In-hospital and 6-month outcomes in patients with COVID-19 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (EuroECMO-COVID): a multicentre, prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been widely used in patients with COVID-19, but uncertainty remains about the determinants of in-hospital mortality and data on post-discharge outcomes are scarce. The aims of this study were to investigate the variables associated with in-hospital outcomes in patients who received ECMO during the first wave of COVID-19 and to describe the status of patients 6 months after ECMO initiation. METHODS: EuroECMO-COVID is a prospective, multicentre, observational study developed by the European Extracorporeal Life Support Organization. This study was based on data from patients aged 16 years or older who received ECMO support for refractory COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic-from March 1 to Sept 13, 2020-at 133 centres in 21 countries. In-hospital mortality and mortality 6 months after ECMO initiation were the primary outcomes. Mixed-Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate associations between patient and management-related variables (eg, patient demographics, comorbidities, pre-ECMO status, and ECMO characteristics and complications) and in-hospital deaths. Survival status at 6 months was established through patient contact or institutional charts review. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04366921, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between March 1 and Sept 13, 2020, 1215 patients (942 [78%] men and 267 [22%] women; median age 53 years [IQR 46-60]) were included in the study. Median ECMO duration was 15 days (IQR 8-27). 602 (50%) of 1215 patients died in hospital, and 852 (74%) patients had at least one complication. Multiorgan failure was the leading cause of death (192 [36%] of 528 patients who died with available data). In mixed-Cox analyses, age of 60 years or older, use of inotropes and vasopressors before ECMO initiation, chronic renal failure, and time from intubation to ECMO initiation of 4 days or more were associated with higher in-hospital mortality. 613 patients did not die in hospital, and 547 (95%) of 577 patients for whom data were available were alive at 6 months. 102 (24%) of 431 patients had returned to full-time work at 6 months, and 57 (13%) of 428 patients had returned to part-time work. At 6 months, respiratory rehabilitation was required in 88 (17%) of 522 patients with available data, and the most common residual symptoms included dyspnoea (185 [35%] of 523 patients) and cardiac (52 [10%] of 514 patients) or neurocognitive (66 [13%] of 512 patients) symptoms. INTERPRETATION: Patient's age, timing of cannulation (<4 days vs ≥4 days from intubation), and use of inotropes and vasopressors are essential factors to consider when analysing the outcomes of patients receiving ECMO for COVID-19. Despite post-discharge survival being favourable, persisting long-term symptoms suggest that dedicated post-ECMO follow-up programmes are required. FUNDING: None.

Outcomes of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in COVID-19–Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: An Inverse Probability Weighted Analysis

IMPORTANCE: Although venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) has been used in case of COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), outcomes and criteria for its application should be evaluated. OBJECTIVES: To describe patient characteristics and outcomes in patients receiving VV ECMO due to COVID-19–induced ARDS and to assess the possible impact of COVID-19 on mortality. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Multicenter retrospective study in 15 ICUs worldwide. All adult patients (> 18 yr) were included if they received VV ECMO with ARDS as main indication. Two groups were created: a COVID-19 cohort from March 2020 to December 2020 and a “control” non-COVID ARDS cohort from January 2018 to July 2019. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Collected data consisted of patient demographics, baseline variables, ECMO characteristics, and patient outcomes. The primary outcome was 60-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included patient characteristics, COVID-19–related therapies before and during ECMO and complication rate. To assess the influence of COVID-19 on mortality, inverse probability weighted (IPW) analyses were used to correct for predefined confounding variables. RESULTS: A total of 193 patients with COVID-19 received VV ECMO. The main indication for VV ECMO consisted of refractory hypoxemia, either isolated or combined with refractory hypercapnia. Complications with the highest occurrence rate included hemorrhage, an additional infectious event or acute kidney injury. Mortality was 35% and 45% at 28 and 60 days, respectively. Those mortality rates did not differ between the first and second waves of COVID-19 in 2020. Furthermore, 60-day mortality was equal between patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19–associated ARDS receiving VV ECMO (hazard ratio 60-d mortality, 1.27;95% CI, 0.82–1.98;p = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Mortality for patients with COVID-19 who received VV ECMO was similar to that reported in other COVID-19 cohorts, although no differences were found between the first and second waves regarding mortality. In addition, after IPW, mortality was independent of the etiology of ARDS.

