Analysis of Biochemical and Inflammatory Markers for Predicting COVID-19 Severity: Insights From a Tertiary Healthcare Institution of Eastern India.

Background Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) patients often deteriorate rapidly based on viral infection-related inflammation and the subsequent cytokine storm. The clinical symptoms were found to be inconsistent with laboratory findings. There is a need to develop biochemical severity score to closely monitor COVID-19 patients. Methods This study was conducted in the department of biochemistry at All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) Bhubaneswar in collaboration with the intensive care unit. Laboratory data of 7,395 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 during the first three waves of the pandemic were analyzed. The serum high sensitivity high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP, immuno-turbidity method), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH, modified Wacker et al. method), and liver enzymes (kinetic-UV method) were estimated by fully automated chemistry analyzer. Serum ferritin and interleukin-6 (IL-6) were measured by one-step immunoassay using chemiluminescence technology. Three models were used in logistic regression to check for the predictive potential of biochemical parameters, and a COVID-19 biochemical severity score was calculated using a non-linear regression algorithm. Results The receiver operating characteristic curve found age, urea, uric acid, CRP, ferritin, IL6, and LDH with the highest odds of predicting ICU admission for COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 biochemical severity scores higher than 0.775 were highly predictive (odds ratio of 5.925) of ICU admission (AUC=0.740, p<0.001) as compared to any other individual parameter. For the validation, 30% of the total dataset was used as testing data (n=2095) with a sensitivity of 68.3%, specificity of 74.5%, and odds ratio of 6.304. Conclusion Age, urea, uric acid, ferritin, IL6, LDH, and CRP-based predictive probability algorithm calculating COVID-19 severity was found to be highly predictive of ICU admission for COVID-19 patients.

Awake proning in patients with COVID-19-related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: A rapid practice guideline.

This rapid practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the use of awake proning in adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19. The panel included 20 experts from 12 countries, including one patient representative, and used a strict conflict of interest policy for potential financial and intellectual conflicts of interest. Methodological support was provided by the guidelines in intensive care, development, and evaluation (GUIDE) group. Based on an updated systematic review, and the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) method we evaluated the certainty of evidence and developed recommendations using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. We conducted an electronic vote, requiring >80% agreement amongst the panel for a recommendation to be adopted. The panel made a strong recommendation for a trial of awake proning in adult patients with COVID-19 related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure who are not invasively ventilated. Awake proning appears to reduce the risk of tracheal intubation, although it may not reduce mortality. The panel judged that most patients would want a trial of awake proning, although this may not be feasible in some patients and some patients may not tolerate it. However, given the high risk of clinical deterioration amongst these patients, awake proning should be conducted in an area where patients can be monitored by staff experienced in rapidly detecting and managing clinical deterioration. This RPG panel recommends a trial of awake prone positioning in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19.

Impact of COVID-19 on non-COVID intensive care unit service utilization, case mix and outcomes: A registry-based analysis from India.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been responsible for over 3.4 million deaths globally and over 25 million cases in India. As part of the response, India imposed a nation-wide lockdown and prioritized COVID-19 care in hospitals and intensive care units (ICUs). Leveraging data from the Indian Registry of IntenSive care, we sought to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on critical care service utilization, case-mix, and clinical outcomes in non-COVID ICUs.  Methods: We included all consecutive patients admitted between 1 st October 2019 and 27 th September 2020. Data were extracted from the registry database and included patients admitted to the non-COVID or general ICUs at each of the sites. Outcomes included measures of resource-availability, utilisation, case-mix, acuity, and demand for ICU beds. We used a Mann-Whitney test to compare the pre-pandemic period (October 2019 - February 2020) to the pandemic period (March-September 2020). In addition, we also compared the period of intense lockdown (March-May 31 st 2020) with the pre-pandemic period. Results: There were 3424 patient encounters in the pre-pandemic period and 3524 encounters in the pandemic period. Comparing these periods, weekly admissions declined (median [Q1 Q3] 160 [145,168] to 113 [98.5,134]; p=0.00002); unit turnover declined (median [Q1 Q3] 12.1 [11.32,13] to 8.58 [7.24,10], p<0.00001), and APACHE II score increased (median [Q1 Q3] 19 [19,20] to 21 [20,22] ; p<0.00001). Unadjusted ICU mortality increased (9.3% to 11.7%, p=0.01519) and the length of ICU stay was similar (median [Q1 Q3] 2.11 [2, 2] vs. 2.24 [2, 3] days; p=0.15096). Conclusion: Our registry-based analysis of the impact of COVID-19 on non-COVID critical care demonstrates significant disruptions to healthcare utilization during the pandemic and an increase in the severity of illness.

