Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Intensive Care Med ; 48(8): 1039-1052, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1930382

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To describe bleeding and thrombotic events and their risk factors in patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to evaluate their impact on in-hospital mortality. METHODS: The ECMOSARS registry included COVID-19 patients supported by ECMO in France. We analyzed all patients included up to March 31, 2022 without missing data regarding bleeding and thrombotic events. The association of bleeding and thrombotic events with in-hospital mortality and pre-ECMO variables was assessed using multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among 620 patients supported by ECMO, 29% had only bleeding events, 16% only thrombotic events and 20% both bleeding and thrombosis. Cannulation site (18% of patients), ear nose and throat (12%), pulmonary bleeding (9%) and intracranial hemorrhage (8%) were the most frequent bleeding types. Device-related thrombosis and pulmonary embolism/thrombosis accounted for most of thrombotic events. In-hospital mortality was 55.7%. Bleeding events were associated with in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio (adjOR) = 2.91[1.94-4.4]) but not thrombotic events (adjOR = 1.02[0.68-1.53]). Intracranial hemorrhage was strongly associated with in-hospital mortality (adjOR = 13.5[4.4-41.5]). Ventilation duration before ECMO ≥ 7 days and length of ECMO support were associated with bleeding. Thrombosis-associated factors were fibrinogen ≥ 6 g/L and length of ECMO support. CONCLUSIONS: In a nationwide cohort of COVID-19 patients supported by ECMO, bleeding incidence was high and associated with mortality. Intracranial hemorrhage incidence was higher than reported for non-COVID patients and carried the highest risk of death. Thrombotic events were less frequent and not associated with mortality. Length of ECMO support was associated with a higher risk of both bleeding and thrombosis, supporting the development of strategies to minimize ECMO duration.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Thrombosis , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/adverse effects , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/etiology , Humans , Intracranial Hemorrhages/epidemiology , Intracranial Hemorrhages/etiology , Retrospective Studies , Thrombosis/epidemiology , Thrombosis/etiology
2.
Virol J ; 18(1): 211, 2021 10 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1622247

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 virus is the causing agent of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) characterized by a huge pro-inflammatory response and coagulation disorders that may lead to for its severe forms, in organ failure or even death. As major players of thrombo-inflammation, platelets release large amounts of immunomodulatory molecules and regulate leukocyte and endothelial activity, which are both altered in COVID-19. Altogether, this makes platelets a very likely actor of the thrombo-inflammatory complications of COVID-19. Thus, we propose to identify a platelet inflammatory signature of severe COVID-19 specifically modulated throughout the course of the disease. METHODS: Luminex technology and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay were used to assess plasma levels of platelet inflammatory markers in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection on admission and for 14 days afterwards. RESULTS: In accordance with the observations of other teams, we evidence that the plasma levels of the platelet soluble (s)CD40L is significantly elevated in the early stages of the disease. Interestingly we observe that the plasma level of sCD40L decreases overtime while that of sCD62P increases significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that there is a platelet signature of inflammatory response to SARS-COv-2 infection which varies overtime and could serve as monitoring biomarkers of patient inflammatory state. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 2020-A01100-39; title: Human Ab Response & immunoMONItoring of COVID-19 Patients, registration date: 05/25/2020; URL of the registry: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/history/NCT04373200?V_5=View .


Subject(s)
Biomarkers/blood , Blood Platelets/immunology , COVID-19 , Inflammation , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/immunology , Female , Humans , Inflammation/blood , Inflammation/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , Young Adult
3.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 40(6): 100963, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1471855

