Outcomes in patients discharged with extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after hospitalization with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a known complication of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in patients requiring hospitalization and intensive care. We examined the association between extended pharmacological VTE prophylaxis and outcomes among patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with an index positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test at the time of, or during hospitalization. Patients who were prescribed extended pharmacological VTE prophylaxis were compared against patients who were not. Multivariable logistic regression was used to produce odds ratio (OR) estimates and Cox proportional hazard models for hazard ratios (HR) with 95% CI to examine the association between pharmacological VTE prophylaxis and outcomes of interest. Primary outcomes were 30- and 90-day VTE events. Secondary outcomes included 30- and 90-day mortality, 30-day superficial venous thrombosis (SVT), acute myocardial infarction (MI), acute ischemic stroke, critical limb ischemia, clinically significant bleeding, and inpatient readmissions. RESULTS: A total of 1936 patients were included in the study. Among them, 731 (38%) were discharged on extended pharmacological VTE prophylaxis. No significant difference was found in 30- and 90-day VTE events among groups. Patients discharged on extended VTE prophylaxis showed improved survival at 30 (HR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.21-0.59) and 90 days (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.23-0.55) and reduced inpatient readmission at 30 days (OR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.04-0.33) when compared to those without. CONCLUSION: Patients discharged on extended VTE prophylaxis after hospitalization due to COVID-19 had similar thrombotic events on follow-up. However, use of extended VTE prophylaxis was associated with improved 30- and 90-day survival and reduced risk of 30-day inpatient readmission.

Discharge Disposition and Loss of Independence Among Survivors of COVID-19 Admitted to Intensive Care: Results From the SCCM Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS).

OBJECTIVES: To describe incidence and risk factors of loss of previous independent living through nonhome discharge or discharge home with health assistance in survivors of intensive care unit (ICU) admission for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). DESIGN: Multicenter observational study including patients admitted to the ICU from January 2020 till June 30, 2021. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that there is a high risk of nonhome discharge in patients surviving ICU admission due to COVID-19. SETTING: Data were included from 306 hospitals in 28 countries participating in the SCCM Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study COVID-19 registry. PATIENTS: Previously independently living adult ICU survivors of COVID-19. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was nonhome discharge. Secondary outcome was the requirement of health assistance among patients who were discharged home. Out of 10 820 patients, 7101 (66%) were discharged alive; 3791 (53%) of these survivors lost their previous independent living status, out of those 2071 (29%) through nonhome discharge, and 1720 (24%) through discharge home requiring health assistance. In adjusted analyses, loss of independence on discharge among survivors was predicted by patient age ≥ 65 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.47-3.14, P < .0001), former and current smoking status (aOR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08-1.46, P = .003 and 1.60 (95% CI 1.18-2.16), P = .003, respectively), substance use disorder (aOR 1.52, 95% CI 1.12-2.06, P = .007), requirement for mechanical ventilation (aOR 4.17, 95% CI 3.69-4.71, P < .0001), prone positioning (aOR 1.19, 95% CI 1.03-1.38, P = .02), and requirement for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (aOR 2.28, 95% CI 1.55-3.34, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: More than half of ICU survivors hospitalized for COVID-19 are unable to return to independent living status, thereby imposing a significant secondary strain on health care systems worldwide.

Challenges in hyperglycemia management in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Hyperglycemia is commonly associated with adverse outcomes especially in patients requiring intensive care unit stay. Data from the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic indicates that individuals with diabetes appear to be at similar risk for COVID-19 infection to those without diabetes but are more likely to experience increased morbidity and mortality. The proposed hypothesis for hyperglycemia in COVID-19 include insulin resistance, critical illness hyperglycemia (stress- induced hyperglycemia) secondary to high levels of hormones like cortisol and catecholamines that counteract insulin action, acute cytokine storm and pancreatic cell dysfunction. Diabetic patients are more likely to have severe hyperglycemic complications including diabetic ketoacidosis and hyperosmolar hyperglycemic state. Management of hyperglycemia in COVID-19 is often complicated by use of steroids, prolonged total parenteral or enteral nutrition, frequent acute hyperglycemic events, and restrictions with fluid management due to acute respiratory distress syndrome. While managing hyperglycemia special attention should be paid to mode of insulin delivery, frequency of glucose monitoring based on patient and caregiver safety thereby minimizing exposure and conserving personal protective equipment. In this article we describe the pathophysiology of hyperglycemia, challenges encountered in managing hyperglycemia, and review some potential solutions to address them.