Late manifestation of follicular conjunctivitis in ventilated patient following COVID-19 positive severe pneumonia

A 65-year-old known diabetic, hypertensive, and asthmatic patient was admitted for suspected coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) infection following complaints of breathlessness. He tested positive for COVID-19 and was put on ventilation. He developed severe follicular conjunctivitis of the right eye while on a ventilator, which was treated conservatively. The resolution of ocular signs was noted over 2 weeks without any complications. This case highlights the timeline of events and discusses the late ophthalmic manifestations in patients with COVID-19 infection.

Epidural morphine in COVID ARDS patients with high respiratory drive: a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: We aim to study the effect of epidural morphine as a means to reduce high respiratory drive in COVID 19 patients on non-invasive ventilation (NIV)-primary end point-and to study its effect on respiratory parameters, subjective patient comfort, rates of endotracheal intubation, duration of mechanical ventilation and mortality. TRIAL DESIGN: Parallel group, randomised, double blind, single centre placebo control trial. Allocation ratio 1:1, superiority trial PARTICIPANTS: Trial site and population-COVID ICU patients in the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India Inclusion and exclusion criteria Inclusion criteria Adult patients on NIV with COVID-19 Exclusion criteria Metabolic acidosis HCO3-< 16 and pH < 7.2. Severe hypoxemia warranting cessation of NIV and intubation, non-acceptance of NIV and proven sepsis. Technical difficulty for epidural catheterization, coagulation abnormalities, low respiratory drive and EOL orders. Sources or methods of recruitment-daily discussion at 8 am of new admissions to COVID ICU on NIV-consenting adult patients with COVID19 on NIV and high respiratory drive; not meeting exclusion criteria will be recruited for the trial and randomised. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Patients of both groups will be turned to a lateral or sitting position (as comfortable), and an injection of local anaesthetic be given at lumbar 2-3/3-4 space. In the intervention group, an epidural catheter will be inserted using aseptic technique and fixed to the skin. The control group will have a sham catheter fixed exactly like in the intervention group, but not entering the epidural space. The intervention group will be administered injection morphine sulphate once every 18-24 h into the epidural space. The doses will be escalated daily (5-10 mg), titrated to effect: escalation limited by hypoventilation resulting in respiratory acidosis (pH < 7.2). The intervention will continue for a minimum of 2 doses and a maximum of 5 doses (96 h) of morphine. It will be stopped if the epidural catheter gets dislodged before the second dose or the patient is weaned off non-invasive ventilation to high flow mask for a continuous period of 24 h or requires endotracheal intubation. The patient will be followed up till death or 28 days after ICU discharge. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary outcome-diaphragm thickening index fraction (average of minimum 3 readings) Secondary outcomes-ventilator parameters, sedation and pain scores, subjective comfort and dyspnoea scores, time to intubation, length of stay on NIV and 28-day mortality Timing of outcome assessment-every 8th hour assessment for 24 h after the last dose of epidural morphine or 120 h whichever is greater RANDOMISATION: A central random number list will be kept with the study research assistant. She will randomise according to the numbers available in the list using an allocation ratio of 1:1. An opaque sealed envelope concealing the allotted randomisation code will be dispatched to the ICU team. BLINDING (MASKING): The assessor, patient, nurses and physicians will be blind to group allocation. One member of the team not involved in research will administer the intervention. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): Twenty-five patients per group; 50 patients total TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1. Not recruiting yet. Recruitment to begin by 24 July 2021 and end by 31 August 2022 TRIAL REGISTRATION: Central Trials Registry India CTRI CTRI/2021/07/035093 . Registered on 23 July 2021. Prospectively registered FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Variation in therapeutic strategies for the management of severe COVID-19 in India: A nationwide cross-sectional survey.

