Applications of rotational thromboelastometry in heparin monitoring in critical COVID-19 disease: Observations in the Maastricht Intensive Care COVID cohort

Background Critically ill COVID-19 patients are at risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Therefore, they receive thromboprophylaxis and, when appropriate, therapeutic unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). To monitor heparins in COVID-19 disease, whole-blood rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) may be a promising alternative to the aPTT and anti-Xa assays. Objective To evaluate the ROTEM INTEM/HEPTEM ratios in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients treated with UFH and therapeutic LMWH. Material and methods A subcohort of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients of the prospective Maastricht Intensive Care Covid (MaastrICCht) cohort was studied. Anti-Xa, aPTT, and ROTEM measurements following treatment with UFH or therapeutic dose of LMWH (nadroparin) were evaluated using uni- and multivariable linear regression analysis and receiver operating characteristics. Results A total of 98 patients were included, of which 82 were treated with UFH and 16 with therapeutic LMWH. ROTEM-measured INTEM/HEPTEM CT ratio was higher in patients using UFH (1.4 [1.3–1.4]) compared to patients treated with LMWH (1.0 [1.0–1.1], p < 0.001). Both the aPTT and anti-Xa were associated with the CT ratio. However, the β-regression coefficient (95%CI) was significantly higher in patients on UFH (0.31 (0.001–0.62)) compared to therapeutic LMWH (0.09 (0.05–0.13)) for comparison with the anti-Xa assay. Furthermore, ROC analysis demonstrated an area under the curve for detecting UFH of 0.936(0.849–1.00), 0.851(0.702–1.000), and 0.645(0.465–0.826) for the CT ratio, aPTT, and anti-Xa, respectively. Conclusion The ROTEM INTEM/HEPTEM CT ratio appears a promising tool to guide anticoagulant therapy in ICU patients with COVID-19 disease, but associations with clinical endpoints are currently lacking.

Structural under-reporting of informed consent, data handling and sharing, ethical approval, and application of Open Science principles as proxies for study quality conduct in COVID-19 research: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic required science to provide answers rapidly to combat the outbreak. Hence, the reproducibility and quality of conducting research may have been threatened, particularly regarding privacy and data protection, in varying ways around the globe. The objective was to investigate aspects of reporting informed consent and data handling as proxies for study quality conduct. METHODS: A systematic scoping review was performed by searching PubMed and Embase. The search was performed on November 8th, 2020. Studies with hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 over 18 years old were eligible for inclusion. With a focus on informed consent, data were extracted on the study design, prestudy protocol registration, ethical approval, data anonymisation, data sharing and data transfer as proxies for study quality. For reasons of comparison, data regarding country income level, study location and journal impact factor were also collected. RESULTS: 972 studies were included. 21.3% of studies reported informed consent, 42.6% reported waivers of consent, 31.4% did not report consent information and 4.7% mentioned other types of consent. Informed consent reporting was highest in clinical trials (94.6%) and lowest in retrospective cohort studies (15.0%). The reporting of consent versus no consent did not differ significantly by journal impact factor (p=0.159). 16.8% of studies reported a prestudy protocol registration or design. Ethical approval was described in 90.9% of studies. Information on anonymisation was provided in 17.0% of studies. In 257 multicentre studies, 1.2% reported on data sharing agreements, and none reported on Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable data principles. 1.2% reported on open data. Consent was most often reported in the Middle East (42.4%) and least often in North America (4.7%). Only one report originated from a low-income country. DISCUSSION: Informed consent and aspects of data handling and sharing were under-reported in publications concerning COVID-19 and differed between countries, which strains study quality conduct when in dire need of answers.

COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study with an opportunity-centric approach from an ICU perspective in a teaching hospital. Upsides worth to secure?

