Femorally inserted central catheters with exit site at mid-thigh: A low risk alternative for central venous catheterization.

BACKGROUND: Femorally inserted central catheters are increasingly used, especially after the COVID-19 pandemic, also thanks to widespread of tunneling techniques that allow the exit site to be moved away from the groin. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, femorally inserted catheters, with exit site at mid-thigh and the tip in Inferior vena cava or in Inferior vena cava at the junction with right atrium, have been observed and complications have been analyzed. All catheters were inserted by trained Nurses of a tertiary hospital Vascular Access Team. RESULTS: In 142 catheters (126 inserted via common femoral vein and 16 inserted via superficial femoral vein) and 3060 catheter days, we observed an infection rate of 1.3 events/1000 catheter days (all of them in oncologic patients and up to 30 days of catheterization), 2 cases of thrombotic events (1.41%) and 17 cases of accidental removal (11.97%). Other rare complications, as primary malposition, tip migration, arterial pseudoaneurysm, have been recorded. The average length of catheters inserted, from the exit site to the tip, was 47.6 ± 2.4 cm. CONCLUSION: The attention to the correct position of the tip, the exit site at mid-thigh and the new techniques during insertion make these femoral catheters as safe as other central vascular access devices. For this kind of central access device, a catheter at least 50 cm long is needed.

Sigh in Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure and ARDS: The PROTECTION Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Sigh is a cyclic brief recruitment maneuver: previous physiologic studies showed that its use could be an interesting addition to pressure support ventilation to improve lung elastance, decrease regional heterogeneity, and increase release of surfactant. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is the clinical application of sigh during pressure support ventilation (PSV) feasible? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter noninferiority randomized clinical trial on adult intubated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure or ARDS undergoing PSV. Patients were randomized to the no-sigh group and treated by PSV alone, or to the sigh group, treated by PSV plus sigh (increase in airway pressure to 30 cm H2O for 3 s once per minute) until day 28 or death or successful spontaneous breathing trial. The primary end point of the study was feasibility, assessed as noninferiority (5% tolerance) in the proportion of patients failing assisted ventilation. Secondary outcomes included safety, physiologic parameters in the first week from randomization, 28-day mortality, and ventilator-free days. RESULTS: Two-hundred and fifty-eight patients (31% women; median age, 65 [54-75] years) were enrolled. In the sigh group, 23% of patients failed to remain on assisted ventilation vs 30% in the no-sigh group (absolute difference, -7%; 95% CI, -18% to 4%; P = .015 for noninferiority). Adverse events occurred in 12% vs 13% in the sigh vs no-sigh group (P = .852). Oxygenation was improved whereas tidal volume, respiratory rate, and corrected minute ventilation were lower over the first 7 days from randomization in the sigh vs no-sigh group. There was no significant difference in terms of mortality (16% vs 21%; P = .337) and ventilator-free days (22 [7-26] vs 22 [3-25] days; P = .300) for the sigh vs no-sigh group. INTERPRETATION: Among hypoxemic intubated ICU patients, application of sigh was feasible and without increased risk. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03201263; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Remdesivir Use in Patients Requiring Mechanical Ventilation due to COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir has been associated with accelerated recovery of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, whether it is also beneficial in patients requiring mechanical ventilation is uncertain. METHODS: All consecutive intensive care unit (ICU) patients requiring mechanical ventilation due to COVID-19 were enrolled. Univariate and multivariable Cox models were used to explore the possible association between in-hospital death or hospital discharge, considered competing-risk events, and baseline or treatment-related factors, including the use of remdesivir. The rate of extubation and the number of ventilator-free days were also calculated and compared between treatment groups. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen patients requiring mechanical ventilation were observed for a median of 31 days of follow-up; 32% died, 69% were extubated, and 66% were discharged alive from the hospital. Among 33 treated with remdesivir (RDV), lower mortality (15.2% vs 38.8%) and higher rates of extubation (88% vs 60%), ventilator-free days (median [interquartile range], 11 [0-16] vs 5 [0-14.5]), and hospital discharge (85% vs 59%) were observed. Using multivariable analysis, RDV was significantly associated with hospital discharge (hazard ratio [HR], 2.25; 95% CI, 1.27-3.97; P = .005) and with a nonsignificantly lower mortality (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.26-2.1; P = .560). RDV was also independently associated with extubation (HR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.19-3.73; P = .011), which was considered a competing risk to death in the ICU in an additional survival model. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort of mechanically ventilated patients, RDV was not associated with a significant reduction of mortality, but it was consistently associated with shorter duration of mechanical ventilation and higher probability of hospital discharge, independent of other risk factors.