Palliative care consultation and end-of-life outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

RATIONALE: The impact of palliative care consultation on end-of-life care has not previously been evaluated in a multi-center study. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of palliative care consultation on the incidence of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed and comfort care received at the end-of-life in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We used the Society of Critical Care Medicine's COVID-19 registry to extract clinical data on patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 31st, 2020 to March 17th, 2021 and died during their hospitalization. The proportion of patients who received palliative care consultation was assessed in patients who did and did not receive CPR (primary outcome) and comfort care (secondary outcome). Propensity matching was used to account for potential confounding variables. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: 3,227 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in the incidence of palliative care consultation between the CPR and no-CPR groups (19.9% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.8334). Patients who received comfort care at the end-of-life were significantly more likely to have received palliative care consultation (43.3% vs. 7.7%, p < 0.0001). After propensity matching for comfort care on demographic characteristics and comorbidities, this relationship was still significant (43.2% vs. 8.5%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Palliative care consultation was not associated with CPR performed at the end-of-life but was associated with increased incidence of comfort care being utilized. These results suggest that utilizing palliative care consultation at the end-of-life may better align the needs and values of patients with the care they receive.

COVID-19 and venous thromboembolism: Known and unknown for imaging decisions.

As we continue to fight against the current coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, healthcare professionals across the globe are trying to answer questions surrounding how to best help patients with the up-to-date available science while awaiting the development of new therapies and mass vaccination. Since early in the pandemic, studies indicated a heightened risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in COVID-19 infected patients. There have been differing expert opinions about how to assess pretest probability of VTE in this patient population. This has been partly due to the high prevalence of respiratory failure in this patient population and the use of D-dimer as a prognostic test which is also frequently elevated in patients with COVID-19 in absence of VTE. Some experts have argued for an approach similar to usual care with testing if clinical suspicion is high enough. Some have argued for more routine screening at different points of care. Others have even suggested empiric therapeutic anti-coagulation in moderate to severely ill COVID-19 patients. In the following article, we review and summarize the most current literature in hopes of assisting clinicians in decision making and guidance for when to be concerned for VTE in COVID-19 patients. We also discuss research gaps and share pathways currently being used within our institution.

Risk and Management of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: One of the most pronounced and poorly understood pathological features of COVID-19 infection has been high risk for venous and arterial thromboembolic complications. An increasing number of thromboembolic events are being reported almost on a daily basis, and the medical community has struggled to predict and mitigate this risk. We aimed to review available literature on the risk and management of COVID-19 related venous thromboembolism (VTE), and provide evidence-based guidance to manage these events. METHODS: A literature review of VTE complications in patients with COVID-19 was performed, in addition to a summary of the societal guidelines and present pathways implemented at our institution for the management of both in- and outpatient COVID-19 related VTE. RESULTS: Although a significant VTE risk has been confirmed in patients with COVID-19, literature addressing best ways to mitigate this risk is lacking. Furthermore, there has been very limited guidance provided by societal guidelines to help prevent and manage VTE associated with the COVID-19 infection. In light of the available data, we advise that all patients admitted with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 receive pharmacological prophylaxis if bleeding risk is acceptable. For patients with COVID-19 who have been discharged from the emergency department or hospital, we suggest extended thromboprophylaxis (up to 39 days) as long as bleeding risk is low. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that this literature summary along with our center recommendations and algorithms provide valuable guidance to providers caring for patients with COVID-19 related VTE. More research is needed to standardize prophylaxis and management protocols for these patients.

Current role of imaging in COVID-19 infection with recent recommendations of point of care ultrasound in the contagion: a narrative review.

Radiological studies have an important role in the diagnosis and follow up of many infectious diseases. With current pandemic of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) though the molecular analysis with reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) remains the cornerstone of diagnosis, the critical role of chest imaging including CT scan and baseline X-ray became apparent early in the course due to concern for less than optimal sensitivity of PCR testing. Delay in molecular diagnosis due to a shortage of testing kits and laboratory personnel also makes imaging an important modality in early diagnosis for appropriate triage and isolation decisions. CT scan technology is widely available in developed parts of the world but in developing countries, CT scanner is not widely available especially in rural settings. CT imaging usually requires patient movement to the radiology department and the scanner is not easy to disinfect. Point of care ultrasound (POCUS) has been used for many years in the assessment of critically ill patients in emergency departments and intensive care units. It is rapidly gaining popularity across many specialties and part of many general medicine training programs across the United States. It can be learned rapidly and with experienced hands, POCUS can help identify disease patterns in the lung parenchyma, and during the current pandemic has been gaining special attention. In this article, we review the most prominent imaging findings on chest X-ray and CT scan in patients with COVID-19. We also focus on the background and evolution of POCUS with studies showing the promising role of this diagnostic modality in COVID-19 infection. In addition, we describe step by step guidance on the use and disinfection of the portable ultrasound machine.

Review of X-ray and computed tomography scan findings with a promising role of point of care ultrasound in COVID-19 pandemic.

As healthcare professionals continue to combat the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection worldwide, there is an increasing interest in the role of imaging and the relevance of various modalities. Since imaging not only helps assess the disease at the time of diagnosis but also aids evaluation of response to management, it is critical to examine the role of different modalities currently in use, such as baseline X-rays and computed tomography scans carefully. In this article, we will draw attention to the critical findings for the radiologist. Further, we will look at point of care ultrasound, an increasingly a popular tool in diagnostic medicine, as a component of COVID-19 management.