OBJECTIVES: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the staff in the intensive care unit (ICU) was materially, physically and emotionally challenged. This qualitative study investigated the effects that ICU staff experienced and were considered of value to be permanently implemented. SETTING: ICU in an university medical centre during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: An opportunity-centric approach was applied in individual semi-structured interviews to optimise the achieved results and was guided by the theoretical model of appreciative inquiry (AI). PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen ICU staff members (8 nurses and 7 intensivists) participated. RESULTS: Working during the COVID-19 pandemic catalysed interprofessional collaboration and team learning in the ICU on an individual and team level, centred around a common goal: taking care of critically ill patients with COVID-19. The effect of interprofessional collaboration was that provisions were taken care of quicker than usual, without bureaucratic delays. However, this effect was experienced to be transient. Also, ICU staff perceived limited possibilities to help patients and families around the palliative phase, and they perceived a lack of appreciation from higher management. This is a point of future attention: how to make this perceived lack of appreciation more visible to all (ICU) staff. CONCLUSION: Regarding our primary question, the ICU staff voiced that the direct communication and collaboration are the most important elements of the COVID-19 peak they would like to preserve. Furthermore, it was learnt that consolation and support for family members should not be forgotten. Considering the results, we believe that further research concerning team reflexivity might contribute to (or enhance) our knowledge about working together during and after a crisis.

Regional peak flow as a novel approach to assess regional pulmonary mechanics by electrical impedance tomography: an observational validation study.

Background: Spontaneous breathing efforts during mechanical ventilation are a widely accepted weaning approach for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients. These efforts can be too vigorous, possibly inflicting lung and diaphragm damage. Higher positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels can be used to lower the magnitude of vigorous breathing efforts. Nevertheless, PEEP titrating tools are lacking in spontaneous mechanical ventilation (SMV). Therefore, the aim is to develop an electrical impedance tomography (EIT) algorithm for quantifying regional lung mechanics independent from a stable plateau pressure phase based on regional peak flow (RPF) by EIT, which is hypothetically applicable in SMV and to validate this algorithm in patients on controlled mechanical ventilation (CMV). Methods: The RPF algorithm quantifies a cumulative overdistension (ODRPF) and collapse (CLRPF) rate and is validated in a prospective cohort of mechanically ventilated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) patients on CMV. ODRPF and CLRPF are compared with compliance-based cumulative overdistension (ODP500) and collapse (CLP500) rates from the Pulmovista 500 EIT device at multiple PEEP levels (PEEP 10 cmH2O to PEEP 24 cmH2O) in EIT measurements from CMV patients by linear mixed models, Bland-Altman analysis and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: Seventy-eight patients were included. Linear mixed models revealed an association between ODRPF and ODP500 of 1.02 (0.98-1.07, P<0.001) and between CLRPF and CLP500 of 0.93 (0.80-1.05, P<0.001). ICC values ranged from 0.78 to 0.86 (P<0.001) for ODRPF and ODP500 and from 0.70 to 0.85 (P<0.001) for CLRPF and CLP500 (PEEP 10 to PEEP 24). The mean bias between ODRPF and ODP500 in these PEEP levels ranged from 0.80% to 4.19% and from -1.31% to 0.13% between CLRPF and CLP500. Conclusions: A RPF approach for quantifying regional lung mechanics showed a moderate to good agreement in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related ARDS patients on CMV compared to the compliance-based approach. This, in addition to being independent of a plateau pressure phase, indicates that the RPF approach is a valid method to explore for quantifying regional lung mechanics in SMV.

Prevalence, pathophysiology, prediction and health-related quality of life of long COVID: study protocol of the longitudinal multiple cohort CORona Follow Up (CORFU) study.

INTRODUCTION: The variety, time patterns and long-term prognosis of persistent COVID-19 symptoms (long COVID-19) in patients who suffered from mild to severe acute COVID-19 are incompletely understood. Cohort studies will be combined to describe the prevalence of long COVID-19 symptoms, and to explore the pathophysiological mechanisms and impact on health-related quality of life. A prediction model for long COVID-19 will be developed and internally validated to guide care in future patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Data from seven COVID-19 cohorts will be aggregated in the longitudinal multiple cohort CORona Follow Up (CORFU) study. CORFU includes Dutch patients who suffered from COVID-19 at home, were hospitalised without or with intensive care unit treatment, needed inpatient or outpatient rehabilitation and controls who did not suffer from COVID-19. Individual cohort study designs were aligned and follow-up has been synchronised. Cohort participants will be followed up for a maximum of 24 months after acute infection. Next to the clinical characteristics measured in individual cohorts, the CORFU questionnaire on long COVID-19 outcomes and determinants will be administered digitally at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after the infection. The primary outcome is the prevalence of long COVID-19 symptoms up to 2 years after acute infection. Secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life (eg, EQ-5D), physical functioning, and the prevalence of thromboembolic complications, respiratory complications, cardiovascular diseases and endothelial dysfunction. A prediction model and a patient platform prototype will be developed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval was obtained from the medical research ethics committee of Maastricht University Medical Center+ and Maastricht University (METC 2021-2990) and local committees of the participating cohorts. The project is supported by ZonMW and EuroQol Research Foundation. Results will be published in open access peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at (inter)national conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05240742.

