No Major Age Shift During the Second Wave of COVID-19: A Mortality Analysis at a Tertiary-Level Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: The second wave of coronavirus epidemic affected India severely. We reviewed the in-hospital deaths during the second wave at a dedicated COVID hospital to better understand the clinical characteristics of patients who died during this period. METHODS: Clinical charts of all patients who were admitted and died in-hospital due to COVID-19 between 1 April 2021 and 15 May 2021 were reviewed and clinical data were analysed. RESULTS: The total number of patients admitted to hospital and the intensive care unit was 1438 and 306, respectively. The in-hospital and intensive care unit mortality was 9.3% (134 out of 1438 patients) and 37.6% (115 out of 306 patients), respectively. Septic shock with multiorgan failure was the cause of death in 56.6% of the deceased patients (n = 73) and acute respiratory distress syndrome in 35.3% (n = 47) patients. Of the deceased, 1 patient was less than 12 years old, 56.8% were between 13 and 64 years of age and 42.5% were geriatric, that is, 65 years of age or older. There were no comorbidities in 35.1% of the deceased patients. The cause of death did not vary with the age group. CONCLUSION: The in-hospital and intensive care unit mortality during the second wave was 9.3% and 37.6%, respectively. There was no major age group shift in the second wave as compared to the first wave. However, a significant number of patients (35.1%) did not have any comorbidity. Septic shock with multiorgan failure was the most common cause of death followed by acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Incidence & outcomes of clinically significant bleeding events in critically ill COVID-19 patients receiving Therapeutic dose AntiCoagulanTs: A retrospective cohort study (INTerACT study).

Background & objectives: The high mortality associated with the thrombotic events in hospitalized COVID-19 patients resulted in the usage of anticoagulants in varying doses. Whether high-dose anticoagulants have led to better outcomes or higher incidence of clinically significant bleeding events is debatable. Thus, this study was conducted to find the incidence of clinically significant bleeding events in moderate-to-severe COVID-19 ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome) patients on therapeutic anticoagulation and their outcomes. Methods: In this retrospective, single-centre study of 155 critically ill COVID-19 patients, the incidence of clinically significant bleeding was observed. Multivariate regression models were used to evaluate the association between anticoagulant regimen, coagulation and inflammatory markers with the incidence of bleeding and thrombotic events. Results: The incidence of clinically relevant non-major bleeding was 33.54 per cent (26.17-41.46%) and major bleeding was 9.03 per cent (5.02-14.69%). The anticoagulation intensity at baseline had a high odds of major bleeding when enoxaparin and dual antiplatelet therapy were used together [adjusted odds ratio OR of 434.09 (3.81-49502.95), P<0.05]. At admission, bleeders had a poorer PaO2/FiO2 ratio with more patients on invasive ventilation. At the time of bleeding, the bleeders had a higher D-dimer, ferritin, C-reactive protein and procalcitonin compared to non-bleeders. The subhazard ratio for death in bleeders was 3.35 (95% confidence interval, 1.97-5.65; P<0.001). Interpretation & conclusions: The incidence of bleeding in critically ill COVID-19 patients on therapeutic anticoagulation may increase with the severity of the disease as well as with concurrent use of dual antiplatelets. Major bleeding may also contribute to higher mortality.

Clinicoepidemiological Features and Mortality Analysis of Deceased Patients with COVID-19 in a Tertiary Care Center.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A large number of studies describing the clinicoepidemiological features of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) patients are available but very few studies have documented similar features of the deceased. This study was aimed to describe the clinicoepidemiological features and the causes of mortality of COVID-19 deceased patients admitted in a dedicated COVID center in India. METHODOLOGY: This was a retrospective study done in adult deceased patients admitted in COVID ICU from April 4 to July 24, 2020. The clinical features, comorbidities, complications, and causes of mortality in these patients were analyzed. Pediatric deceased were analyzed separately. RESULTS: A total of 654 adult patients were admitted in the ICU during the study period and ICU mortality was 37.7% (247/654). Among the adult deceased, 65.9% were males with a median age of 56 years [interquartile range (IQR), 41.5-65] and 94.74% had one or more comorbidities, most common being hypertension (43.3%), diabetes mellitus (34.8%), and chronic kidney disease (20.6%). The most common presenting features in these deceased were fever (75.7%), cough (68.8%), and shortness of breath (67.6%). The mean initial sequential organ failure assessment score was 9.3 ± 4.7 and 24.2% were already intubated at the time of admission. The median duration of hospital stay was 6 days (IQR, 3-11). The most common cause of death was sepsis with multi-organ failure (55.1%) followed by severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (25.5%). All pediatric deceased had comorbid conditions and the most common cause of death in this group was severe ARDS. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of adult deceased, most were young males with age less than 65 years with one or more comorbidities, hypertension being the most common. Only 5% of the deceased had no comorbidities. Sepsis with multi-organ dysfunction syndrome was the most common cause of death. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Aggarwal R, Bhatia R, Kulshrestha K, Soni KD, Viswanath R, Singh AK, et al. Clinicoepidemiological Features and Mortality Analysis of Deceased Patients with COVID-19 in a Tertiary Care Center. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021; 25(6):622-628.

