Tracheal intubation in the critically ill patient.

Tracheal intubation is among the most commonly performed and high-risk procedures in critical care. Indeed, 45% of patients undergoing intubation experience at least one major peri-intubation adverse event, with cardiovascular instability being the most common event reported in 43%, followed by severe hypoxemia in 9% and cardiac arrest in 3% of cases. These peri-intubation adverse events may expose patients to a higher risk of 28-day mortality, and they are more frequently observed with an increasing number of attempts to secure the airway. The higher risk of peri-intubation complications in critically ill patients, compared with the anaesthesia setting, is the consequence of their deranged physiology (e.g. underlying respiratory failure, shock and/or acidosis) and, in this regard, airway management in critical care has been defined as "physiologically difficult". In recent years, several randomised studies have investigated the most effective preoxy-genation strategies, and evidence for the use of positive pressure ventilation in moderate-to-severe hypoxemic patients is established. On the other hand, evidence on interventions to mitigate haemodynamic collapse after intubation has been elusive. Airway management in COVID-19 patients is even more challenging because of the additional risk of infection for healthcare workers, which has influenced clinical choices in this patient group. The aim of this review is to provide an update of the evidence for intubation in critically ill patients with a focus on understanding peri-intubation risks and evaluating interventions to prevent or mitigate adverse events.

Short and long-term complications due to standard and extended prone position cycles in CoViD-19 patients.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate short and long-term complications due to standard (≤24 hours) and extended (>24 hours) prone position in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study conducted in an Italian general intensive care unit. We enrolled patients on invasive mechanical ventilation and treated with prone positioning. We recorded short term complications from the data chart and long-term complications from the scheduled follow-up visit, three months after intensive care discharge. RESULTS: A total of 96 patients were included in the study. Median time for each prone positioning cycle (302 cycles) was equal to 18 (16-32) hours. In 37 (38%) patients at least one cycle of extended pronation was implemented. Patients with at least one pressure sore due to prone position were 38 (40%). Patients with pressure sores showed a statistically significative difference in intensive care length of stay, mechanical ventilation days, numbers of prone position cycles, total time spent in prone position and the use of extended prone position, compared to patients without pressure sores. All lesions were low grade. Cheekbones (18%) and chin (10%) were the most affected sites. Follow-up visit, scheduled three months after intensive care discharge, was possible in 58 patients. All patients were able to have all 12 muscle groups examined using theMedical Research Council scale examination. No patient reported sensory loss or presence of neuropathic pain for upper limbs. CONCLUSIONS: Extended prone position is feasible and might reduce the workload on healthcare workers without significant increase of major prone position related complications.

Management of critically ill patients with COVID-19: suggestions and instructions from the coordination of intensive care units of Lombardy.

With 63,098 confirmed cases on 17 April 2020 and 11,384 deaths, Lombardy has been the most affected region in Italy by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To cope with this emergency, the COVID-19 Lombardy intensive care units (ICU) network was created. The network identified the need of defining a list of clinical recommendations to standardize treatment of patients with COVID-19 admitted to Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Three core topics were identified: 1) rational use of intensive care resources; 2) ventilation strategies; 3) non-ventilatory interventions. Identification of patients who may benefit from ICU treatment is challenging. Clinicians should consider baseline performance and frailty status and they should adopt disease-specific staging tools. Continuous positive airway pressure, mainly delivered through a helmet as elective method, should be considered as initial treatment for all patients with respiratory failure associated with COVID-19. In case of persisting dyspnea and/or desaturation despite 4-6 hours of noninvasive ventilation, endotracheal intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation should be considered. In the early phase, muscle relaxant use and volume-controlled ventilation is recommended. Prone position should be performed in patients with PaO2/FiO2≤100 mmHg. For patients admitted to ICU with COVID-19 interstitial pneumonia, we do not recommend empiric antibiotic therapy for community-acquired pneumonia. Consultation of an infectious disease specialist is suggested before start of any antiviral therapy. In conclusion, the COVID-19 Lombardy ICU Network identified a list of best practice statements supported by the available evidence and clinical experience or identified as panel members expert opinions for the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19.