Predicting COVID-19 prognosis in the ICU remained challenging: external validation in a multinational regional cohort.

OBJECTIVES: Many prediction models for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been developed. External validation is mandatory before implementation in the intensive care unit (ICU). We selected and validated prognostic models in the Euregio Intensive Care COVID (EICC) cohort. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: In this multinational cohort study, routine data from COVID-19 patients admitted to ICUs within the Euregio Meuse-Rhine were collected from March to August 2020. COVID-19 models were selected based on model type, predictors, outcomes, and reporting. Furthermore, general ICU scores were assessed. Discrimination was assessed by area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) and calibration by calibration-in-the-large and calibration plots. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool results. RESULTS: 551 patients were admitted. Mean age was 65.4 ± 11.2 years, 29% were female, and ICU mortality was 36%. Nine out of 238 published models were externally validated. Pooled AUCs were between 0.53 and 0.70 and calibration-in-the-large between -9% and 6%. Calibration plots showed generally poor but, for the 4C Mortality score and Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC) score, moderate calibration. CONCLUSION: Of the nine prognostic models that were externally validated in the EICC cohort, only two showed reasonable discrimination and moderate calibration. For future pandemics, better models based on routine data are needed to support admission decision-making.

Serial thrombin generation and exploration of alternative anticoagulants in critically ill COVID-19 patients: Observations from Maastricht Intensive Care COVID Cohort.

Background: COVID-19 associated coagulopathy (CAC) is associated with an increase in thromboembolic events. Current guidelines recommend prophylactic heparins in the management of CAC. However, the efficacy of this strategy in the intensive care population remains uncertain. Objective: We aimed to measure thrombin generation (TG) to assess CAC in intensive care unit (ICU) patients receiving thromboprophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH). In addition, we performed statistical modeling to link TG parameters to patient characteristics and clinical parameters. Lastly, we studied the potency of different anticoagulants as an alternative to LMWH treatment in ex vivo COVID-19 plasma. Patients/Methods: We included 33 patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted at the ICU. TG was measured at least twice over the course of 6 weeks after admission. Thrombin generation parameters peak height and endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) were compared to healthy controls. Results were subsequently correlated with a patient characteristics and laboratory measurements. In vitro spiking in TG with rivaroxaban, dabigatran, argatroban and orgaran was performed and compared to LMWH. Results: Anti-Xa levels of all patients remained within the therapeutic range throughout follow-up. At baseline, the mean (SE) endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) was 1,727 (170) nM min and 1,620 (460) nM min for ellagic acid (EA) and tissue factor (TF), respectively. In line with this we found a mean (SE) peak height of 353 (45) nM and 264 (96) nM for EA and TF. Although fluctuating across the weeks of follow-up, TG parameters remained elevated despite thromboprophylaxis. In vitro comparison of LMWHs and direct thrombin inhibitors (e.g., agratroban, dabigatran) revealed a higher efficacy in reducing coagulation potential for direct thrombin inhibition in both ellagic acid (EA) and tissue factor (TF) triggered TG. Conclusion: In a sub-group of mechanically ventilated, critically ill COVID-19 patients, despite apparent adequate anti-coagulation doses evaluated by anti-Xa levels, thrombin generation potential remained high during ICU admission independent of age, sex, body mass index, APACHE II score, cardiovascular disease, and smoking status. These observations could, only partially, be explained by (anti)coagulation and thrombosis, inflammation, and multi-organ failure. Our in vitro data suggested that direct thrombin inhibition compared with LMWH might offer an alternate, more effective anticoagulant strategy in COVID-19.

Pulmonary pathophysiology development of COVID-19 assessed by serial Electrical Impedance Tomography in the MaastrICCht cohort.

Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection present with different lung compliance and progression of disease differs. Measures of lung mechanics in SARS-CoV-2 patients may unravel different pathophysiologic mechanisms during mechanical ventilation. The objective of this prospective observational study is to describe whether Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT) guided positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels unravel changes in EIT-derived parameters over time and whether the changes differ between survivors and non-survivors. Serial EIT-measurements of alveolar overdistension, collapse, and compliance change in ventilated SARS-CoV-2 patients were analysed. In 80 out of 94 patients, we took 283 EIT measurements (93 from day 1-3 after intubation, 66 from day 4-6, and 124 from day 7 and beyond). Fifty-one patients (64%) survived the ICU. At admission mean PaO2/FiO2-ratio was 184.3 (SD 61.4) vs. 151.3 (SD 54.4) mmHg, (p = 0.017) and PEEP was 11.8 (SD 2.8) cmH2O vs. 11.3 (SD 3.4) cmH2O, (p = 0.475), for ICU survivors and non-survivors. At day 1-3, compliance was ~ 55 mL/cmH2O vs. ~ 45 mL/cmH2O in survivors vs. non-survivors. The intersection of overdistension and collapse curves appeared similar at a PEEP of ~ 12-13 cmH2O. At day 4-6 compliance changed to ~ 50 mL/cmH2O vs. ~ 38 mL/cmH2O. At day 7 and beyond, compliance was ~ 38 mL/cmH2O with the intersection at a PEEP of ~ 9 cmH2O vs. ~ 25 mL/cmH2O with overdistension intersecting at collapse curves at a PEEP of ~ 7 cmH2O. Surviving SARS-CoV-2 patients show more favourable EIT-derived parameters and a higher compliance compared to non-survivors over time. This knowledge is valuable for discovering the different groups.

Anticoagulants for thrombosis prophylaxis in acutely ill patients admitted to hospital: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefits and harms of different types and doses of anticoagulant drugs for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients who are acutely ill and admitted to hospital. DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, clinical trial registries, and national health authority databases. The search was last updated on 16 November 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials that evaluated low or intermediate dose low-molecular-weight heparin, low or intermediate dose unfractionated heparin, direct oral anticoagulants, pentasaccharides, placebo, or no intervention for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill adult patients in hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Random effects, bayesian network meta-analyses used four co-primary outcomes: all cause mortality, symptomatic venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and serious adverse events at or closest timing to 90 days. Risk of bias was also assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias 2.0 tool. The quality of evidence was graded using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis framework. RESULTS: 44 randomised controlled trials that randomly assigned 90 095 participants were included in the main analysis. Evidence of low to moderate quality suggested none of the interventions reduced all cause mortality compared with placebo. Pentasaccharides (odds ratio 0.32, 95% credible interval 0.08 to 1.07), intermediate dose low-molecular-weight heparin (0.66, 0.46 to 0.93), direct oral anticoagulants (0.68, 0.33 to 1.34), and intermediate dose unfractionated heparin (0.71, 0.43 to 1.19) were most likely to reduce symptomatic venous thromboembolism (very low to low quality evidence). Intermediate dose unfractionated heparin (2.63, 1.00 to 6.21) and direct oral anticoagulants (2.31, 0.82 to 6.47) were most likely to increase major bleeding (low to moderate quality evidence). No conclusive differences were noted between interventions regarding serious adverse events (very low to low quality evidence). When compared with no intervention instead of placebo, all active interventions did more favourably with regard to risk of venous thromboembolism and mortality, and less favourably with regard to risk of major bleeding. The results were robust in prespecified sensitivity and subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Low-molecular-weight heparin in an intermediate dose appears to confer the best balance of benefits and harms for prevention of venous thromboembolism. Unfractionated heparin, in particular the intermediate dose, and direct oral anticoagulants had the least favourable profile. A systematic discrepancy was noted in intervention effects that depended on whether placebo or no intervention was the reference treatment. Main limitations of this study include the quality of the evidence, which was generally low to moderate due to imprecision and within-study bias, and statistical inconsistency, which was addressed post hoc. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020173088.

Coronary Artery Calcifications Are Associated With More Severe Multiorgan Failure in Patients With Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection: Longitudinal Results of the Maastricht Intensive Care COVID Cohort.