Barotrauma in critically ill COVID-19 patients: a retrospective case-control study.

BACKGROUND: There is increased incidence of barotrauma in COVID-19 patients, probably due to disease pathology, oxygen therapy and coughing. We aimed to retrospectively compare the characteristics, associations and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with and without barotrauma in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: All adults admitted between October 1st and December 31st 2020 in the ICUs of a COVID-19 hospital were retrospectively analysed for presence of a 'barotrauma event' (presence of at least one of pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, subcutaneous emphysema or bronchopleural fistula). A control group was formed by matching each case to a patient belonging to the same gender and age range from the remaining patients in the cohort, i.e., those without barotrauma. Demographic details, ICU stay details, details of oxygen therapy and ventilation, and outcomes were noted and compared. RESULTS: Of 827 patients, 30 patients (3.6%) developed barotrauma events. The typical patient was middle aged (median age 55.5 years) and male (73.3%). The mortality rate was significantly higher in the barotrauma group (83.3% vs. 43.3%, P < 0.001), and odds of survival decreased by 85% if barotrauma occurred (OR 0.15; 95% CI: 0.46-0.51). Patients who developed barotrauma spent a longer time on a high-flow nasal cannula (median 6.7 vs. 1.73 days, P = 0.04), and mechanical ventilation (median 9.54 vs. 0.867 days, P < 0.001), and had a longer ICU stay (median 15.5 vs. 9 days, P = 0.014). The most common event was pneumothorax (26/30). CONCLUSIONS: Barotrauma in the COVID-19 ICU is associated with prolonged ICU stay, higher odds of mortality and longer duration spent on mechanical ventilation and a high-flow nasal cannula. Key words: barotrauma, ICU, COVID-19, mortality, pneumothorax.

High-Dose Dexamethasone Versus Tocilizumab in Moderate to Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background and objectives Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have indicated potential therapeutic benefits with high-dose dexamethasone (HDD) or tocilizumab (TCZ) plus standard care in moderate to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). No study has compared these two against each other. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of HDD against TCZ in moderate to severe COVID-ARDS. Methods Patients admitted with moderate to severe COVID-19 ARDS with clinical worsening within 48 hours of standard care were randomly assigned to receive either HDD or TCZ plus standard care. The primary outcome was ventilator-free days (VFDs) at 28 days. The main secondary outcomes were 28-day all-cause mortality and the incidence of adverse events. Our initial plan was to perform an interim analysis of the first 42 patients. Results VFDs were significantly lower in the HDD arm (median difference: 28 days; 95% confidence interval (CI): 19.35-36.65; Cohen's d = 1.14;p < 0.001). We stopped the trial at the first interim analysis due to high 28-day mortality in the HDD arm (relative risk (RR) of death: 6.5; p = 0.007; NNT (harm) = 1.91). The incidence of secondary infections was also significantly high in the HDD arm (RR: 5.5; p = 0.015; NNT (harm) = 2.33). Conclusions In our study population, HDD was associated with a very high rate of mortality and adverse events. We would not recommend HDD to mitigate the cytokine storm in moderate to severe COVID-19 ARDS. TCZ appears to be a much better and safer alternative.

Clinical Course and Outcome of Critically Ill Obese Patients with COVID-19 Admitted in Intensive Care Unit of a Single Center: Our Experience and Review.