Veno-venous extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation in a COVID-19 patient with cold-agglutinin haemolytic anaemia: A case report.

OVERVIEW: The use of extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) therapy to treat severe COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure is increasing worldwide. We reported herein the use of veno-venous ECMO in a patient with cold agglutinin haemolytic anaemia (CAHA) who suffered from severe COVID-19 infection. DESCRIPTION: A 64-year-old man presented to the emergency department (ED) with incremental complaints of dyspnoea and cough since one week. His history consisted of CAHA, which responded well to corticosteroid treatment. Because of severe hypoxemia, urgent intubation and mechanical ventilation were necessary. Despite deep sedation, muscle paralysis and prone ventilation, P/F ratio remained low. Though his history of CAHA, he still was considered for VV-ECMO. As lab results pointed to recurrence of CAHA, corticosteroids and rituximab were started. The VV-ECMO run was short and rather uncomplicated. Although, despite treatment, CAHA persisted and caused important complications of intestinal ischemia, which needed multiple surgical interventions. Finally, the patient suffered from progressive liver failure, thought to be secondary to ischemic cholangitis. One month after admission, therapy was stopped and patient passed away. CONCLUSION: Our case report shows that CAHA is no contraindication for VV-ECMO, even when both titre and thermal amplitude are high. Although, the aetiology of CAHA and its response to therapy will determine the final outcome of those patients.

A Retrospective, Monocentric Study Comparing Co and Secondary Infections in Critically Ill COVID-19 and Influenza Patients.

Few data are available on infectious complications in critically ill patients with different viral infections. We performed a retrospective monocentric study including all of the patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with confirmed COVID-19 (as of 13 March 2020) or Influenza A and/or B infections (as of 1 January 2015) until 20 April 2020. Coinfection and secondary infections (occurring within and after 48 h from admission, respectively) were recorded. Fifty-seven COVID-19 and 55 Influenza patients were included. Co-infections were documented in 13/57 (23%) COVID-19 patients vs. 40/55 (73%) Influenza patients (p < 0.001), most of them being respiratory (9/13, 69% vs. 35/40, 88%; p = 0.13) and of bacterial origin (12/13, 92% vs. 29/40, 73%; p = 0.25). Invasive aspergillosis infections were observed only in Influenza patients (8/55, 15%). The COVID-19 and Influenza patients presented 1 (0-4) vs. 0 (0-4) secondary infections (p = 0.022), with comparable sites being affected (lungs: 35/61, 57% vs. 13/31, 42%; p = 0.16) and causative pathogens occurring (Gram-negative bacteria: 51/61, 84% vs. 23/31, 74%; p > 0.99). The COVID-19 patients had longer ICU lengths of stay (15 (-65) vs. 5 (1-89) days; p = 0.001), yet the two groups had comparable mortality rates (20/57, 35% vs. 23/55, 41%; p = 0.46). We report fewer co-infections but more secondary infections in the ICU COVID-19 patients compared to the Influenza patients. Most of the infectious complications were respiratory and of bacterial origin.

A Retrospective, Monocentric Study Comparing Co and Secondary Infections in Critically Ill COVID-19 and Influenza Patients