PURPOSE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is regarded as a multisystemic disease. Patients with preexisting cardiovascular disease have an increased risk for a more severe disease course. This study aimed to investigate if a higher degree of coronary artery calcifications (CAC) on a standard chest computed tomography (CT) scan in mechanically ventilated patients was associated with a more severe multiorgan failure over time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection who underwent a chest CT were prospectively included. CT was used to establish the extent of CAC using a semiquantitative grading system. We categorized patients into 3 sex-specific tertiles of CAC: lowest, intermediate, and highest CAC score. Daily, the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores were collected to evaluate organ failure over time. Linear mixed-effects regression was used to investigate differences in SOFA scores between tertiles. The models were adjusted for age, sex, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, cardiovascular risk factors, and chronic liver, lung, and renal disease. RESULTS: In all, 71 patients were included. Patients in the highest CAC tertile had, on average, over time, 1.8 (0.5-3.1) points higher SOFA score, compared with the lowest CAC tertile ( P =0.005). This association remained significant after adjustment for age, sex, and APACHE II score (1.4 [0.1-2.7], P =0.042) and clinically relevant after adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors (1.3 [0.0-2.7], P =0.06) and chronic diseases (1.3 [-0.2 to 2.7], P =0.085). CONCLUSION: A greater extent of CAC is associated with a more severe multiorgan failure in mechanically ventilated coronavirus disease 2019 patients.

Cardiovascular outcome 6 months after severe coronavirus disease 2019 infection.

OBJECTIVES: In coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), cardiovascular risk factors and myocardial injury relate to increased mortality. We evaluated the extent of cardiac sequelae 6 months after hospital discharge in patients surviving ICU hospitalization for COVID-19. METHODS: All survivors of Maastricht-ICU were invited for comprehensive cardiovascular evaluation 6 months after discharge from ICU. Cardiac screening included an electrocardiogram, cardiac biomarkers, echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and, wherever indicated, cardiac computed tomography or coronary angiogram. RESULTS: Out of 52 survivors, 81% ( n  = 42) participated to the cardiovascular follow-up [median follow-up of 6 months, interquartile range (IQR) 6.1-6.7]. Eight patients (19%) had newly diagnosed coronary artery disease (CAD), of which two required a percutaneous intervention. Echocardiographic global longitudinal strain (GLS) was abnormal in 24% and CMR-derived GLS was abnormal in 12%, despite normal left ventricular ejection fraction in all. None of the patients showed elevated T 1 relaxation times and five patients (14%) had an elevated T 2 relaxation time. Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) reflecting regional myocardial fibrosis was increased in eight patients (21%), of which three had myocarditis and three had pericarditis. CONCLUSION: Cardiovascular follow-up at 6 months after ICU-admission for severe COVID-19 revealed that one out of five invasively mechanically ventilated survivors had CAD, a quarter had subclinical left ventricular dysfunction defined as reduced echocardiographic GLS, and 42% of the patients had CMR abnormalities (reduced LVEF, reduced GLS, LGE presence, and elevated T 2 ). On the basis of these findings, long-term cardiovascular follow-up is strongly recommended in all post-IC COVID-19 patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial Register number [NL8613]) https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8613Video abstract:http://links.lww.com/HJH/B899 .

Temporary mechanical circulatory support for COVID-19 patients: A systematic review of literature.

OBJECTIVE: Myocardial damage occurs in up to 25% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. While veno-venous extracorporeal life support (V-V ECLS) is used as respiratory support, mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may be required for severe cardiac dysfunction. This systematic review summarizes the available literature regarding MCS use rates, disease drivers for MCS initiation, and MCS outcomes in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: PubMed/EMBASE were searched until October 14, 2021. Articles including adults receiving ECLS for COVID-19 were included. The primary outcome was the rate of MCS use. Secondary outcomes included mortality at follow-up, ECLS conversion rate, intubation-to-cannulation time, time on ECLS, cardiac diseases, use of inotropes, and vasopressors. RESULTS: Twenty-eight observational studies (comprising both ECLS-only populations and ECLS patients as part of larger populations) included 4218 COVID-19 patients (females: 28.8%; median age: 54.3 years, 95%CI: 50.7-57.8) of whom 2774 (65.8%) required ECLS with the majority (92.7%) on V-V ECLS, 4.7% on veno-arterial ECLS and/or Impella, and 2.6% on other ECLS. Acute heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and cardiac arrest were reported in 7.8%, 9.7%, and 6.6% of patients, respectively. Vasopressors were used in 37.2%. Overall, 3.1% of patients required an ECLS change from V-V ECLS to MCS for heart failure, myocarditis, or myocardial infarction. The median ECLS duration was 15.9 days (95%CI: 13.9-16.3), with an overall survival of 54.6% and 28.1% in V-V ECLS and MCS patients. One study reported 61.1% survival with oxy-right ventricular assist device. CONCLUSION: MCS use for cardiocirculatory compromise has been reported in 7.3% of COVID-19 patients requiring ECLS, which is a lower percentage compared to the incidence of any severe cardiocirculatory complication. Based on the poor survival rates, further investigations are warranted to establish the most appropriated indications and timing for MCS in COVID-19.