INTRODUCTION: Obesity has been considered as one of the independent risk factors for a severe form of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) and relationship between obesity, critical illness, and infection is still poorly understood. We herein discuss clinical course and outcome of critically ill obese patients with COVID-19 admitted to critical care unit. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data of critically ill obese patients hospitalized with COVID-19 over a span of 6 months. Management was guided according to the institutional protocol. Collected data included demographic parameters (age, sex, comorbidities, and body mass index (BMI)), complications, inflammatory markers (interleukin (IL)-6, Ferritin), length of mechanical ventilation, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and inhospital death. RESULTS: There was no appreciable difference in terms of demographics, inflammatory markers, predictors of mortality scores, and comorbidity indices between the survivors and nonsurvivors. Among outcome analysis, there was a statistically significant difference between ventilator days between survivors and nonsurvivors (p = 0.003**). CONCLUSION: Obesity itself is a significant risk factor for severe COVID-19 infection; however, if efficiently managed and in a protocol-determined manner, it can have a favorable outcome. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Kaur M, Aggarwal R, Ganesh V, Kumar R, Patel N, Ayub A, et al. Clinical Course and Outcome of Critically Ill Obese Patients with COVID-19 Admitted in Intensive Care Unit of a Single Center: Our Experience and Review. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(12):1382-1386.

Epidemiology and clinical characteristics of COVID- 19 patients requiring critical care in a Tertiary care teaching hospital.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We describe the epidemiological and clinical characteristics, and 28 day outcome of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to a tertiary care centre in India. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We included 60 adult critically ill COVID-19 patients in this prospective observational study, admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) after obtaining ethics committee approval and informed consent. Demographics, clinical data, and treatment outcome at 28 days were assessed. RESULTS: Demographic characteristics of the COVID-19 patients reveal that compared to the survivors, the non-survivors were significantly older [57.5 vs. 47.5 years], had more comorbid disease [Charlson's comorbidity index 4 vs. 2], higher Apache II scores [19 vs. 8.5], and had significantly higher percentage of smokers. Diabetes mellitus and hypertension were the most common comorbidities. Dyspnea, fever, and cough were the most common presenting symptoms. Total leucocyte count as well as blood lactate level were significantly higher in non-survivors. Around 47% patients had severe ARDS, and 60% patients required invasive mechanical ventilation. 28 day ICU mortality was 50%, with a mortality of 75% in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. Mortality was higher in males than females (57% vs. 33%). Acute kidney injury and septic shock were the most common non-pulmonary complications during ICU stay. Incidence of liver dysfunction, septic shock, and vasopressor use was significantly higher in the non-survivors. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates a high 28 day mortality in severe COVID-19 patients. Further well designed prospective studies with larger sample size are needed to identify the risk factors associated with poor outcome in such patients.

Evaluation of utility and usefulness of webinars on COVID-19 management: a questionnaire-based survey

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic and its consequent “social distancing” has fueled the use of social media platforms for educational purposes. Since the start of the pandemic, a plethora of experts and self-proclaimed experts have been keenly delivering webinars on COVID. This begs the question “Do webinars on COVID-19 really help in the improvement of knowledge base or management skills?”. The questionnaire was designed to assess information regarding COVID-webinars and their usefulness from the end-user standpoint. The response to the questions was measured using a 4- or 5-point Likert scale. The survey was open for a 4-week period with the extension of 1 week.ResultsThe response rate was 54% as 270 out of 500 participants responded to the questionnaire. The majority of the respondents were anesthesiologists in-training, post-graduates, fellows, and seniors belonging to tertiary care settings with fewer percentages belonging to physicians and others. Most of the doctors had attended an average of 2 webinars per week. The tests of model effects showed a significant negative correlation of webinar quality ratings for district hospital healthcare setting of the attendees (of p value of 0.013) and for the number of COVID-related webinars attended per week (p value of 0.009).ConclusionsMost respondents had favorable perceptions of webinars happening during the pandemic. However, there is a need for improvisation in the volume of webinars, target-audience-based delivery, and participant interaction to add value to this new dimension of teaching-learning.

