Protective Effect of Inactivated COVID-19 Vaccines against Omicron BA.2 Infection in Guangzhou: A Test-Negative Case-Control Real-World Study.

This study aims to explore the relationship between the doses of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines received and SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection in the real-world setting, so as to preliminarily evaluate the protective effect induced by COVID-19 vaccination. We conducted a test-negative case-control study and recruited the test-positive cases and test-negative controls in the outbreak caused by Omicron BA.2 in April 2022 in Guangzhou, China. All the participants were 3 years and older. The vaccination status between the case group and the control group was compared in the vaccinated and all participants, respectively, to estimate the immune protection of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines. After adjusting for sex and age, compared with a mere single dose, full vaccination of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines (OR = 0.191, 95% CI: 0.050 to 0.727) and booster vaccination (OR = 0.091, 95% CI: 0.011 to 0.727) had a more superior protective effect. Compared with one dose, the second dose was more effective in males (OR = 0.090), as well as two doses (OR = 0.089) and three doses (OR = 0.090) among individuals aged 18-59. Whereas, when compared with the unvaccinated, one dose (OR = 7.715, 95% CI: 1.904 to 31.254) and three doses (OR = 2.055, 95% CI: 1.162 to 3.635) could contribute to the increased risk of Omicron infection after adjusting for sex and age. Meanwhile, by contrast with unvaccinated individuals, the result of increased risk was also manifested in the first dose in males (OR = 12.400) and one dose (OR = 21.500), two doses (OR = 1.890), and a booster dose (OR = 1.945) in people aged 18-59. In conclusion, the protective effect of full and booster vaccination with inactivated COVID-19 vaccines exceeded the incomplete vaccination, of which three doses were more effective. Nevertheless, vaccination may increase the risk of Omicron infection compared with unvaccinated people. This may result from the transmission traits of BA.2, the particularity and stronger protection awareness of the unvaccinated population, as well as the ADE effect induced by the decrease of antibody titers after a long time of vaccination. It is crucial to explore this issue in depth for the formulation of future COVID-19 vaccination strategies.

Effects of airway pressure release ventilation on multi-organ injuries in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome pig models.

BACKGROUND: Extra-pulmonary multi-organ failure in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a major cause of high mortality. Our purpose is to assess whether airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) causes more multi-organ damage than low tidal volume ventilation (LTV). METHODS: Twenty one pigs were randomized into control group (n = 3), ARDS group (n = 3), LTV group (n = 8) and APRV group (n = 7). Severe ARDS model was induced by repeated bronchial saline lavages. Pigs were ventilated and monitored continuously for 48 h. Respiratory data, hemodynamic data, serum inflammatory cytokines were collected throughout the study. Histological injury and apoptosis were assessed by two pathologists. RESULTS: After severe ARDS modeling, pigs in ARDS, LTV and APRV groups experienced significant hypoxemia and reduced lung static compliance (Cstat). Oxygenation recovered progressively after 16 h mechanical ventilation (MV) in LTV and APRV group. The results of the repeated measures ANOVA showed no statistical difference in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio between the APRV and LTV groups (p = 0.54). The Cstat showed a considerable improvement in APRV group with statistical significance (p < 0.01), which was significantly higher than in the LTV group since 16 h (p = 0.04). Histological injury scores showed a significantly lower injury score in the middle and lower lobes of the right lung in the APRV group compared to LTV (pmiddle = 0.04, plower = 0.01), and no significant increase in injury scores for extra-pulmonary organs, including kidney (p = 0.10), small intestine (p = 1.0), liver (p = 0.14, p = 0.13) and heart (p = 0.20). There were no significant differences in serum inflammatory cytokines between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, in the experimental pig models of severe ARDS induced by repetitive saline lavage, APRV improved lung compliance with reduced lung injury of middle and lower lobes, and did not demonstrate more extra-pulmonary organ injuries as compared with LTV.