Serial Assessment of Myocardial Injury Markers in Mechanically Ventilated Patients With SARS-CoV-2 (from the Prospective MaastrICCht Cohort).

Myocardial injury in COVID-19 is associated with in-hospital mortality. However, the development of myocardial injury over time and whether myocardial injury in patients with COVID-19 at the intensive care unit is associated with outcome is unclear. This study prospectively investigates myocardial injury with serial measurements over the full course of intensive care unit admission in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. As part of the prospective Maastricht Intensive Care COVID cohort, predefined myocardial injury markers, including high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and electrocardiographic characteristics were serially collected in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. Linear mixed-effects regression was used to compare survivors with nonsurvivors, adjusting for gender, age, APACHE-II score, daily creatinine concentration, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and obesity. In 90 patients, 57 (63%) were survivors and 33 (37%) nonsurvivors, and a total of 628 serial electrocardiograms, 1,565 hs-cTnT, and 1,559 NT-proBNP concentrations were assessed. Log-hs-cTnT was lower in survivors compared with nonsurvivors at day 1 (ß -0.93 [-1.37; -0.49], p <0.001) and did not change over time. Log-NT-proBNP did not differ at day 1 between both groups but decreased over time in the survivor group (ß -0.08 [-0.11; -0.04] p <0.001) compared with nonsurvivors. Many electrocardiographic abnormalities were present in the whole population, without significant differences between both groups. In conclusion, baseline hs-cTnT and change in NT-proBNP were strongly associated with mortality. Two-thirds of patients with COVID-19 showed electrocardiographic abnormalities. Our serial assessment suggests that myocardial injury is common in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 and is associated with outcome.

Differences and Similarities Among COVID-19 Patients Treated in Seven ICUs in Three Countries Within One Region: An Observational Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate healthcare system-driven variation in general characteristics, interventions, and outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients admitted to the ICU within one Western European region across three countries. DESIGN: Multicenter observational cohort study. SETTING: Seven ICUs in the Euregio Meuse-Rhine, one region across Belgium, The Netherlands, and Germany. PATIENTS: Consecutive COVID-19 patients supported in the ICU during the first pandemic wave. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, laboratory values, and outcome data were retrieved after ethical approval and data-sharing agreements. Descriptive statistics were performed to investigate country-related practice variation. From March 2, 2020, to August 12, 2020, 551 patients were admitted. Mean age was 65.4 ± 11.2 years, and 29% were female. At admission, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores were 15.0 ± 5.5, 16.8 ± 5.5, and 15.8 ± 5.3 (p = 0.002), and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were 4.4 ± 2.7, 7.4 ± 2.2, and 7.7 ± 3.2 (p < 0.001) in the Belgian, Dutch, and German parts of Euregio, respectively. The ICU mortality rate was 22%, 42%, and 44%, respectively (p < 0.001). Large differences were observed in the frequency of organ support, antimicrobial/inflammatory therapy application, and ICU capacity. Mixed-multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that differences in ICU mortality were independent of age, sex, disease severity, comorbidities, support strategies, therapies, and complications. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients admitted to ICUs within one region, the Euregio Meuse-Rhine, differed significantly in general characteristics, applied interventions, and outcomes despite presumed genetic and socioeconomic background, admission diagnosis, access to international literature, and data collection are similar. Variances in healthcare systems' organization, particularly ICU capacity and admission criteria, combined with a rapidly spreading pandemic might be important drivers for the observed differences. Heterogeneity between patient groups but also healthcare systems should be presumed to interfere with outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019.