Few data are available on infectious complications in critically ill patients with different viral infections. We performed a retrospective monocentric study including all of the patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with confirmed COVID-19 (as of 13 March 2020) or Influenza A and/or B infections (as of 1 January 2015) until 20 April 2020. Coinfection and secondary infections (occurring within and after 48 h from admission, respectively) were recorded. Fifty-seven COVID-19 and 55 Influenza patients were included. Co-infections were documented in 13/57 (23%) COVID-19 patients vs. 40/55 (73%) Influenza patients (p < 0.001), most of them being respiratory (9/13, 69% vs. 35/40, 88%;p = 0.13) and of bacterial origin (12/13, 92% vs. 29/40, 73%;p = 0.25). Invasive aspergillosis infections were observed only in Influenza patients (8/55, 15%). The COVID-19 and Influenza patients presented 1 (0–4) vs. 0 (0–4) secondary infections (p = 0.022), with comparable sites being affected (lungs: 35/61, 57% vs. 13/31, 42%;p = 0.16) and causative pathogens occurring (Gram-negative bacteria: 51/61, 84% vs. 23/31, 74%;p > 0.99). The COVID-19 patients had longer ICU lengths of stay (15 (–65) vs. 5 (1–89) days;p = 0.001), yet the two groups had comparable mortality rates (20/57, 35% vs. 23/55, 41%;p = 0.46). We report fewer co-infections but more secondary infections in the ICU COVID-19 patients compared to the Influenza patients. Most of the infectious complications were respiratory and of bacterial origin.

Non-Invasive Multimodal Neuromonitoring in Non-Critically Ill Hospitalized Adult Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: Neurological complications are frequent in patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). The use of non-invasive neuromonitoring in subjects without primary brain injury but with potential neurological derangement is gaining attention outside the intensive care unit (ICU). This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the use of non-invasive multimodal neuromonitoring of the brain in non-critically ill patients with COVID-19 outside the ICU and quantifies the prevalence of abnormal neuromonitoring findings in this population. Methods: A structured literature search was performed in MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and EMBASE to investigate the use of non-invasive neuromonitoring tools, including transcranial doppler (TCD); optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD); near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS); pupillometry; and electroencephalography (EEG) inpatients with COVID-19 outside the ICU. The proportion of non-ICU patients with CVOID-19 and a particular neurological feature at neuromonitoring at the study time was defined as prevalence. Results: A total of 6,593 records were identified through literature searching. Twenty-one studies were finally selected, comprising 368 non-ICU patients, of whom 97 were considered for the prevalence of meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of electroencephalographic seizures, periodic and rhythmic patterns, slow background abnormalities, and abnormal background on EEG was.17 (95% CI 0.04-0.29), 0.42 (95% CI 0.01-0.82), 0.92 (95% CI 0.83-1.01), and.95 (95% CI 0.088-1.09), respectively. No studies investigating NIRS and ONSD outside the ICU were found. The pooled prevalence for abnormal neuromonitoring findings detected using the TCD and pupillometry were incomputable due to insufficient data. Conclusions: Neuromonitoring tools are non-invasive, less expensive, safe, and bedside available tools with a great potential for both diagnosis and monitoring of patients with COVID-19 at risk of brain derangements. However, extensive literature searching reveals that they are rarely used outside critical care settings.Systematic Review Registration: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=265617, identifier: CRD42021265617.

Use of Sedatives and Neuromuscular-Blocking Agents in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with COVID-19 ARDS.

OBJECTIVES: To assess differences in the use of analgesics, sedatives and neuromuscular-blocking agents (NMBA) in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 or other conditions. METHODS: Retrospective observational cohort study, single-center tertiary Intensive Care Unit. COVID-19 patients with ARDS (March-May 2020) and non-COVID ARDS patients (2017-2020) on mechanical ventilation and receiving sedation for at least 48 h. RESULTS: A total of 39 patients met the inclusion criteria in each group, with similar demographics at baseline. COVID-19 patients had a longer duration of MV (median 22 (IQRs 16-29) vs. 9 (6-18) days; p < 0.01), of sedatives administration (18 (11-22) vs. 5 (4-9) days; p < 0.01) and NMBA therapy (12 (9-16) vs. 3 (2-7) days; p < 0.01). During the first 7 days of sedation, compared to non-COVID patients, COVID patients received more frequently a combination of multiple sedative drugs (76.9% vs. 28.2%; p < 0.01) and a higher NMBA regimen (cisatracurium: 3.0 (2.1-3.7) vs. 1.3 (0.9-1.9) mg/kg/day; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The duration and consumption of sedatives and NMBA was significantly increased in patients with COVID-19 related ARDS than in non-COVID ARDS. Different sedation strategies and protocols might be needed in COVID-19 patients with ARDS, with potential implications on long-term complications and drugs availability.