Performance of Health Care Workers in Doffing of Personal Protective Equipment Using Real-Time Remote Audio-Visual Doffing Surveillance System: Its Implications for Bio-Safety Amid COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background Very little has been reported about health care workers' (HCWs) adherence to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines of doffing personal protective equipment (PPE) amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Real-time remote audio-visual doffing surveillance (RADS) system for assisting doffing might reduce the risk of self-contamination. We used this system to determine the incidence of the breach in biosafety during doffing of PPE among HCWs involved in the care of Covid-19 patients. Methods A total of 100 HCWs were enrolled in this observational study who performed duties in the COVID intensive care unit (ICU) of our tertiary care centre. With a real-time RADS system, trained observers from remote locations assisted HCWs during doffing of PPE and noted breach at any step using the CDC doffing checklist. The breach was considered major if committed during removal of gloves/gown/N-95 or if ≥3 errors occurred in any other steps. Results Overall, 40% of the HCWs committed a breach during doffing at least one step. The majority of the errors were observed during hand hygiene (34%), followed by glove removal (12%) and N-95 removal (8%). Nineteen percent of HCWs committed the major breach, out of which 37.5% were done by house-keeping sanitation staff (p = 0.008 and RR 2.85; 95% CI of 1.313-6.19), followed by technicians (22.5%), nursing staff (16.7%) and resident doctors (6.5%). Conclusions Performing doffing using a real-time RADS system is associated with a relatively low incidence of a breach in biosafety compared with earlier studies using an onsite standard observer. Overall adherence of HCWs to the CDC guidelines of doffing PPE was satisfactory. This study highlights the importance of the RADS system during doffing of PPE in a health care setting amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Coronavirus Disease-Associated Mucormycosis from a Tertiary Care Hospital in India: A Case Series.

BACKGROUND:  Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) remains a health concern with new challenges emerging as the pandemic progresses. The recent rise of opportunistic infections especially mucormycosis in COVID-19 patients is further complicating their outcomes. Mucormycosis is well known to infect patients with diabetes mellitus, malignancy, chemotherapy, and other immunocompromised conditions. The treatment of COVID-19 largely remains systemic steroids and other immunomodulators that add to the risk of invasive fungal infection. METHODOLOGY: Here, we present a retrospective case series of 13 patients with individual clinical characteristics along with the demography and treatment details. The data were collected retrospectively in a single center that caters to a large population of COVID-19 patients with varying severity. RESULTS: Thirteen patients were presented with COVID-19 associated mucormycosis (CAM). The median age was higher in non-survivors (49.5 years), with a higher odds of death (23.8) in those with severe COVID, having overall mortality of 64.3%. Moreover, diabetes mellitus was present in 61.5% of patients with a mortality of 75%. About 11 (84.6%) patients had received prior steroids for COVID-19. The incidence of hyperglycemia at admission was equal among both survivors and non-survivors. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of mucormycosis seems to be increasing among COVID-19 patients which may be associated with increased use of steroids, the possible immunocompromised state imposed by SARS-CoV-2, or co-existing conditions such as diabetes mellitus. The mortality of CAM is remarkably high and apart from preventive practices and rational use of immunomodulators, a high index of suspicion with early diagnosis would be key to survival.

Comparison of KingVision Videolaryngoscope channelled blade with Tuoren Videolaryngoscope non-channelled blade in a simulated COVID-19 intubation scenario by non-anaesthesiologists and experienced anaesthesiologists: a prospective randomised crossover mannequin study

Purpose A videolaryngoscope has been recommended for intubation in the COVID-19 scenario but the videolaryngoscope providing optimal intubation conditions is not ascertained. We compared KingVision channelled blade with a non-Channelled videolaryngoscope for intubation times in a simulated COVID-19 intubation scenario by both anaesthesiologists and non-anaesthesiologists. Methods This prospective randomised cross over mannequin study was conducted in a skill training lab. 25 anaesthesiologists and 25 non-anaesthesiologists donned in standard personal protective equipment performed 100 intubations with KingVision and Tuoren videolaryngoscopes in a mannequin covered with a transparent plastic sheet. The total intubation time, percentage of glottic opening scores, first attempt success rates were assessed. Results The mean difference in intubation times in anaesthesiologists and non-anaesthesiologist less with KingVision videolaryngoscope (21.1s;95% CI 9.6 to 32.6s vs. 35.9s;95% CI 24.4 to 47.4 s;P=0.001). Percentage of glottic opening score was significantly better with KingVision by non-anaesthesiologists (60;IQR 42.5 to 75 vs. 70;IQR 50 to 100;P=0.019). KingVision provided superior first attempt success rate in non-anaesthesiologists (84% vs. 61.9%;P=0.02) and anaesthesiologists (96% vs. 76%;P=0.12). Conclusion KingVision channelled videolaryngoscope provided faster intubation times, glottic views and first attempt success rates in a simulated COVID-19 scenario in manikins and might be preferred over videolaryngoscopes with non-channelled blade. The findings need to be further verified in humans.