Better COVID-19 Intensive Care Unit survival in females, independent of age, disease severity, comorbidities, and treatment.

Although male Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) patients have higher Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission rates and a worse disease course, a comprehensive analysis of female and male ICU survival and underlying factors such as comorbidities, risk factors, and/or anti-infection/inflammatory therapy administration is currently lacking. Therefore, we investigated the association between sex and ICU survival, adjusting for these and other variables. In this multicenter observational cohort study, all patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia admitted to seven ICUs in one region across Belgium, The Netherlands, and Germany, and requiring vital organ support during the first pandemic wave were included. With a random intercept for a center, mixed-effects logistic regression was used to investigate the association between sex and ICU survival. Models were adjusted for age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score, comorbidities, and anti-infection/inflammatory therapy. Interaction terms were added to investigate effect modifications by sex with country and sex with obesity. A total of 551 patients (29% were females) were included. Mean age was 65.4 ± 11.2 years. Females were more often obese and smoked less frequently than males (p-value 0.001 and 0.042, respectively). APACHE II scores of females and males were comparable. Overall, ICU mortality was 12% lower in females than males (27% vs 39% respectively, p-value < 0.01) with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.62 (95%CI 0.39-0.96, p-value 0.032) after adjustment for age and APACHE II score, 0.63 (95%CI 0.40-0.99, p-value 0.044) after additional adjustment for comorbidities, and 0.63 (95%CI 0.39-0.99, p-value 0.047) after adjustment for anti-infection/inflammatory therapy. No effect modifications by sex with country and sex with obesity were found (p-values for interaction > 0.23 and 0.84, respectively). ICU survival in female SARS-CoV-2 patients was higher than in male patients, independent of age, disease severity, smoking, obesity, comorbidities, anti-infection/inflammatory therapy, and country. Sex-specific biological mechanisms may play a role, emphasizing the need to address diversity, such as more sex-specific prediction, prognostic, and therapeutic approach strategies.

Performance of prediction models for short-term outcome in COVID-19 patients in the emergency department: a retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has a high burden on the healthcare system. Prediction models may assist in triaging patients. We aimed to assess the value of several prediction models in COVID-19 patients in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: In this retrospective study, ED patients with COVID-19 were included. Prediction models were selected based on their feasibility. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality, secondary outcomes were 14-day mortality and a composite outcome of 30-day mortality and admission to medium care unit (MCU) or intensive care unit (ICU). The discriminatory performance of the prediction models was assessed using an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS: We included 403 patients. Thirty-day mortality was 23.6%, 14-day mortality was 19.1%, 66 patients (16.4%) were admitted to ICU, 48 patients (11.9%) to MCU, and 152 patients (37.7%) met the composite endpoint. Eleven prediction models were included. The RISE UP score and 4 C mortality scores showed very good discriminatory performance for 30-day mortality (AUC 0.83 and 0.84, 95% CI 0.79-0.88 for both), significantly higher than that of the other models. CONCLUSION: The RISE UP score and 4 C mortality score can be used to recognise patients at high risk for poor outcome and may assist in guiding decision-making and allocating resources.

Vital Signs Prediction for COVID-19 Patients in ICU.

This study introduces machine learning predictive models to predict the future values of the monitored vital signs of COVID-19 ICU patients. The main vital sign predictors include heart rate, respiration rate, and oxygen saturation. We investigated the performances of the developed predictive models by considering different approaches. The first predictive model was developed by considering the following vital signs: heart rate, blood pressure (systolic, diastolic and mean arterial, pulse pressure), respiration rate, and oxygen saturation. Similar to the first approach, the second model was developed using the same vital signs, but it was trained and tested based on a leave-one-subject-out approach. The third predictive model was developed by considering three vital signs: heart rate (HR), respiration rate (RR), and oxygen saturation (SpO2). The fourth model was a leave-one-subject-out model for the three vital signs. Finally, the fifth predictive model was developed based on the same three vital signs, but with a five-minute observation rate, in contrast with the aforementioned four models, where the observation rate was hourly to bi-hourly. For the five models, the predicted measurements were those of the three upcoming observations (on average, three hours ahead). Based on the obtained results, we observed that by limiting the number of vital sign predictors (i.e., three vital signs), the prediction performance was still acceptable, with the average mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) being 12%,5%, and 21.4% for heart rate, oxygen saturation, and respiration rate, respectively. Moreover, increasing the observation rate could enhance the prediction performance to be, on average, 8%,4.8%, and 17.8% for heart rate, oxygen saturation, and respiration rate, respectively. It is envisioned that such models could be integrated with monitoring systems that could, using a limited number of vital signs, predict the health conditions of COVID-19 ICU patients in real-time.