How to Manage Withdrawal of Sedation and Analgesia in Mechanically Ventilated COVID-19 Patients?

COVID-19 patients suffering from severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) require mechanical ventilation (MV) for respiratory failure. To achieve these ventilatory goals, it has been observed that COVID-19 patients in particular require high regimens and prolonged use of sedatives, analgesics and neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA). Withdrawal from analgo-sedation may induce a "drug withdrawal syndrome" (DWS), i.e., clinical symptoms of anxiety, tremor, agitation, hallucinations and vomiting, as a result of adrenergic activation and hyperalgesia. We describe the epidemiology, mechanisms leading to this syndrome and our strategies to prevent and treat it.

Quantifying Renin-Angiotensin-System Alterations in COVID-19.

The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) plays a pivotal role in a wide series of physiological processes, among which inflammation and blood pressure regulation. One of its key components, the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, has been identified as the entry point of the SARS-CoV-2 virus into the host cells, and therefore a lot of research has been devoted to study RAS dysregulation in COVID-19. Here we discuss the alterations of the regulatory RAS axes due to SARS-CoV-2 infection on the basis of a series of recent clinical investigations and experimental analyzes quantifying, e.g., the levels and activity of RAS components. We performed a comprehensive meta-analysis of these data in view of disentangling the links between the impaired RAS functioning and the pathophysiological characteristics of COVID-19. We also review the effects of several RAS-targeting drugs and how they could potentially help restore the normal RAS functionality and minimize the COVID-19 severity. Finally, we discuss the conflicting evidence found in the literature and the open questions on RAS dysregulation in SARS-CoV-2 infection whose resolution would improve our understanding of COVID-19.

Neurological Manifestations of Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Comprehensive Review and Meta-Analysis of the First 6 Months of Pandemic Reporting.

Background: There is growing evidence that SARS-Cov-2 infection is associated with severe neurological complications. Understanding the nature and prevalence of these neurologic manifestations is essential for identifying higher-risk patients and projecting demand for ongoing resource utilisation. This review and meta-analysis report the neurologic manifestations identified in hospitalised COVID-19 patients and provide a preliminary estimate of disease prevalence. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus were searched for studies reporting the occurrence of neurological complications in hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Results: A total of 2,207 unique entries were identified and screened, among which 14 cohort studies and 53 case reports were included, reporting on a total of 8,577 patients. Central nervous system manifestations included ischemic stroke (n = 226), delirium (n = 79), intracranial haemorrhage (ICH, n = 57), meningoencephalitis (n = 13), seizures (n = 3), and acute demyelinating encephalitis (n = 2). Peripheral nervous system manifestations included Guillain-Barrè Syndrome (n = 21) and other peripheral neuropathies (n = 3). The pooled period prevalence of ischemic stroke from identified studies was 1.3% [95%CI: 0.9-1.8%, 102/7,715] in all hospitalised COVID-19 patients, and 2.8% [95%CI: 1.0-4.6%, 9/318] among COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU. The pooled prevalence of ICH was estimated at 0.4% [95%CI: 0-0.8%, 6/1,006]. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic exerts a substantial neurologic burden which may have residual effects on patients and healthcare systems for years. Low quality evidence impedes the ability to accurately predict the magnitude of this burden. Robust studies with standardised screening and case definitions are required to improve understanding of this disease and optimise treatment of individuals at higher risk for neurologic sequelae.

Increased circulating levels of angiotensin-(1-7) in severely ill COVID-19 patients.

This letter reports an unexpected increase of the ACE2 product angiotensin-(1-7) and a parallel decrease of its substrate angiotensin II, suggesting a dysregulation of the renin-angiotensin system towards angiotensin-(1-7) formation in #COVID19 patients https://bit.ly/3xFXuTU.

