Prone Positioning: A Safe and Effective Procedure in Pregnant Women Presenting with Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Prone positioning (PP) improves oxygenation and survival in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Data regarding feasibility and effectiveness of PP in pregnancy are lacking. This subgroup analysis of a cohort study that included mechanically ventilated pregnant women presenting with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-induced ARDS who underwent PP aims to assess the efficacy and safety of PP. Ventilatory and gasometric parameters were evaluated at baseline (T0) and in prone (T1) and supine (T2) positions. Obstetric outcomes were also assessed. Sixteen cases at an average of 27.0 (22.0−31.1) gestational weeks of pregnancy were included. Obesity and hypertension were frequent comorbidities. PP was associated with a >20% increase in PaO2 levels and in PaO2/FiO2 ratios in 50% and 100% of cases, respectively. The PaO2/FiO2 ratio increased 76.7% (20.5−292.4%) at T1 and 76.9% (0−182.7%) at T2. PP produced sustained improvements in mean PaO2/FiO2 ratio (p < 0.001) and PaCO2 level (p = 0.028). There were no cases of emergency delivery or suspected fetal distress in pregnancies ≥25 weeks during the 24 h period following PP. PP is safe and feasible during pregnancy, improving PaO2/FiO2 ratios and helping to delay preterm delivery in severe ARDS.

Stress and substance abuse among workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in an intensive care unit: A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: Professionals working in intensive care units (ICUs) during the COVID-19 pandemic have been exposed to stressful situations and increased workload. The association between symptoms of traumatic stress disorders, substance abuse and personal/occupational characteristics of Brazilian COVID-19-ICU workers is still to be addressed. Our aim was to evaluate the prevalence of those conditions and to find if those associations exist. METHODS: In this observational, single-center, cross-sectional study, all professionals working in a COVID-19 ICU were invited to fill an anonymous form containing screening tools for traumatic stress disorders and substance abuse, and a section with questions regarding personal and occupational information. RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-six ICU professionals participated. Direct exposure to patients infected by COVID-19, history of relatives infected by COVID-19, and sex (female) were significantly associated with signs and symptoms of traumatic stress disorders. 76.5% of the participants had scores compatible with a diagnosis of traumatic stress disorders. Moreover, the prevalence of scores suggestive of Tobacco and Alcohol abuse were 11.7% and 24.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION: ICU workers had significantly elevated scores on both screening forms. Providing psycho-social support to ICU professionals may prevent future problems with traumatic stress disorders or substance abuse.

A Novel Noninvasive Technique for Intracranial Pressure Waveform Monitoring in Critical Care.

BACKGROUND: We validated a new noninvasive tool (B4C) to assess intracranial pressure waveform (ICPW) morphology in a set of neurocritical patients, correlating the data with ICPW obtained from invasive catheter monitoring. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing invasive intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring were consecutively evaluated using the B4C sensor. Ultrasound-guided manual internal jugular vein (IJV) compression was performed to elevate ICP from the baseline. ICP values, amplitudes, and time intervals (P2/P1 ratio and time-to-peak [TTP]) between the ICP and B4C waveform peaks were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 41 patients, the main causes for ICP monitoring included traumatic brain injury, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and stroke. Bland-Altman's plot indicated agreement between the ICPW parameters obtained using both techniques. The strongest Pearson's correlation for P2/P1 and TTP was observed among patients with no cranial damage (r = 0.72 and 0.85, respectively) to the detriment of those who have undergone craniotomies or craniectomies. P2/P1 values of 1 were equivalent between the two techniques (area under the receiver operator curve [AUROC], 0.9) whereas B4C cut-off 1.2 was predictive of intracranial hypertension (AUROC 0.9, p < 000.1 for ICP > 20 mmHg). CONCLUSION: B4C provided biometric amplitude ratios correlated with ICPW variation morphology and is useful for noninvasive critical care monitoring.

