The Maryland (USA) Critical Care Coordination Center (C4): From Pandemic to Permanence.

INTRODUCTION: The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic created overwhelming demand for critical care services within Maryland's (USA) hospital systems. As intensive care units (ICUs) became full, critically ill patients were boarded in hospital emergency departments (EDs), a practice associated with increased mortality and costs. Allocation of critical care resources during the pandemic requires thoughtful and proactive management strategies. While various methodologies exist for addressing the issue of ED overcrowding, few systems have implemented a state-wide response using a public safety-based platform. The objective of this report is to describe the implementation of a state-wide Emergency Medical Services (EMS)-based coordination center designed to ensure timely and equitable access to critical care. METHODS: The state of Maryland designed and implemented a novel, state-wide Critical Care Coordination Center (C4) staffed with intensivist physicians and paramedics purposed to ensure appropriate critical care resource management and patient transfer assistance. A narrative description of the C4 is provided. A retrospective cohort study design was used to present requests to the C4 as a case series report to describe the results of implementation. RESULTS: Providing a centralized asset with regional situational awareness of hospital capability and bed status played an integral role for directing the triage process of critically ill patients to appropriate facilities during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 2,790 requests were received by the C4. The pairing of a paramedic with an intensivist physician resulted in the successful transfer of 67.4% of requests, while 27.8% were managed in place with medical direction. Overall, COVID-19 patients comprised 29.5% of the cohort. Data suggested increased C4 usage was predictive of state-wide ICU surges. The C4 usage volume resulted in the expansion to pediatric services to serve a broader age range. The C4 concept, which leverages the complimentary skills of EMS clinicians and intensivist physicians, is presented as a proposed public safety-based model for other regions to consider world-wide. CONCLUSION: The C4 has played an integral role in the State of Maryland's pledge to its citizens to deliver the right care to the right patient at the right time and can be considered as a model for adoption by other regions world-wide.

Time from Infiltrate on Chest Radiograph to Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in COVID-19 Affects Mortality.

Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has been used to treat severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome; however, patient selection criteria have evolved throughout the pandemic. In this study, we sought to determine the association of patient mortality with time from positive COVID-19 test and infiltrate on chest radiograph (x-ray) to VV ECMO cannulation. We hypothesized that an increasing duration between a positive COVID-19 test or infiltrates on chest x-ray and cannulation would be associated with increased mortality. This is a single-center retrospective chart review of COVID-19 VV ECMO patients from March 1, 2020 to July 28, 2021. Unadjusted and adjusted multivariate analyses were performed to assess for mortality differences. A total of 93 patients were included in our study. Increased time, in days, from infiltrate on chest x-ray to cannulation was associated with increased mortality in both unadjusted (5-9, P = 0.002) and adjusted regression analyses (odds ratio [OR]: 1.49, 95% CI: 1.22-1.81, P < 0.01). Time from positive test to cannulation was not found to be significant between survivors and nonsurvivors (7.5-11, P = 0.06). Time from infiltrate on chest x-ray to cannulation for VV ECMO should be considered when assessing patient candidacy. Further larger cohort and prospective studies are required.

COVID-19 outcomes of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute respiratory failure vs historical cohort of non-COVID-19 viral infections.

INTRODUCTION: Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has become a support modality for patients with acute respiratory failure refractory to standard therapies. VV ECMO has been increasingly used during the current COVID-19 pandemic for patients with refractory respiratory failure. The object of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of VV ECMO in patients with COVID-19 compared to patients with non-COVID-19 viral infections. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients supported with VV ECMO between 8/2014 and 8/2020 whose etiology of illness was a viral pulmonary infection. The primary outcome of this study was to evaluate in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included length of ECMO course, ventilator duration, hospital length of stay, incidence of adverse events through ECMO course. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were included (35 COVID-19 vs 54 non-COVID-19). Forty (74%) of the non-COVID-19 patients had influenza virus. Prior to cannulation, COVID-19 patients had longer ventilator duration (3 vs 1 day, p = .003), higher PaCO2 (64 vs 53 mmHg, p = .012), and white blood cell count (14 vs 9 ×103/µL, p = .004). Overall in-hospital mortality was 33.7% (n = 30). COVID-19 patients had a higher mortality (49% vs. 24%, p = .017) when compared to non-COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 survivors had longer median time on ECMO than non-COVID-19 survivors (24.4 vs 16.5 days p = .03) but had a similar hospital length of stay (HLOS) (41 vs 48 Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenationdays p = .33). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 patients supported with VV ECMO have a higher mortality than non-COVID-19 patients. While COVID-19 survivors had significantly longer VV ECMO runs than non-COVID-19 survivors, HLOS was similar. This data add to a growing body of literature supporting the use of ECMO for potentially reversible causes of respiratory failure.

Influence of Covid-19 Restrictions on Urban Violence.