Does airway pressure release ventilation offer new hope for treating acute respiratory distress syndrome?☆

Mechanical ventilation (MV) is an essential life support method for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which is one of the most common critical illnesses with high mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU). A lung-protective ventilation strategy based on low tidal volume (LTV) has been recommended since a few years;however, as this did not result in a significant decrease of ARDS-related mortality, a more optimal ventilation mode was required. Airway pressure release ventilation (APRV) is an old method defined as a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) with a brief intermittent release phase based on the open lung concept;it also perfectly fits the ARDS treatment principle. Despite this, APRV has not been widely used in the past, rather only as a rescue measure for ARDS patients who are difficult to oxygenate. Over recent years, with an increased understanding of the pathophysiology of ARDS, APRV has been reproposed to improve patient prognosis. Nevertheless, this mode is still not routinely used in ARDS patients given its vague definition and complexity. Consequently, in this paper, we summarize the studies that used APRV in ARDS, including adults, children, and animals, to illustrate the settings of parameters, effectiveness in the population, safety (especially in children), incidence, and mechanism of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI) and effects on extrapulmonary organs. Finally, we found that APRV is likely associated with improvement in ARDS outcomes, and does not increase injury to the lungs and other organs, thereby indicating that personalized APRV settings may be the new hope for ARDS treatment.

A Skin‐Like and Highly Stretchable Optical Fiber Sensor with the Hybrid Coding of Wavelength–Light Intensity

Skin‐like electrical sensor has been widely employed for wearable human healthcare monitoring but is limited by electromagnetic interferences, poor waterproof performance, and point‐type measurement. Herein, a skin‐like and stretchable optical fiber (SSOF) sensor with excellent stretchability (up to 100%), flexibility, and excellent compliance with skin is reported. A hybrid coding based on the light intensity difference of two fiber Bragg gratings (FBGs) is created to achieve the resistance for light power fluctuations and the capability of distributed measurement. The SSOF sensor has outstanding durability (>10 000 cycles), waterproofness, and impact resistance. And it can stably work in heat (55 °C) or cold (≈0 °C) environment as well. Furthermore, the SSOF sensor‐based human–computer interaction system is created to achieve the distributed monitoring of physiological parameters and human full‐body movement leading to the enormous potential for virtual reality (VR) and rehabilitation therapy.

A genetic variant in IL-6 lowering its expression is protective for critical patients with COVID-19.

Critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with high mortality and potential genetic factors have been reported to be involved in the development of critical COVID-19. We performed a genome-wide association study to identify the genetic factors responsible for developing critical COVID-19. 632 critical patients with COVID-19 and 3021 healthy controls from the Chinese population were recruited. First, we identified a genome-wide significant difference of IL-6 rs2069837 (p = 9.73 × 10-15, OR = 0.41) between 437 critical patients with COVID-19 and 2551 normal controls in the discovery cohort. When replicated these findings in a set of 195 patients with critical COVID-19 and 470 healthy controls, we detected significant association of rs2069837 with COVID-19 (p = 8.89 × 10-3, OR = 0.67). This variant surpassed the formal threshold for genome-wide significance (combined p = 4.64 × 10-16, OR = 0.49). Further analysis revealed that there was a significantly stronger expression of IL-6 in the serum from patients with critical COVID-19 than in that from patients with asymptomatic COVID-19. An in vitro assay showed that the A to G allele changes in rs2069837 within IL-6 obviously decreased the luciferase expression activity. When analyzing the effect of this variant on the IL-6 in the serum based on the rs2069837 genotype, we found that the A to G variation in rs2069837 decreased the expression of IL-6, especially in the male. Overall, we identified a genetic variant in IL-6 that protects against critical conditions with COVID-19 though decreasing IL-6 expression in the serum.

Efficacy and Safety of SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody JS016 in Hospitalized Chinese Patients with COVID-19: a Phase 2/3, Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label, Controlled Trial.

Recombinant human severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) monoclonal antibody JS016 showed neutralizing and therapeutic effects in preclinical studies. The clinical efficacy and safety of the therapy needed to be evaluated. In this phase 2/3, multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled trial, hospitalized patients with moderate or severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive standard care or standard care plus a single intravenous infusion of JS016. The primary outcome was a six-level ordinal scale of clinical status on day 28 since randomization. Secondary outcomes include adverse events, 28-day mortality, ventilator-free days within 28 days, length of hospital stay, and negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid on day 14. A total of 199 patients were randomized, and 197 (99 in the JS016 group and 98 in the control group) were analyzed. Most patients, 95 (96%) in the JS016 group and 97 (99%) in the control group were in the best category on day 28 since randomization. The odds ratio of being in a better clinical status was 0.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03 to 3.19; P = 0.33). Few adverse events occurred in both groups (3% in the JS016 group and 1% in the control group, respectively; P = 0.34). SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody JS016 did not show clinical efficacy among hospitalized Chinese patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 disease. Further studies are needed to assess the efficacy of the neutralizing antibody to prevent disease deterioration and its benefits among groups of patients specified by disease course and severity. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT04931238.).