Cerebral Hemodynamics and Intracranial Compliance Impairment in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Pilot Study.

Introduction: One of the possible mechanisms by which the new coronavirus (SARS-Cov2) could induce brain damage is the impairment of cerebrovascular hemodynamics (CVH) and intracranial compliance (ICC) due to the elevation of intracranial pressure (ICP). The main objective of this study was to assess the presence of CVH and ICC alterations in patients with COVID-19 and evaluate their association with short-term clinical outcomes. Methods: Fifty consecutive critically ill COVID-19 patients were studied with transcranial Doppler (TCD) and non-invasive monitoring of ICC. Subjects were included upon ICU admission; CVH was evaluated using mean flow velocities in the middle cerebral arteries (mCBFV), pulsatility index (PI), and estimated cerebral perfusion pressure (eCPP), while ICC was assessed by using the P2/P1 ratio of the non-invasive ICP curve. A CVH/ICC score was computed using all these variables. The primary composite outcome was unsuccessful in weaning from respiratory support or death on day 7 (defined as UO). Results: At the first assessment (n = 50), only the P2/P1 ratio (median 1.20 [IQRs 1.00-1.28] vs. 1.00 [0.88-1.16]; p = 0.03) and eICP (14 [11-25] vs. 11 [7-15] mmHg; p = 0.01) were significantly higher among patients with an unfavorable outcome (UO) than others. Patients with UO had a significantly higher CVH/ICC score (9 [8-12] vs. 6 [5-7]; p < 0.001) than those with a favorable outcome; the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) for CVH/ICC score to predict UO was 0.86 (95% CIs 0.75-0.97); a score > 8.5 had 63 (46-77)% sensitivity and 87 (62-97)% specificity to predict UO. For those patients undergoing a second assessment (n = 29), after a median of 11 (5-31) days, all measured variables were similar between the two time-points. No differences in the measured variables between ICU non-survivors (n = 30) and survivors were observed. Conclusions: ICC impairment and CVH disturbances are often present in COVID-19 severe illness and could accurately predict an early poor outcome.

Protective ventilation and outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 5% of COVID-19 patients develop respiratory failure and need ventilatory support, yet little is known about the impact of mechanical ventilation strategy in COVID-19. Our objective was to describe baseline characteristics, ventilatory parameters, and outcomes of critically ill patients in the largest referral center for COVID-19 in Sao Paulo, Brazil, during the first surge of the pandemic. METHODS: This cohort included COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs) of an academic hospital with 94 ICU beds, a number expanded to 300 during the pandemic as part of a state preparedness plan. Data included demographics, advanced life support therapies, and ventilator parameters. The main outcome was 28-day survival. We used a multivariate Cox model to test the association between protective ventilation and survival, adjusting for PF ratio, pH, compliance, and PEEP. RESULTS: We included 1503 patients from March 30 to June 30, 2020. The mean age was 60 ± 15 years, and 59% were male. During 28-day follow-up, 1180 (79%) patients needed invasive ventilation and 666 (44%) died. For the 984 patients who were receiving mechanical ventilation in the first 24 h of ICU stay, mean tidal volume was 6.5 ± 1.3 mL/kg of ideal body weight, plateau pressure was 24 ± 5 cmH2O, respiratory system compliance was 31.9 (24.4-40.9) mL/cmH2O, and 82% of patients were ventilated with protective ventilation. Noninvasive ventilation was used in 21% of patients, and prone, in 36%. Compliance was associated with survival and did not show a bimodal pattern that would support the presence of two phenotypes. In the multivariable model, protective ventilation (aHR 0.73 [95%CI 0.57-0.94]), adjusted for PF ratio, compliance, PEEP, and arterial pH, was independently associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: During the peak of the epidemic in Sao Paulo, critically ill patients with COVID-19 often required mechanical ventilation and mortality was high. Our findings revealed an association between mechanical ventilation strategy and mortality, highlighting the importance of protective ventilation for patients with COVID-19.