ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Prone positioning is widely used in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19; however, the specific clinical scenario in which the individual is most poised to benefit is not fully established. In patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, how effective is prone positioning in improving oxygenation and can that response be predicted? DESIGN: This is a retrospective observational study from two tertiary care centers including consecutive patients mechanically ventilated for COVID-19 from 3/1/2020 - 7/1/2021. The primary outcome is improvement in oxygenation as measured by PaO2/FiO2. We describe oxygenation before, during and after prone episodes with a focus on identifying patient, respiratory or ventilator variables that predict prone positioning success. SETTING: 2 Tertiary Care Academic Hospitals. PATIENTS: 125 patients mechanically ventilated for COVID-19 respiratory failure. INTERVENTIONS: Prone positioning. MAIN RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five patients underwent prone positioning a total of 309 times for a median duration of 23 hours IQR (14 - 49). On average, PaO2/FiO2 improved 19%: from 115 mm Hg (80 - 148) immediately before proning to 137 mm Hg (95 - 197) immediately after returning to the supine position. Prone episodes were more successful if the pre-prone PaO2/FiO2 was lower and if the patient was on inhaled epoprostenol (iEpo). For individuals with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (PaO2/FiO2 < 100 prior to prone positioning) and on iEpo, the median improvement in PaO2/FiO2 was 27% in both instances. CONCLUSIONS: Prone positioning in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 is generally associated with sustained improvements in oxygenation, which is made more likely by the concomitant use of iEpo and is more impactful in those who are more severely hypoxemic prior to prone positioning.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Respiratory Insufficiency , COVID-19/therapy , Epoprostenol , Humans , Prone Position/physiology , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapySubject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency , Cannula , Humans , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Inhaled pulmonary vasodilators are used as adjunctive therapies for the treatment of refractory hypoxemia. Available evidence suggest they improve oxygenation in a subset of patients without changing long-term trajectory. Given the differences in respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and "traditional" ARDS, we sought to identify their physiologic impact. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study of patients mechanically ventilated for COVID-19, from the ICUs of 2 tertiary care centers, who received inhaled epoprostenol (iEpo) for the management of hypoxemia. The primary outcome is change in PaO2/FiO2. Additionally, we measured several patient level features to predict iEpo responsiveness (or lack thereof). RESULTS: Eighty patients with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV2 received iEpo while mechanically ventilated and had PaO2/FiO2 measured before and after. The median PaO2/FiO2 prior to receiving iEpo was 92 mmHg and interquartile range (74 - 122). The median change in PaO2/FiO2 was 9 mmHg (-9 - 37) corresponding to a 10% improvement (-8 - 41). Fifty-percent (40 / 80) met our a priori definition of a clinically significant improvement in PaO2/FiO2 (increase in 10% from the baseline value). Prone position and lower PaO2/FiO2 when iEpo was started predicted a more robust response, which held after multivariate adjustment. For proned individuals, improvement in PaO2/FiO2 was 14 mmHg (-6 to 45) vs. 3 mmHg (-11 - 20), p = 0.04 for supine individuals; for those with severe ARDS (PaO2/FiO2 < 100, n = 49) the median improvement was 16 mmHg (-2 - 46). CONCLUSION: Fifty percent of patients have a clinically significant improvement in PaO2/FiO2 after the initiation of iEpo. This suggests it is worth trying as a rescue therapy; although generally the benefit was modest with a wide variability. Those who were prone and had lower PaO2/FiO2 were more likely to respond.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Epoprostenol/therapeutic use , Hypoxia/therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Vasodilator Agents/therapeutic use , Administration, Inhalation , Aged , Female , Humans , Hypoxia/metabolism , Male , Middle Aged , Oxygen/metabolism , Partial Pressure , Patient Positioning , Prone Position , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Tertiary Care Centers , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
We report the case of a healthcare worker who presented with a large vessel acute ischemic stroke in setting of a mild SARS-CoV-2 infection and provide a review of the emerging literature on COVID-related stroke. A 43-year-old female presented with right-sided hemiparesis, aphasia and dysarthria. She had a nonproductive of cough for 1 week without fever, fatigue or dyspnea. A CT Head, CT angiography and CT perfusion imaging revealed a M1 segment occlusion of the left middle cerebral artery requiring transfer from a primary to a comprehensive stroke center. A nasopharyngeal swab confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to arrival at the accepting center. During the thrombectomy a 3 cm thrombus was removed. Thrombus was also evident in the 8 French short sheath during closure device placement so a hypercoagulable state was suspected. Stroke work-up revealed a glycosylated hemoglobin of 8.7%, elevation of inflammatory markers and an indeterminate level of lupus anticoagulant IgM. On discharge home, she had near complete neurological recovery. This case highlights suspected mechanisms of hypercoagulability in SARS-CoV-2 infection and the importance of optimizing stroke care systems during the COVID-19 pandemic.