A Large Retrospective Assessment of Voriconazole Exposure in Patients Treated with Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

BACKGROUND: Voriconazole is one of the first-line therapies for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Drug concentrations might be significantly influenced by the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We aimed to assess the effect of ECMO on voriconazole exposure in a large patient population. METHODS: Critically ill patients from eight centers in four countries treated with voriconazole during ECMO support were included in this retrospective study. Voriconazole concentrations were collected in a period on ECMO and before/after ECMO treatment. Multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the effect of ECMO on voriconazole exposure and to assess the impact of possible saturation of the circuit's binding sites over time. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients and 337 samples (190 during and 147 before/after ECMO) were analyzed. Subtherapeutic concentrations (<2 mg/L) were observed in 56% of the samples during ECMO and 39% without ECMO (p = 0.80). The median trough concentration, for a similar daily dose, was 2.4 (1.2-4.7) mg/L under ECMO and 2.5 (1.4-3.9) mg/L without ECMO (p = 0.58). Extensive inter-and intrasubject variability were observed. Neither ECMO nor squared day of ECMO (saturation) were retained as significant covariates on voriconazole exposure. CONCLUSIONS: No significant ECMO-effect was observed on voriconazole exposure. A large proportion of patients had voriconazole subtherapeutic concentrations.

Six-Month Pulmonary Function After Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has been largely used in patients with refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome due to coronavirus disease 2019. Few data on long-term pulmonary function among venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation survivors are available. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational cohort. SETTING: Two mixed medical-surgical tertiary (30 beds) and secondary (22 beds) ICUs. PATIENTS: All critically ill adult coronavirus disease 2019 survivors treated with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation between March 10, and April 30, 2020. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The last available lung function and 6-minute walking tests, performed after a median of 178 days (ranges, 72-232 d) from ICU admission, were analyzed. Among the 32 coronavirus disease 2019 patients treated by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during the study period, 11 (34%; median age 56 yr; median duration of mechanical ventilation and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy of 26 and 15 d, respectively) were successfully weaned and discharged home. Spirometry was performed in nine patients; the volumetric lung function was preserved, that is, median forced vital capacity was 83% of predicted value (51-99% of predicted value), and median forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 82% of predicted value (60-99% of predicted value). Also, the median residual volume and the lung capacity were 100% of predicted value (50-140% of predicted value) and 90% of predicted value (50-100% of predicted value); only the diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide and 6-minute walking test were decreased (58% of predicted value [37-95% of predicted value] and 468 meters (365-625 meters), corresponding to [63-90% of predicted value], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among survivors from severe coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia treated with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, preserved long-term volumetric lung function with decreased diffusion capacity of lung carbon monoxide was observed.

Cerebral Hemodynamics and Intracranial Compliance Impairment in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Pilot Study.

Introduction: One of the possible mechanisms by which the new coronavirus (SARS-Cov2) could induce brain damage is the impairment of cerebrovascular hemodynamics (CVH) and intracranial compliance (ICC) due to the elevation of intracranial pressure (ICP). The main objective of this study was to assess the presence of CVH and ICC alterations in patients with COVID-19 and evaluate their association with short-term clinical outcomes. Methods: Fifty consecutive critically ill COVID-19 patients were studied with transcranial Doppler (TCD) and non-invasive monitoring of ICC. Subjects were included upon ICU admission; CVH was evaluated using mean flow velocities in the middle cerebral arteries (mCBFV), pulsatility index (PI), and estimated cerebral perfusion pressure (eCPP), while ICC was assessed by using the P2/P1 ratio of the non-invasive ICP curve. A CVH/ICC score was computed using all these variables. The primary composite outcome was unsuccessful in weaning from respiratory support or death on day 7 (defined as UO). Results: At the first assessment (n = 50), only the P2/P1 ratio (median 1.20 [IQRs 1.00-1.28] vs. 1.00 [0.88-1.16]; p = 0.03) and eICP (14 [11-25] vs. 11 [7-15] mmHg; p = 0.01) were significantly higher among patients with an unfavorable outcome (UO) than others. Patients with UO had a significantly higher CVH/ICC score (9 [8-12] vs. 6 [5-7]; p < 0.001) than those with a favorable outcome; the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) for CVH/ICC score to predict UO was 0.86 (95% CIs 0.75-0.97); a score > 8.5 had 63 (46-77)% sensitivity and 87 (62-97)% specificity to predict UO. For those patients undergoing a second assessment (n = 29), after a median of 11 (5-31) days, all measured variables were similar between the two time-points. No differences in the measured variables between ICU non-survivors (n = 30) and survivors were observed. Conclusions: ICC impairment and CVH disturbances are often present in COVID-19 severe illness and could accurately predict an early poor outcome.