Clinical features of 375 COVID-19 cases imported from Russia through the Suifenhe port and countermeasures.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: At present, the focus of the fighting against COVID-19 in China is shifting to strictly prevent the entrance of cases from abroad and disease transmission. Therefore, it is extremely urgent to better understand the clinical features of imported cases from overseas countries, which is conductive to formulate the corresponding countermeasures. This study aimed to describe the clinical features of COVID-19 cases imported from Russia through the Suifenhe port, in order to identify baseline and clinical data associated with disease progression and present corresponding countermeasures. METHODS: All COVID-19 cases imported from Russia through the Suifenhe port were included in this retrospective study. According to the "Diagnosis and Treatment Protocol for Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia (seventh edition)", imported COVID-19 cases were divided into asymptomatic infection, mild, moderate, severe, and critical groups. Baseline and clinical data, including age, gender, comorbidities, disease severity, symptoms at onset, body temperature, white blood cell (WBC) count, lymphocyte (LYMPH) count, lymphocyte percentage (LYM%), C-reactive protein (CRP), oxygenation index (OI), and the use therapeutic modalities were obtained on admission, and then compared between groups. RESULTS: A total of 375 COVID-19 cases imported from Russia through Suifenhe port were included, of whom the asymptomatic infection, mild, moderate, severe, and critical groups accounted for 4.0%, 13.9%, 75.5%, 5.3%, and 1.3%, respectively. The majority of the imported COVID-19 cases were men (61.9%) with a median age of 38.72 years who had no comorbidity (87.7%). Nearly one-third of them (33.1%) were asymptomatic at onset, and common initial symptoms included fever (36.5%), cough (36.0%), pharyngeal discomfort (12.3%), expectoration (8.0%), and chest tightness (5.3%). In total, 180 (48%) and 4 (1.1%) enrolled imported cases received nasal tube oxygen inhalation therapy and high-flow oxygen absorption, respectively; the remaining patients did not undergo oxygen therapy. The values of age, body temperature, WBC, LYMPH, LYM%, CRP, and OI were 38.72 ± 10.50, 35.10 ± 7.92, 5.59 ± 1.97, 1.67 ± 0.68, 31.05 ± 10.22, 8.00 ± 14.75, and 389.03 ± 74.07, respectively. Gender, age, LYMPH, LYM%, symptoms at onset, cough, fever, other rare symptoms, and oxygen therapy showed significant differences between groups (P = 0.036, < 0.001, < 0.001, < 0.001, < 0.001, < 0.001, < 0.001, = 0.045, < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with domestic confirmed patients, COVID-19 patients who arrived at China from Russia through the Suifenhe port had significantly different clinical features, and the differences in gender, age, LYMPH, LYM%, symptoms at onset, cough, fever, other rare symptoms, and oxygen therapy between groups were statistically significant. Therefore, detailed and comprehensive countermeasures were developed to manage and prevent another outbreak based on these clinical features.

Review and classification of AI-enabled COVID-19 CT imaging models based on computer vision tasks.

This article presents a systematic overview of artificial intelligence (AI) and computer vision strategies for diagnosing the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) using computerized tomography (CT) medical images. We analyzed the previous review works and found that all of them ignored classifying and categorizing COVID-19 literature based on computer vision tasks, such as classification, segmentation, and detection. Most of the COVID-19 CT diagnosis methods comprehensively use segmentation and classification tasks. Moreover, most of the review articles are diverse and cover CT as well as X-ray images. Therefore, we focused on the COVID-19 diagnostic methods based on CT images. Well-known search engines and databases such as Google, Google Scholar, Kaggle, Baidu, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Scopus were utilized to collect relevant studies. After deep analysis, we collected 114 studies and reported highly enriched information for each selected research. According to our analysis, AI and computer vision have substantial potential for rapid COVID-19 diagnosis as they could significantly assist in automating the diagnosis process. Accurate and efficient models will have real-time clinical implications, though further research is still required. Categorization of literature based on computer vision tasks could be helpful for future research; therefore, this review article will provide a good foundation for conducting such research.