We investigated whether the COVID-19 pandemic affected rates of interpersonal violence (IV). A retrospective study was performed using city-wide crime data and the trauma registry at one high-volume trauma center pre-pandemic [PP] (March-October 2019) and during the pandemic [PA] (March-October 2020). The proportion of trauma admissions attributable to IV remained unchanged from PP to PA, but IV increased as a proportion of overall crime (34% to 41%, p<0.001). Assaults decreased, but there was a proportionate increase in penetrating trauma which was mostly attributable to firearms. Despite a reduction in admissions due to IV in the first 4 months of the pandemic, the rates of violence subsequently exceeded that of the same months in 2019. The cause of the observed increase of IV is multi-factorial. Future studies aimed at identifying the root causes are essential to mitigate violence during this ongoing health crisis.

Evidence of SARS-CoV-2-Specific T-Cell-Mediated Myocarditis in a MIS-A Case.

A 26-year-old otherwise healthy man died of fulminant myocarditis. Nasopharyngeal specimens collected premortem tested negative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Histopathological evaluation of the heart showed myocardial necrosis surrounded by cytotoxic T-cells and tissue-repair macrophages. Myocardial T-cell receptor (TCR) sequencing revealed hyper-dominant clones with highly similar sequences to TCRs that are specific for SARS-CoV-2 epitopes. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in the gut, supporting a diagnosis of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A). Molecular targets of MIS-associated inflammation are not known. Our data indicate that SARS-CoV-2 antigens selected high-frequency T-cell clones that mediated fatal myocarditis.

Mortality Risk Assessment in COVID-19 Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

BACKGROUND: A life-threatening complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) refractory to conventional management. Venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (VV-ECMO) is used to support patients with ARDS in whom conventional management fails. Scoring systems to predict mortality in VV-ECMO remain unvalidated in COVID-19 ARDS. This report describes a large single-center experience with VV-ECMO in COVID-19 and assesses the utility of standard risk calculators. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospective database of all patients with COVID-19 who underwent VV-ECMO cannulation between March 15 and June 27, 2020 at a single academic center was performed. Demographic, clinical, and ECMO characteristics were collected. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; survivor and nonsurvivor cohorts were compared by using univariate and bivariate analyses. RESULTS: Forty patients who had COVID-19 and underwent ECMO were identified. Of the 33 patients (82.5%) in whom ECMO had been discontinued at the time of analysis, 18 patients (54.5%) survived to hospital discharge, and 15 (45.5%) died during ECMO. Nonsurvivors presented with a statistically significant higher Prediction of Survival on ECMO Therapy (PRESET)-Score (mean ± SD, 8.33 ± 0.8 vs 6.17 ± 1.8; P = .001). The PRESET score demonstrated accurate mortality prediction. All patients with a PRESET-Score of 6 or lowers survived, and a score of 7 or higher was associated with a dramatic increase in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that favorable outcomes are possible in patients with COVID-19 who undergo ECMO at high-volume centers. This study demonstrated an association between the PRESET-Score and survival in patients with COVID-19 who underwent VV-ECMO. Standard risk calculators may aid in appropriate selection of patients with COVID-19 ARDS for ECMO.

The Role of a Statewide Critical Care Coordination Center in the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic-and Beyond.

OBJECTIVE: Public health emergencies, like the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, can cause unprecedented demand for critical care services. We describe statewide implementation of a critical care coordination center designed to optimize ICU utilization. To describe a centralized critical care coordination center designed to ensure appropriate intensive care resource allocation. DESIGN: A descriptive case series of consecutive critically ill adult patients. SETTING: ICUs, emergency departments, freestanding medical facilities in the state of Maryland and adjacent states, serving a population of over 6,045,000 across a land area of 9,776 sq mi (25,314 km2). PATIENTS: Adults requiring intensive care. INTERVENTIONS: Consultation with a critical care physician and emergency medical services clinician. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Number of consults, number of patient movements to higher levels of critical care, and number of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation referrals for both patients with and without coronavirus disease 2019. Over a 6-month period, critical care coordination center provided 1,006 critical care consultations and directed 578 patient transfers for 58 hospitals in the state of Maryland and adjoining region. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation referrals were requested for 58 patients. Four-hundred twenty-eight patients (42.5%) were managed with consultation only and did not require transfer. CONCLUSIONS: Critical care coordination center, staffed 24/7 by a critical care physician and emergency medical service clinician, may improve critical care resource use and patient flow. This serves as a model for a tiered regionalized system to ensure that the demand for critical care services may be met during a pandemic and beyond.

A Dedicated Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Unit during a Respiratory Pandemic: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Part II: Clinical Management.

