REDUCED TRANSMISSION RISKS FOR PASSENGER OPERATIONS DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC

In the aircraft cabin, passengers must share a confined environment with other passengers during boarding, flight, and disembarkation, which poses a risk for virus transmission and requires risk-appropriate mitigation strategies. Spacing between passenger groups during boarding and disembarkation reduces the risk of transmission, and optimized sequencing of passenger groups helps to significantly reduce boarding and disembarkation time. We considered passenger groups to be an important factor in overall operational efficiency. The basic idea of our concept is that the members of a group should not be separated, since they were already traveling as a group before entering the aircraft. However, to comply with COVID-19 regulations, different passenger groups should be separated spatially. For the particular challenge of disembarkation, we assume that passenger groups will be informed directly when they are allowed to leave for disembarkation. Today, cabin lighting could be used for this information process, but in a future digitally connected cabin, passengers could be informed directly via their personal devices. These devices could also be used to check the required distances between passengers. The implementation of optimized group sequencing has the potential to significantly reduce boarding and disembarkation times, taking into account COVID-19 constraints. © 2022 ICAS. All Rights Reserved.

The efficacy and safety of intravenous imatinib in invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome (InventCOVID): a multicentre, randomised, double-blinded, placebocontrolled, phase II clinical study

Background: A central hallmark of ARDS is hypoxemic respiratory failure due to increased pulmonary capillary leakage. The kinase inhibitor imatinib was shown to reverse vascular leak. This study aimed to investigate the effect of intravenous imatinib on pulmonary edema in patients with COVID-19 ARDS. Method(s): This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial (ClinicalTrial.gov identifier NCT04794088) included adult patients admitted to the ICU with moderate or severe COVID-19 ARDS. Patients were randomised 1:1 to receive 200mg intravenous imatinib or placebo twice daily for seven days or until ICU discharge. The change in extravascular lung water index between day 1 and day 4, measured using a PiCCO catheter, was chosen as the primary endpoint. Secondary outcomes included the PaO2/FiO2 ratio, number of ventilator free days, length of ICU admission and 28-day mortality rate. Study drug safety was assessed by daily screening of the patient records for adverse and serious adverse event occurrence and by performing ECGs and targeted clinical laboratory tests to monitor renal, liver and cardiac function. Result(s): Between March 2021 and 2022, 67 predominantly male (58%) patients with a mean age of 63+/-10 years were randomized to receive imatinib or placebo. No adverse events were considered to be related to study drug administration. At the moment of the submission, data cleaning is still ongoing. Conclusion(s): Thus far, intravenous imatinib administration seems safe and feasible in patients with COVID-19 related ARDS.

[Pre-clinical validation of a turbine-based ventilator for invasive ventilation-The ACUTE-19 ventilator]. / Validación preclínica de un respirador de turbina para la ventilación invasiva: el respirador ACUTE-19.

Background: The severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 pandemic pressure on healthcare systems can exhaust ventilator resources, especially where resources are restricted. Our objective was a rapid preclinical evaluation of a newly developed turbine-based ventilator, named the ACUTE-19, for invasive ventilation. Methods: Validation consisted of (a) testing tidal volume delivery in 11 simulated models, with various resistances and compliances; (b) comparison with a commercial ventilator (VIVO-50) adapting the United Kingdom Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency-recommendations for rapidly manufactured ventilators; and (c) in vivo testing in a sheep before and after inducing acute respiratory distress syndrome by saline lavage. Results: Differences in tidal volume in the simulated models were marginally different (largest difference 33 ml [95% CI 31 to 36]; P < .001). Plateau pressure was not different (-0.3 cmH2O [95% CI -0.9 to 0.3]; P = .409), and positive end-expiratory pressure was marginally different (0.3 cmH2O [95% CI 0.2 to 0.3]; P < .001) between the ACUTE-19 and the commercial ventilator. Bland-Altman analyses showed good agreement (mean bias -0.29 [limits of agreement 0.82 to -1.42], and mean bias 0.56 [limits of agreement 1.94 to -0.81], at a plateau pressure of 15 and 30 cmH2O, respectively). The ACUTE-19 achieved optimal oxygenation and ventilation before and after acute respiratory distress syndrome induction. Conclusions: The ACUTE-19 performed accurately in simulated and animal models yielding a comparable performance with a VIVO-50 commercial device. The ACUTE-19 can provide the basis for the development of a future affordable commercial ventilator.