Hemostasis and fibrinolysis in COVID-19 survivors 6 months after intensive care unit discharge.

BACKGROUND: The prothrombotic phenotype has been extensively described in patients with acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, potential long-term hemostatic abnormalities are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the changes in routine hemostasis laboratory parameters and tissue-type plasminogen activator (tPA) rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) 6 months after COVID-19 intensive care unit (ICU) discharge in patients with and without venous thromboembolism (VTE) during admission. METHODS: Patients with COVID-19 of the Maastricht Intensive Care COVID cohort with tPA ROTEM measurement at ICU and 6-month follow-up were included. TPA ROTEM is a whole blood viscoelastic assay that illustrates both clot development and fibrinolysis due to simultaneous addition of tissue factor and tPA. Analyzed ROTEM parameters include clotting time, maximum clot firmness (MCF), lysis onset time (LOT), and lysis time (LT). RESULTS: Twenty-two patients with COVID-19 were included and showed extensive hemostatic abnormalities before ICU discharge. TPA ROTEM MCF (75 mm [interquartile range, 68-78]-59 mm [49-63]; P ≤ .001), LOT (3690 seconds [2963-4418]-1786 seconds [1465-2650]; P ≤ .001), and LT (7200 seconds [6144-7200]-3138 seconds [2591-4389]; P ≤ .001) normalized 6 months after ICU discharge. Of note, eight and four patients still had elevated fibrinogen and D-dimer concentrations at follow-up, respectively. In general, no difference in median hemostasis parameters at 6-month follow-up was observed between patients with (n=14) and without (n=8) VTE, although fibrinogen appeared to be lower in the VTE group (VTE-, 4.3 g/L [3.7-4.7] vs VTE+, 3.4 g/L [3.2-4.2]; P = .05). CONCLUSIONS: Six months after COVID-19 ICU discharge, no persisting hypercoagulable or hypofibrinolytic profile was detected by tPA ROTEM. Nevertheless, increased D-dimer and fibrinogen concentrations persist up to 6 months in some patients, warranting further exploration of the role of hemostasis in long-term morbidity after hospital discharge.

Predicting mortality of individual patients with COVID-19: a multicentre Dutch cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Develop and validate models that predict mortality of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 admitted to the hospital. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A multicentre cohort across 10 Dutch hospitals including patients from 27 February to 8 June 2020. PARTICIPANTS: SARS-CoV-2 positive patients (age ≥18) admitted to the hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: 21-day all-cause mortality evaluated by the area under the receiver operator curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. The predictive value of age was explored by comparison with age-based rules used in practice and by excluding age from the analysis. RESULTS: 2273 patients were included, of whom 516 had died or discharged to palliative care within 21 days after admission. Five feature sets, including premorbid, clinical presentation and laboratory and radiology values, were derived from 80 features. Additionally, an Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)-based data-driven feature selection selected the 10 features with the highest F values: age, number of home medications, urea nitrogen, lactate dehydrogenase, albumin, oxygen saturation (%), oxygen saturation is measured on room air, oxygen saturation is measured on oxygen therapy, blood gas pH and history of chronic cardiac disease. A linear logistic regression and non-linear tree-based gradient boosting algorithm fitted the data with an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.85) and 0.82 (0.79 to 0.85), respectively, using the 10 selected features. Both models outperformed age-based decision rules used in practice (AUC of 0.69, 0.65 to 0.74 for age >70). Furthermore, performance remained stable when excluding age as predictor (AUC of 0.78, 0.75 to 0.81). CONCLUSION: Both models showed good performance and had better test characteristics than age-based decision rules, using 10 admission features readily available in Dutch hospitals. The models hold promise to aid decision-making during a hospital bed shortage.