Severe Adaptive Immune Suppression May Be Why Patients With Severe COVID-19 Cannot Be Discharged From the ICU Even After Negative Viral Tests.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a phenomenon emerged in which some patients with severe disease were critically ill and could not be discharged from the ICU even though they exhibited negative viral tests. To explore the underlying mechanism, we collected blood samples from these patients and analyzed the gene expression profiles of peripheral immune cells. We found that all enrolled patients, regardless of changes in genes related to different symptoms and inflammatory responses, showed universally and severely decreased expression of adaptive immunity-related genes, especially those related to T/B cell arms and HLA molecules, and that these patients exhibited long-term secondary infections. In addition, no significant change was found in the expression of classic immunosuppression molecules including PD-1, PD-L1, and CTLA-4, suggesting that the adaptive immune suppression may not be due to the change of these genes. According to the published literatures and our data, this adaptive immunosuppression is likely to be caused by the "dysregulated host response" to severe infection, similar to the immunosuppression that exists in other severely infected patients with sepsis.

Severe Patients With ARDS With COVID-19 Treated With Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in China: A Retrospective Study.

Background: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become a global health crisis affecting over 200 countries worldwide. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been increasingly used in the management of COVID-19-associated end-stage respiratory failure. However, the exact effect of ECMO in the management of these patients, especially with regards to complications and mortality, is unclear. Methods: This is the largest retrospective study of ECMO treated COVID-19 patients in China. A total of 50 ECMO-treated COVID-19 patients were recruited. We describe the main characteristics, the clinical features, ventilator parameters, ECMO-related variables and management details, and complications and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) that required ECMO support. Results: For those patients with ECMO support, 21 patients survived and 29 died (mortality rate: 58.0%). Among those who survived, PaO2 (66.3 mmHg [59.5-74.0 mmHg] and PaO2/FiO2 (68.0 mmHg [61.0-76.0 mmHg]) were higher in the survivors than those of non-survivors (PaO2: 56.8 mmHg (49.0-65.0 mmHg), PaO2/FiO2 (58.2 mmHg (49.0-68.0 mmHg), all P < 0.01) prior to ECMO. Patients who achieved negative fluid balance in the early resuscitation phase (within 3 days) had a higher survival rate than those who did not (P = 0.0003). Conclusions: In this study of 50 cases of ECMO-treated COVID-19 patients, a low PO2/FIO2 ratio before ECMO commencement may indicate a poor prognosis. Negative fluid balance in the early resuscitation phase during ECMO treatment was a predictor of increased survival post-ECMO treatment.

Retrospective Study of Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients With and Without Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support in Wuhan, China.

Background: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) might benefit critically ill COVID-19 patients. But the considerations besides indications guiding ECMO initiation under extreme pressure during the COVID-19 epidemic was not clear. We aimed to analyze the clinical characteristics and in-hospital mortality of severe critically ill COVID-19 patients supported with ECMO and without ECMO, exploring potential parameters for guiding the initiation during the COVID-19 epidemic. Methods: Observational cohort study of all the critically ill patients indicated for ECMO support from January 1 to May 1, 2020, in all 62 authorized hospitals in Wuhan, China. Results: Among the 168 patients enrolled, 74 patients actually received ECMO support and 94 not were analyzed. The in-hospital mortality of the ECMO supported patients was significantly lower than non-ECMO ones (71.6 vs. 85.1%, P = 0.033), but the role of ECMO was affected by patients' age (Logistic regression OR 0.62, P = 0.24). As for the ECMO patients, the median age was 58 (47-66) years old and 62.2% (46/74) were male. The 28-day, 60-day, and 90-day mortality of these ECMO supported patients were 32.4, 68.9, and 74.3% respectively. Patients survived to discharge were younger (49 vs. 62 years, P = 0.042), demonstrated higher lymphocyte count (886 vs. 638 cells/uL, P = 0.022), and better CO2 removal (PaCO2 immediately after ECMO initiation 39.7 vs. 46.9 mmHg, P = 0.041). Age was an independent risk factor for in-hospital mortality of the ECMO supported patients, and a cutoff age of 51 years enabled prediction of in-hospital mortality with a sensitivity of 84.3% and specificity of 55%. The surviving ECMO supported patients had longer ICU and hospital stays (26 vs. 18 days, P = 0.018; 49 vs. 29 days, P = 0.001 respectively), and ECMO procedure was widely carried out after the supplement of medical resources after February 15 (67.6%, 50/74). Conclusions: ECMO might be a benefit for severe critically ill COVID-19 patients at the early stage of epidemic, although the in-hospital mortality was still high. To initiate ECMO therapy under tremendous pressure, patients' age, lymphocyte count, and adequacy of medical resources should be fully considered.

Association between glucocorticoids treatment and viral clearance delay in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence of glucocorticoids on viral clearance delay of COVID-19 patients is not clear. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched for studies on Medline, Embase, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 2019 to April 20, 2021. We mainly pooled the risk ratios (RRs) and mean difference (MD) for viral clearance delay and did subgroup analyses by the severity of illness and doses of glucocorticoids. RESULTS: 38 studies with a total of 9572 patients were identified. Glucocorticoids treatment was associated with delayed viral clearance in COVID-19 patients (adjusted RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.80, I2 = 52%), based on moderate-quality evidence. In subgroup analyses, risk of viral clearance delay was significant both for COVID-19 patients being mild or moderate ill (adjusted RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.57, I2 = 48%), and for patients of being severe or critical ill (adjusted RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.07, I2 = 0%); however, this risk significantly increased for patients taking high doses (unadjusted RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.08 to 3.18; MD 7.19, 95% CI 2.78 to 11.61) or medium doses (adjusted RR 1.86, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.62, I2 = 45%; MD 3.98, 95% CI 3.07 to 4.88, I2 = 4%), rather those taking low doses (adjusted RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.02, I2 = 59%; MD 1.46, 95% CI -0.79 to 3.70, I2 = 82%). CONCLUSIONS: Glucocorticoids treatment delayed viral clearance in COVID-19 patients of taking high doses or medium doses, rather in those of taking low doses of glucocorticoids.

Hypophosphatemia at Admission is Associated with Increased Mortality in COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Electrolyte disturbances are commonly observed in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and associated with outcome in these patients. Our study was designed to examine whether hypophosphatemia is associated with mortality in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and hospitalized in Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University between January 30 and February 24, 2020 were included in this study. Patients were divided into two groups, a hypophosphatemia group and a non-hypophosphatemia group, based on a serum phosphate level of 0.8 mmol/L. Logistic regression was performed to analyze the relationship between hypophosphatemia and mortality. A locally weighted scatterplot smoothing (LOWESS) curve was plotted to show the detailed association between mortality rate and serum phosphate level. A Kaplan-Meier survival curve was drawn to compare the difference in cumulative survival between the two groups. RESULTS: Hypophosphatemia at admission occurred in 33 patients, with an incidence of 7.6%. The hypophosphatemia group had a significantly higher incidence of respiratory failure (54.5% vs 32.6%, p=0.013) and mortality (57.6% vs 15.2%, p<0.001). Multivariate logistic regression indicated that age (OR=1.059, p<0.001), oxygen saturation (OR=0.733, p<0.001), white blood cells (OR=1.428, p<0.001), lymphocytes (OR=0.075, p<0.001) and hypophosphatemia (OR=3.636, p=0.015) were independently associated with mortality in the included patients. The hypophosphatemia group had significantly shorter survival than the non-hypophosphatemia group (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Hypophosphatemia at admission is associated with increased mortality in COVID-19 patients. More attention and medical care should be given to COVID-19 patients with hypophosphatemia at admission.

The neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio is an independent predictor for severe COVID-19 : Evidence from a multicenter case-control study and meta-analyses.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine whether the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) can predict severe Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicenter case-control study was conducted to investigate whether the NLR can help predict the severity of COVID-19. Patients confirmed to have COVID-19 between 16 January 2020 and 15 March 2020 were enrolled. Furthermore, meta-analyses were conducted based on both previous studies and our case-control study. RESULTS: In the case-control study, 213 patients (severe: 81) were included. The results suggested that the NLR was an independent risk factor (odds ratio [OR], 1.155, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.043-1.279, P = 0.006) and a great predictor (the area under the ROC curve was 0.728, 95% CI: 0.656-0.800) for severe COVID-19. In total, 18 datasets from 16 studies combined with our case-control study (severe: 1211; non-severe: 5838) were included in the meta-analyses and the results showed that the NLR of the severe COVID-19 group was significantly higher than that of the non-severe group (SMD = 1.10, 95% CI: 0.90-1.31, P < 0.001). Based on the 2â€¯× 2 data from 6 studies, the SROC of NLR for predicting severe COVID-19 was 0.802, with a sensitivity of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.61-0.72) and a specificity of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.73-0.78). CONCLUSION: Based on a multicenter case-control study and a meta-analysis, we found that the initial NLR was a great predictor of severe COVID-19.