Obesity and its implications on cerebral circulation and intracranial compliance in severe COVID-19.

Objective: Multiple factors have been identified as causes of intracranial compliance impairment (ICCI) among patients with obesity. On the other hand, obesity has been linked with worst outcomes in COVID-19. Thus, the hypothesis of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) conducing to cerebral hemodynamic disorders (CHD) able to worsen ICCI and play an additional role on prognosis determination for COVID-19 among obese patients becomes suitable. Methods: 50 cases of SARS by COVID-19 were evaluated, for the presence of ICCI and cerebrovascular circulatory disturbances in correspondence with whether unfavorable outcomes (death or impossibility for mechanical ventilation weaning [MVW]) within 7 days after evaluation. The objective was to observe whether obese patients (BMI ≥ 30) disclosed worse outcomes and tests results compared with lean subjects with same clinical background. Results: 23 (46%) patients among 50 had obesity. ICCI was verified in 18 (78%) obese, whereas in 13 (48%) of 27 non-obese (p = 0,029). CHD were not significantly different between groups, despite being high prevalent in both. 69% unfavorable outcomes were observed among obese and 44% for lean subjects (p = 0,075). Conclusion: In the present study, intracranial compliance impairment was significantly more observed among obese subjects and may have contributed for SARS COVID-19 worsen prognosis.

Safety profile of enhanced thromboprophylaxis strategies for critically ill COVID-19 patients during the first wave of the pandemic: observational report from 28 European intensive care units.

INTRODUCTION: Critical illness from SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) is associated with a high burden of pulmonary embolism (PE) and thromboembolic events despite standard thromboprophylaxis. Available guidance is discordant, ranging from standard care to the use of therapeutic anticoagulation for enhanced thromboprophylaxis (ET). Local ET protocols have been empirically determined and are generally intermediate between standard prophylaxis and full anticoagulation. Concerns have been raised in regard to the potential risk of haemorrhage associated with therapeutic anticoagulation. This report describes the prevalence and safety of ET strategies in European Intensive Care Unit (ICUs) and their association with outcomes during the first wave of the COVID pandemic, with particular focus on haemorrhagic complications and ICU mortality. METHODS: Retrospective, observational, multi-centre study including adult critically ill COVID-19 patients. Anonymised data included demographics, clinical characteristics, thromboprophylaxis and/or anticoagulation treatment. Critical haemorrhage was defined as intracranial haemorrhage or bleeding requiring red blood cells transfusion. Survival was collected at ICU discharge. A multivariable mixed effects generalised linear model analysis matched for the propensity for receiving ET was constructed for both ICU mortality and critical haemorrhage. RESULTS: A total of 852 (79% male, age 66 [37-85] years) patients were included from 28 ICUs. Median body mass index and ICU length of stay were 27.7 (25.1-30.7) Kg/m2 and 13 (7-22) days, respectively. Thromboembolic events were reported in 146 patients (17.1%), of those 78 (9.2%) were PE. ICU mortality occurred in 335/852 (39.3%) patients. ET was used in 274 (32.1%) patients, and it was independently associated with significant reduction in ICU mortality (log odds = 0.64 [95% CIs 0.18-1.1; p = 0.0069]) but not an increased risk of critical haemorrhage (log odds = 0.187 [95%CI - 0.591 to - 0.964; p = 0.64]). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of critically ill patients with a high prevalence of thromboembolic events, ET was associated with reduced ICU mortality without an increased burden of haemorrhagic complications. This study suggests ET strategies are safe and associated with favourable outcomes. Whilst full anticoagulation has been questioned for prophylaxis in these patients, our results suggest that there may nevertheless be a role for enhanced / intermediate levels of prophylaxis. Clinical trials investigating causal relationship between intermediate thromboprophylaxis and clinical outcomes are urgently needed.