ABSTRACT

Argatroban is a direct anti-IIa (thrombin) anticoagulant, administered as a continuous intravenous infusion; it has been approved in many countries for the anticoagulant management of heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia (HIT). Argatroban was recently proposed as the non-heparin anticoagulant of choice for the management of patients diagnosed with Vaccine-induced Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopaenia (VITT). Immunoglobulins are also promptly intravenously administered in order to rapidly improve platelet count; concomitant therapy with steroids is also often considered. An ad hoc committee of the French Working Group on Haemostasis and Thrombosis members has worked on updated and detailed proposals regarding the management of anticoagulation with argatroban, based on previously released guidance for HIT, and adapted for VITT. In case of VITT, the initial dose to be preferred is 1.0 µg × kg-1 × min-1, with further dose-adjustments based on iterative and frequent clinical and laboratory assessments. It is strongly advised to involve a health practitioner experienced in the management of difficult cases in haemostasis. The first laboratory assessment should be performed 4 h after the initiation of argatroban infusion, with further controls at 2-4-h intervals until steady state, and at least once daily thereafter. Importantly, full anticoagulation should be rapidly achieved in case of widespread thrombosis. Cerebral vein thrombosis (which is typical of VITT) should not call for an overly cautious anticoagulation scheme. Argatroban administration requires baseline laboratory assessment and should rely on an anti-IIa assay to derive argatroban plasma levels using a dedicated calibration, with a target range between 0.5 and 1.5 µg/mL. Target argatroban plasma levels can be refined based on meticulous appraisal of risk factors for bleeding and thrombosis, on frequent reassessments of clinical status with appropriate vascular imaging, and on the changes in daily platelet counts. Regarding the use of aPTT, baseline value and possible causes for alterations of the clotting time must be taken into account. Specifically, in case of VITT, an aPTT ratio (patient's/mean normal clotting time) between 1.5 and 2.5 is suggested, to be refined according to the sensitivity of the reagent to the effect of a direct thrombin inhibitor. The sole use of aPTT is discouraged: one has to resort to a periodical check with an anti-IIa assay at least, with the help of a specialised laboratory if necessary. Dose modifications should proceed in a stepwise manner with 0.1 to 0.2 µg × kg-1 × min-1 up- or downward changes, taking into account the initial dose, laboratory results, and the whole individual setting. Nomograms are available to adjust the infusion rate. Haemoglobin level, platelet count, fibrinogen plasma level and liver tests should be periodically checked, depending on the clinical status, the more so when unstable.


Subject(s)
Thrombocytopenia , Thrombosis , Vaccines , Arginine/analogs & derivatives , Humans , Pipecolic Acids , Sulfonamides , Thrombocytopenia/chemically induced , Thrombocytopenia/therapy
4.
Chest ; 159(6): 2417-2427, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1131172

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Because of the high risk of thrombotic complications (TCs) during SARS-CoV-2 infection, several scientific societies have proposed to increase the dose of preventive anticoagulation, although arguments in favor of this strategy are inconsistent. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the incidence of TC in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and what is the relationship between the dose of anticoagulant therapy and the incidence of TC? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: All consecutive patients referred to eight French ICUs for COVID-19 were included in this observational study. Clinical and laboratory data were collected from ICU admission to day 14, including anticoagulation status and thrombotic and hemorrhagic events. The effect of high-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (either at intermediate or equivalent to therapeutic dose), defined using a standardized protocol of classification, was assessed using a time-varying exposure model using inverse probability of treatment weight. RESULTS: Of 538 patients included, 104 patients experienced a total of 122 TCs with an incidence of 22.7% (95% CI, 19.2%-26.3%). Pulmonary embolism accounted for 52% of the recorded TCs. High-dose prophylactic anticoagulation was associated with a significant reduced risk of TC (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.66-0.99) without increasing the risk of bleeding (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.70-1.75). INTERPRETATION: High-dose prophylactic anticoagulation is associated with a reduction in thrombotic complications in critically ill patients with COVID-19 without an increased risk of hemorrhage. Randomized controlled trials comparing prophylaxis with higher doses of anticoagulants are needed to confirm these results. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04405869; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care , Thrombosis/epidemiology , Thrombosis/prevention & control , Aged , Female , France , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Pulmonary Embolism/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiology
5.
Ann Biol Clin (Paris) ; 78(5): 471-481, 2020 10 01.
Article in French | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-836030

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 is associated with disturbances of hemostasis in the laboratory and an increased thrombotic risk. Routine laboratory tests - activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), prothrombin time, Clauss fibrinogen and D-dimers levels measurement - are used for the evaluation of the thrombotic risk and the monitoring of hemostasis, but are subject to several drawbacks that may affect the reliability and clinical relevance of the delivered results. Another challenge for the hemostasis laboratory is the monitoring of heparin treatment. For instance, the issue of the monitoring of unfractionated heparin remains debated, the more so when there is a tremendous inflammatory response. This brief review considers the role of laboratory tests of hemostasis in the management of COVID-19 and discusses their main limitations to be kept in mind.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Hemostasis/physiology , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Thrombosis/diagnosis , Thrombosis/etiology , Thrombosis/prevention & control , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/physiology , Blood Coagulation Tests , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Drug Monitoring/methods , Hemostasis/drug effects , Humans , Laboratories, Hospital , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombosis/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL