Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 18(1): e0280502, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2214802

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with COVID-19 and severe acute respiratory failure may require veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO). Yet, this procedure is resource-intensive and high mortality rates have been reported. Thus, predictors for identifying patients who will benefit from VV ECMO would be helpful. METHODS: This retrospective study included 129 patients with COVID-19 and severe acute respiratory failure, who had received VV ECMO at the University Medical Center Regensburg, Germany, between 1 March 2020 and 31 December 2021. Patient-specific factors and relevant intensive-care parameters at the time of the decision to start VV ECMO were investigated regarding their value as predictors of patient survival. In addition, the intensive-care course of the first 10 days of VV ECMO was compared between survivors and patients who had died in the intensive care unit. RESULTS: The most important parameters for predicting outcome were patient age and platelet count, which differed significantly between survivors and non-survivors (age: 52.6±8.1 vs. 57.4±10.1 years, p<0.001; platelet count before VV ECMO: 321.3±132.2 vs. 262.0±121.0 /nL, p = 0.006; average on day 10: 199.2±88.0 vs. 147.1±57.9 /nL, p = 0.002). A linear regression model derived from parameters collected before the start of VV ECMO only included age and platelet count. Patients were divided into two groups by using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis: group 1: 78% of patients, mortality 26%; group 2: 22% of patients, mortality 75%. A second linear regression model included average blood pH, minimum paO2, and average pump flow on day 10 of VV ECMO in addition to age and platelet count. The ROC curve resulted in two cut-off values and thus in three groups: group 1: 25% of patients, mortality 93%; group 2: 45% of patients, mortality 31%; group 3: 30% of patients, mortality 0%.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Respiratory Insufficiency , Humans , Adult , Middle Aged , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy
2.
PLoS One ; 17(5): e0268734, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1865344

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In a previous study, we had investigated the intensive care course of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the first wave in Germany by calculating models for prognosticating in-hospital death with univariable and multivariable regression analysis. This study analyzed if these models were also applicable to patients with COVID-19 in the second wave. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 98 critical care patients with COVID-19, who had been treated at the University Medical Center Regensburg, Germany, between October 2020 and February 2021. Data collected for each patient included vital signs, dosage of catecholamines, analgosedation, anticoagulation, and antithrombotic medication, diagnostic blood tests, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), intensive care scores, ventilator therapy, and pulmonary gas exchange. Using these data, expected mortality was calculated by means of the originally developed mathematical models, thereby testing the models for their applicability to patients in the second wave. RESULTS: Mortality in the second-wave cohort did not significantly differ from that in the first-wave cohort (41.8% vs. 32.2%, p = 0.151). As in our previous study, individual parameters such as pH of blood or mean arterial pressure (MAP) differed significantly between survivors and non-survivors. In contrast to our previous study, however, survivors and non-survivors in this study showed significant or even highly significant differences in pulmonary gas exchange and ventilator therapy (e.g. mean and minimum values for oxygen saturation and partial pressure of oxygen, mean values for the fraction of inspired oxygen, positive expiratory pressure, tidal volume, and oxygenation ratio). ECMO therapy was more frequently administered than in the first-wave cohort. Calculations of expected mortality by means of the originally developed univariable and multivariable models showed that the use of simple cut-off values for pH, MAP, troponin, or combinations of these parameters resulted in correctly estimated outcome in approximately 75% of patients without ECMO therapy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals, University , Humans , Oxygen , Retrospective Studies
3.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0258018, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1443853

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Data of critically ill COVID-19 patients are being evaluated worldwide, not only to understand the various aspects of the disease and to refine treatment strategies but also to improve clinical decision-making. For clinical decision-making in particular, prognostic factors of a lethal course of the disease would be highly relevant. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed the first 59 adult critically ill Covid-19 patients treated in one of the intensive care units of the University Medical Center Regensburg, Germany. Using uni- and multivariable regression models, we extracted a set of parameters that allowed for prognosing in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Within the cohort, 19 patients died (mortality 32.2%). Blood pH value, mean arterial pressure, base excess, troponin, and procalcitonin were identified as highly significant prognostic factors of in-hospital mortality. However, no significant differences were found for other parameters expected to be relevant prognostic factors, like low arterial partial pressure of oxygen or high lactate levels. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, the pH value and the mean arterial pressure turned out to be the most influential prognostic factors for a lethal course.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/mortality , Adult , Aged , Arterial Pressure/physiology , Blood Physiological Phenomena , Blood Pressure/physiology , Cohort Studies , Critical Illness/mortality , Female , Germany/epidemiology , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Hydrogen-Ion Concentration , Intensive Care Units/trends , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality/trends , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL