severe COVID-19 present different proportions of DAD patterns over time, with advanced DAD being more prevalent after 17 days, which seems to be influenced by age and weight. Vascular involvement is present in a large proportion of patients, occurs early in disease progression, and does not change over time.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU in a university hospital in São Paulo, Brazil - study protocol

OBJECTIVES: We designed a cohort study to describe characteristics and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in the largest public hospital in Sao Paulo, Brazil, as Latin America becomes the epicenter of the pandemic. METHODS: This is the protocol for a study being conducted at an academic hospital in Brazil with 300 adult ICU beds dedicated to COVID-19 patients. We will include adult patients admitted to the ICU with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 during the study period. The main outcome is ICU survival at 28 days. Data will be collected prospectively and retrospectively by trained investigators from the hospital's electronic medical records, using an electronic data capture tool. We will collect data on demographics, comorbidities, severity of disease, and laboratorial test results at admission. Information on the need for advanced life support and ventilator parameters will be collected during ICU stay. Patients will be followed up for 28 days in the ICU and 60 days in the hospital. We will plot Kaplan-Meier curves to estimate ICU and hospital survival and perform survival analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model to identify the main risk factors for mortality. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04378582. RESULTS: We expect to include a large sample of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU and to be able to provide data on admission characteristics, use of advanced life support, ICU survival at 28 days, and hospital survival at 60 days. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide epidemiological data about critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Brazil, which could inform health policy and resource allocation in low- and middle-income countries.