(1) Background: COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS) has several distinctions from traditional acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); however, patients with refractory respiratory failure may still benefit from veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) support. We report our challenges caring for CARDS patients on VV-ECMO and alterations to traditional management strategies. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of our institutional strategies for managing patients with COVID-19 who required VV-ECMO in a dedicated airlock biocontainment unit (BCU), from March to June 2020. The data collected included the time course of admission, VV-ECMO run, ventilator length, hospital length of stay, and major events related to bleeding, such as pneumothorax and tracheostomy. The dispensation of sedation agents and trial therapies were obtained from institutional pharmacy tracking. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed. (3) Results: Forty COVID-19 patients on VV-ECMO were managed in the BCU during this period, from which 21 survived to discharge and 19 died. The criteria for ECMO initiation was altered for age, body mass index, and neurologic status/cardiac arrest. All cannulations were performed with a bedside ultrasound-guided percutaneous technique. Ventilator and ECMO management were routed in an ultra-lung protective approach, though varied based on clinical setting and provider experience. There was a high incidence of pneumothorax (n = 19). Thirty patients had bedside percutaneous tracheostomy, with more procedural-related bleeding complications than expected. A higher use of sedation was noted. The timing of decannulation was also altered, given the system constraints. A variety of trial therapies were utilized, and their effectiveness is yet to be determined. (4) Conclusions: Even in a high-volume ECMO center, there are challenges in caring for an expanded capacity of patients during a viral respiratory pandemic. Though institutional resources and expertise may vary, it is paramount to proceed with insightful planning, the recognition of challenges, and the dynamic application of lessons learned when facing a surge of critically ill patients.

A Dedicated Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Unit during a Respiratory Pandemic: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Part I: System Planning and Care Teams.

BACKGROUND: The most critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may require advanced support modalities, such as veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). A systematic, methodical approach to a respiratory pandemic on a state and institutional level is critical. METHODS: We conducted retrospective review of our institutional response to the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the creation of a dedicated airlock biocontainment unit (BCU) to treat patients with refractory COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS). Data were collected through conversations with staff on varying levels in the BCU, those leading the effort to make the BCU and hospital incident command system, email communications regarding logistic changes being implemented, and a review of COVID-19 patient census at our institution from March through June 2020. RESULTS: Over 2100 patients were successfully admitted to system hospitals; 29% of these patients required critical care. The response to this respiratory pandemic augmented intensive care physician staffing, created a 70-member nursing team, and increased the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) capability by nearly 200%. During this time period, 40 COVID-19 patients on VV-ECMO were managed in the BCU. Challenges in an airlock unit included communication, scarcity of resources, double-bunking, and maintaining routine care. CONCLUSIONS: Preparing for a surge of critically ill patients during a pandemic can be a daunting task. The implementation of a coordinated, system-level approach can help with the allocation of resources as needed. Focusing on established strengths of hospitals within the system can guide triage based on individual patient needs. The management of ECMO patients is still a specialty care, and a systematic and hospital based approach requiring an ECMO team composed of multiple experienced individuals is paramount during a respiratory viral pandemic.

Aspirin Use Is Associated With Decreased Mechanical Ventilation, Intensive Care Unit Admission, and In-Hospital Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is associated with hypercoagulability and increased thrombotic risk in critically ill patients. To our knowledge, no studies have evaluated whether aspirin use is associated with reduced risk of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and in-hospital mortality. METHODS: A retrospective, observational cohort study of adult patients admitted with COVID-19 to multiple hospitals in the United States between March 2020 and July 2020 was performed. The primary outcome was the need for mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes were ICU admission and in-hospital mortality. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for study outcomes were calculated using Cox-proportional hazards models after adjustment for the effects of demographics and comorbid conditions. RESULTS: Four hundred twelve patients were included in the study. Three hundred fourteen patients (76.3%) did not receive aspirin, while 98 patients (23.7%) received aspirin within 24 hours of admission or 7 days before admission. Aspirin use had a crude association with less mechanical ventilation (35.7% aspirin versus 48.4% nonaspirin, P = .03) and ICU admission (38.8% aspirin versus 51.0% nonaspirin, P = .04), but no crude association with in-hospital mortality (26.5% aspirin versus 23.2% nonaspirin, P = .51). After adjusting for 8 confounding variables, aspirin use was independently associated with decreased risk of mechanical ventilation (adjusted HR, 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.85, P = .007), ICU admission (adjusted HR, 0.57, 95% CI, 0.38-0.85, P = .005), and in-hospital mortality (adjusted HR, 0.53, 95% CI, 0.31-0.90, P = .02). There were no differences in major bleeding (P = .69) or overt thrombosis (P = .82) between aspirin users and nonaspirin users. CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin use may be associated with improved outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. However, a sufficiently powered randomized controlled trial is needed to assess whether a causal relationship exists between aspirin use and reduced lung injury and mortality in COVID-19 patients.

Extracorporeal Life Support (ECLS): A Review and Focus on Considerations for COVID-19.

ABSTRACT: Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is a support modality for patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who have failed conventional treatments including low tidal volume ventilation, prone positioning, and neuromuscular blockade. In addition, ECLS can be used for hemodynamic support for patients with cardiogenic shock or following cardiac arrest. Injured patients may also require ECLS support for ARDS and other indications. We review the use of ECLS for ARDS patients, trauma patients, cardiogenic shock patients, and post-cardiac arrest patients. We then describe how these principles are applied in the management of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Indications, predictors, procedural considerations, and post-cannulation management strategies are discussed.