AIM: During the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the physicians are using various off-label therapeutics to manage COVID-19. We undertook a cross-sectional survey to study the current variation in therapeutic strategies for managing severe COVID-19 in India. METHODS: From January 4 to January 18, 2021, an online cross-sectional survey was conducted among physicians involved in the management of severe COVID-19. The survey had three sections: 1. Antiviral agents, 2. Immunomodulators, and 3. Adjuvant therapies. RESULTS: 1055 respondents (from 24 states and five union territories), of which 64.2% were consultants, 54.3% working in private hospitals, and 39.1% were from critical care medicine completed the survey. Remdesivir (95.2%), antithrombotics (94.2%), corticosteroids (90.3%), vitamins (89.7%) and empirical antibiotics (85.6%) were the commonly used therapeutics. Ivermectin (33%), convalescent plasma (28.6%) and favipiravir (17.6%) were other antiviral agents used. Methylprednisolone (50.2%) and dexamethasone (44.1%) were preferred corticosteroids and at a dose equivalent of 8 mg of dexamethasone phosphate (70.2%). There was significant variation among physicians from different medical specialities in the use of favipiravir, corticosteroids, empirical antibiotics and vitamins. CONCLUSION: There is a considerable variation in the physicians' choice of therapeutic strategies for the management of severe COVID-19 in India, as compared with the available evidence.

Collateral Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Acute Care of Non-COVID Patients: An Internet-based Survey of Critical Care and Emergency Personnel.

PURPOSE: The impact of disruption to the care of non-coronavirus disease (COVID) patients (COVID collateral damage syndrome-CCDS) is largely unknown in resource-limited settings. We investigated CCDS as perceived by healthcare workers (HCWs) providing acute and critical care services in India. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A clinician and nurse codesigned and validated an internet-based survey, which was disseminated to HCWs using a multiple frame sampling technique. RESULTS: Responses were received from 468 HCWs (completion rate 84%); at the time of the survey, 48% were working in critical care, 41% aged 30-40 years, and 53% represented public institutions. Respondents perceived a decrease in service utilization and disruption to time-sensitive acute interventions (60.1% and 40.8%, respectively), with fear of infection (score, 63.0; standard deviation (SD), 31.8) and restrictions due to lockdown (61.4; SD 32.5) being cited as the causes of service disruption. Being overwhelmed or lack of protective equipment was perceived to contribute less to CCDS. Insistence on COVID test results X 2 (p = 0.02) and duty-avoidance (p < 0.01) was perceived as significant causes for CCDS by HCWs from private hospitals and those in leadership roles, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Fear of infection and the effect of lockdown were perceived as important contributors to CCDS resulting in disruption to services and decreased service utilization. Perceptions were influenced by HCWs' role and hospital organizational structure. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Tripathy S, Vijayaraghavan BKT, Panigrahi MK, Shetty AP, Haniffa R, Mishra RC, et al. Collateral Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Acute Care of Non-COVID Patients: An Internet-based Survey of Critical Care and Emergency Personnel. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(4):374-381.

Late manifestation of follicular conjunctivitis in ventilated patient following COVID-19 positive severe pneumonia.

A 65-year-old known diabetic, hypertensive, and asthmatic patient was admitted for suspected coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) infection following complaints of breathlessness. He tested positive for COVID-19 and was put on ventilation. He developed severe follicular conjunctivitis of the right eye while on a ventilator, which was treated conservatively. The resolution of ocular signs was noted over 2 weeks without any complications. This case highlights the timeline of events and discusses the late ophthalmic manifestations in patients with COVID-19 infection.