Validación preclínica de un respirador de turbina para la ventilación invasiva: el respirador ACUTE-19 Pre-clinical validation of a turbine-based ventilator for invasive ventilation–The ACUTE-19 ventilator

Graphical Antecedentes La pandemia producida por el síndrome respiratorio agudo severo por coronavirus 2 puede agotar los recursos sanitarios, especialmente de respiradores, en situaciones de escasez de recursos sanitarios. Nuestro objetivo fue realizar una evaluación preclínica rápida de un prototipo de respirador de turbina para la ventilación invasiva denominado ACUTE-19. Métodos La validación consistió en: a) evaluación de la administración de un volumen corriente en 11 modelos pulmonares simulados, con diversas resistencias y compliancias;b) comparación con un ventilador comercial (VIVO-50) adaptando las recomendaciones de la Agencia Reguladora de Medicamentos y Productos Sanitarios del Reino Unido para ventiladores de fabricación rápida, y c) realización de pruebas in vivo en una oveja antes y después de inducir el síndrome de distrés respiratorio agudo mediante lavado salino. Resultados Las diferencias de volumen corriente en los modelos simulados fueron mínimamente diferentes (la mayor diferencia fue de 33 ml [IC 95%: 31 a 36];p < 0,001). La presión de meseta no fue diferente (−0,3 cmH2O [IC 95%: −0,9 a 0,3];p = 0,409), y la presión positiva al final de la espiración fue levemente diferente (0,3 cmH2O [IC 95%: 0,2 a 0,3];p < 0,001) comparando el ACUTE-19 y el ventilador comercial. El análisis de Bland-Altman mostró una buena concordancia (sesgo medio −0,29 [límites de concordancia 0,82 a −1,42], y sesgo medio 0,56 [límites de concordancia 1,94 a −0,81], a una presión de meseta de 15 y 30 cmH2O, respectivamente). El ACUTE-19 consiguió una oxigenación y ventilación óptimas antes y después de la inducción del síndrome de distrés respiratorio agudo en el modelo animal. Conclusiones El ACUTE-19 se comportó con precisión en los modelos simulados y animales, con un rendimiento comparable al del dispositivo comercial VIVO-50. El ACUTE-19 puede servir de base para el desarrollo de un futuro ventilador comercial asequible.

Pre-clinical validation of a turbine-based ventilator for invasive ventilation-The ACUTE-19 ventilator.

BACKGROUND: The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)-Coronavirus 2 (CoV-2) pandemic pressure on healthcare systems can exhaust ventilator resources, especially where resources are restricted. Our objective was a rapid preclinical evaluation of a newly developed turbine-based ventilator, named the ACUTE-19, for invasive ventilation. METHODS: Validation consisted of (a) testing tidal volume (V_T) delivery in 11 simulated models, with various resistances and compliances; (b) comparison with a commercial ventilator (VIVO-50) adapting the United Kingdom Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency-recommendations for rapidly manufactured ventilators; and (c) in vivo testing in a sheep before and after inducing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) by saline lavage. RESULTS: Differences in V_T in the simulated models were marginally different (largest difference 33ml [95%-confidence interval (CI) 31-36]; P<.001ml). Plateau pressure (P_plat) was not different (-0.3cmH₂O [95%-CI -0.9 to 0.3]; P=.409), and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) was marginally different (0.3 cmH₂O [95%-CI 0.2 to 0.3]; P<.001) between the ACUTE-19 and the commercial ventilator. Bland-Altman analyses showed good agreement (mean bias, -0.29, [limits of agreement, 0.82 to -1.42], and mean bias 0.56 [limits of agreement, 1.94 to -0.81], at a P_plat of 15 and 30cmH₂O, respectively). The ACUTE-19 achieved optimal oxygenation and ventilation before and after ARDS induction. CONCLUSIONS: The ACUTE-19 performed accurately in simulated and animal models yielding a comparable performance with a VIVO-50 commercial device. The acute 19 can provide the basis for the development of a future affordable commercial ventilator.

Hyperoxemia in invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients-Insights from the PRoVENT-COVID study.