[The role of respiratory therapists in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 patients in China].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical practice of Chinese respiratory therapists (RTs) participating in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and summarize the experience and role of RTs in the treatment of pandemic infectious diseases. METHODS: A self-designed questionnaire was used to investigate the RTs who treated COVID-19 patients in 31 provinces, cities and autonomous regions in China. The survey questionnaire included the basic work of RTs, the specific work of the treatment for COVID-19 patients and problems encountered at work. RESULTS: A total of 126 questionnaires were issued and 40 valid questionnaires were collected from RTs who treated COVID-19 patients at 22 COVID-19 designated hospitals in 8 provinces and municipalities. This included 7 hospitals in Wuhan, the epicenter of the epidemic. In their medical team, RTs accounted for 2.9% (1.5%, 6.7%) of medical staff, the working experience of the RTs was about (6.2±5.4) years, the ratio of RTs to beds was about 1:11 (1:5, 1:26), and 85.0% (34/40) of RTs were transferred from other hospitals. 97.5% (39/40) of RTs were involved in formulating individual respiratory care strategies in their medical teams, and they were all involved in the evaluation of respiratory care and decision-making as well as the early identification of deterioration of respiratory function. All RTs [100% (40/40)] indicated that they would actively monitor patients' respiratory status, increase the means and frequency of the monitoring, implement standardized oxygen therapy, prevent ventilator-associated lung injury (VALI), and standardize the management of artificial airway. However, less than 50% of RTs had carried out stress and strain, transpulmonary pressure, partial pressure of end-tidal carbon dioxide (PetCO2), end-expiratory lung volume, electrical impedance tomography (EIT) and other respiratory function monitoring. 85% of RTs conducted training and education related to respiratory care and formulated relevant standard operating procedures for their medical teams. More than 90% of RTs led the implementation of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNC), pulmonary protective mechanical ventilation, prone ventilation, pulmonary rehabilitation, airway management, transfer of critical patients, and other respiratory treatment. CONCLUSIONS: RTs performed their professional role fully in the assessment, decision-making, and clinical practice in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. However, the manpower shortage of RTs is extremely prominent, the practical experience has provided the basis for the future treatment of infectious respiratory diseases and effectively promoted the development of respiratory care in China.

Comparison of Associations Between Glucocorticoids Treatment and Mortality in COVID-19 Patients and SARS Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The response to glucocorticoids treatment may be different between coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched studies on Medline, Embase, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from 2002 to October 7, 2020. We used fixed-effects and random-effects models to compute the risk ratio of death in the group receiving glucocorticoids treatment and the control group for COVID-19 and SARS, respectively. RESULTS: Ten trials and 71 observational studies, with a total of 45,935 patients, were identified. Glucocorticoids treatment was associated with decreased all-cause mortality both in COVID-19 (risk ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.94; I2 = 26%) and SARS (0.48; 0.29-0.79; 10%), based on high-quality evidence, as well as decreased all-cause mortality-including composite outcome of COVID-19 (0.89; 0.82-0.98; 0%). In subgroup analyses, all-cause mortality was significantly lower among COVID-19 patients being accompanied by severe ARDS but not mild ARDS, taking low-dose or pulse glucocorticoids, being critically severe but not only severe, being of critical severity and old but not young, being of critical severity and men but not women, non-early taking glucocorticoids, taking dexamethasone or methylprednisolone, and with the increased inflammatory state; but for SARS, lower mortality was observed among those who were taking medium-high dose glucocorticoids, being severe or critically severe, early taking glucocorticoids, and taking methylprednisolone or prednisolone. CONCLUSIONS: Glucocorticoids treatment reduced mortality in COVID-19 and SARS patients of critical severity; however, different curative effects existed between the two diseases among subpopulations, mainly regarding sex- and age-specific effects, optimal doses, and use timing of glucocorticoids.