OBJECTIVE: We determined the prevalences of hyperoxemia and excessive oxygen use, and the epidemiology, ventilation characteristics and outcomes associated with hyperoxemia in invasively ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: Post hoc analysis of a national, multicentre, observational study in 22 ICUs. Patients were classified in the first two days of invasive ventilation as 'hyperoxemic' or 'normoxemic'. The co-primary endpoints were prevalence of hyperoxemia (PaO2 > 90 mmHg) and prevalence of excessive oxygen use (FiO2 ≥ 60% while PaO2 > 90 mmHg or SpO2 > 92%). Secondary endpoints included ventilator settings and ventilation parameters, duration of ventilation, length of stay (LOS) in ICU and hospital, and mortality in ICU, hospital, and at day 28 and 90. We used propensity matching to control for observed confounding factors that may influence endpoints. RESULTS: Of 851 COVID-19 patients, 225 (26.4%) were classified as hyperoxemic. Excessive oxygen use occurred in 385 (45.2%) patients. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) severity was lowest in hyperoxemic patients. Hyperoxemic patients were ventilated with higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), while rescue therapies for hypoxemia were applied more often in normoxemic patients. Neither in the unmatched nor in the matched analysis were there differences between hyperoxemic and normoxemic patients with regard to any of the clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients, hyperoxemia occurred often and so did excessive oxygen use. The main differences between hyperoxemic and normoxemic patients were ARDS severity and use of PEEP. Clinical outcomes were not different between hyperoxemic and normoxemic patients.

COVID-19: Passenger Boarding and Disembarkation

Boarding and disembarking an aircraft is a time-critical airport ground handling process. Operations in the confined aircraft cabin must also reduce the potential risk of virus transmission to passengers under current COVID-19 boundary conditions. Passenger boarding will generally be regulated by establishing passenger sequences to reduce the influence of negative interactions between passengers (e.g., congestion in the aisle). This regulation cannot be implemented to the same extent when disembarking at the end of a flight. In our approach, we generate an optimized seat allocation that takes into account both the distance constraints of COVID-19 regulations and groups of passengers traveling together (e.g., families or couples). This seat allocation minimizes the potential transmission risk, while at the same time we calculate improved entry sequences for passengers groups (fast boarding). We show in our simulation environment that boarding and disembarkation times can be significantly reduced even if a physical distance between passenger groups is required. To implement our proposed sequences during real disembarkation, we propose an active information system that incorporates the aircraft cabin lighting system. Thus, the lights above each group member could be turned on when that passenger group is requested to disembark. © ATM 2021. All rights reserved.

Invasive mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome receiving extracorporeal support: a narrative review of strategies to mitigate lung injury.

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is indicated in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and severely impaired gas exchange despite evidence-based lung protective ventilation, prone positioning and other parts of the standard algorithm for treating such patients. Extracorporeal support can facilitate ultra-lung-protective ventilation, meaning even lower volumes and pressures than standard lung-protective ventilation, by directly removing carbon dioxide in patients needing injurious ventilator settings to maintain sufficient gas exchange. Injurious ventilation results in ventilator-induced lung injury, which is one of the main determinants of mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Marked reductions in the intensity of ventilation to the lowest tolerable levels under extracorporeal support may be achieved and could thereby potentially mitigate ventilator-induced lung injury and theoretically patient self-inflicted lung injury in spontaneously breathing patients with high respiratory drive. However, the benefits of this strategy may be counterbalanced by the use of continuous deep sedation and even neuromuscular blocking drugs, which may impair physical rehabilitation and impact long-term outcomes. There are currently a lack of large-scale prospective data to inform optimal invasive ventilation practices and how to best apply a holistic approach to patients receiving veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, while minimising ventilator-induced and patient self-inflicted lung injury. We aimed to review the literature relating to invasive ventilation strategies in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome receiving extracorporeal support and discuss personalised ventilation approaches and the potential role of adjunctive therapies in facilitating lung protection.

The effect of age on ventilation management and clinical outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 patients-insights from the PRoVENT-COVID study

Introduction: We analyzed the association of age with ventilation practice and outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring invasive ventilation. Methods: Posthoc analysis of the PRoVENT-COVID study, an observational study performed in 22 ICUs in the first 3 months of the national outbreak in the Netherlands. The coprimary endpoint was a set of ventilator parameters, including tidal volume normalized for predicted bodyweight, positive end-expiratory pressure, driving pressure, and respiratory system compliance in the first 4 days of invasive ventilation. Secondary endpoints were other ventilation parameters, the use of rescue therapies, pulmonary and extrapulmonary complications in the first 28 days in the ICU, hospital- and ICU stay, and mortality. Results: 1122 patients were divided into four groups based on age quartiles. No meaningful differences were found in ventilation parameters and in the use of rescue therapies for refractory hypoxemia in the first 4 days of invasive ventilation. Older patients received more often a tracheostomy, developed more frequently acute kidney injury and myocardial infarction, stayed longer in hospital and ICU, and had a higher mortality. Conclusions: In this cohort of invasively ventilated critically ill COVID-19 patients, age had no effect on ventilator management. Higher age was associated with more complications, longer length of stay in ICU and hospital and a higher mortality.

Covid-19-Related Challenges for New Normality in Airport Terminal Operations

Airport operations are undergoing significant change, having to meet pandemic requirements in addition to intrinsic security requirements. Although air traffic has declined massively, airports are still the critical hubs of the air transport network. The new restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic pose new challenges for airport operators in redesigning airport terminals and managing passenger flows. To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 restrictions, we implement a reference airport environment. In this reference Airport in the Lab environment we will demonstrate the operational consequences derived from the new operational requirements. In addition, countermeasures to mitigate any negative impacts of these changes are tested. The results highlight emerging issues that the airport will most likely face and possible solutions. Finally, we could apply the findings and lessons learned from our testing at our reference airport to a real airport. © 2021 IEEE.

Determinants of turnaround time in a rapid genome sequencing program

Previous studies of genome sequencing (GS) in critically ill childrenhave made use of either modified hardware or working procedureswhich would be difficult, if not impossible, to integrate into existingclinical workflows1. Our lab’s transition from exome sequencing (ES) to GS offered an opportunity to implement in-house rapid genomesequencing (rGS) in critically ill children in a manner which couldintegrate with existing clinical workflows. We conducted a feasibilityand implementation pilot by offering rGS to child-parent triosconcurrently undergoing clinical rapid ES (rES) via a reference lab.The purpose of this study was to identify and address operationalbarriers to implementation of a rGS program capable of communicatinga preliminary result within 7 days of consent. We consideredthis time span to be more reflective of clinical realities than lab-quotedturnaround times (TAT) which typically start at sample receipt andthus do not account for challenges in sample acquisition and pre-testcounseling in a critical care setting, nor the impact of shipping times.Here we present data on TAT and lessons learned from the first 27subjects enrolled.Using rapid cycle improvement methodologies, we identified fourdistinct but inter-related workflows requiring optimization:1. Pre-analytic: patient identification through acquisition ofsamples2. Wet-lab: extraction through sequencing3. Bioinformatics: secondary and tertiary analysis as well as rapididentification of causal variants4. Return of resultsFigure 1 summarizes TAT across cases, demonstrating the markedimprovements in TAT with our programmatic approach to improvement.We used our first 9 cases to determine a baseline TAT for theentire process and to delineate the 4 main workflows (above). Atbaseline, excluding cases delayed by COVID-19 restrictions, mean TATwas 17.12 days (3 sequential deviant range: 7.05–27.19 days).Following deployment of our programmatic approach to rGS, meanTAT fell to 6.19 days (3 sequential deviant range: 0.51–11.87 days).Table 1 summarizes the observations and insights, by workflow, whichimpacted upon TAT and/or implementation. The single biggest impacton TAT was optimization of bioinformatics by removing all manualsteps between starting sequencing and producing human interpretable,filtered, annotated output of high-priority variants for interpretation.The second biggest source of improvement was optimization ofthe sequencing itself as well as prioritizing sample processing for andaccess to sequencing runs. While variant ranking is helpful in identifying causal variants, in 9/10 cases with a diagnostic findingthe causal variant(s)were obvious to the study teamwithin minutes ofviewing the annotated variant list, regardless of variant rank. (Figure Presented) As time required for sequencing and analytic workflows fell, therelative contribution of other workflows to overall TAT shifted and itbecame more obvious that early identification and utilization of thisapproach is very important in lowering overall time to diagnosis(Figure 2). In 6/10 cases with a diagnostic finding, the initial approachof the clinical team was NOT rES (and thus patients were not eligiblefor rGS on a research basis). Had rGS been the initial diagnosticmodality chosen, a diagnosis could have been reached in a median 12days sooner (range 2–28 days). There were also several cases wheresequencing was delayed when one or both parents did not present tothe lab to provide a blood sample in a timely manner. Optimization ofsequencing or analytic workflows cannot meaningfully improveoutcomes either of these situations.Our findings suggest some important considerations for institutionsdeveloping or seeking to improve rapid sequencing programs for acuteand critically ill children: (Table Presented) • Optimization of computational resource utilization and phenotypecuration saves more time than improved variant filtering orprioritization.• Obtaining samples from parents is non-trivial.• Even trained geneticists may fail to recognize appropriatecandidates for rGS.