Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 29
Filter
1.
Nat Rev Nephrol ; 18(10): 607-608, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2050405
2.
Intensive Care Med ; 48(9): 1260-1261, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2041270
3.
Curr Opin Crit Care ; 28(4): 374-380, 2022 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1985170

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Several studies have recently explored the effects of intravenous vitamin C in sepsis. We aimed to summarize their findings to provide perspectives for future research. RECENT FINDINGS: Sepsis trials examined 6 g/day of intravenous vitamin C with or without the thiamine and/or hydrocortisone compared with placebo or hydrocortisone. Network meta-analysis reported that intravenous vitamin C, thiamine, hydrocortisone, or combinations of these drugs was not proven to reduce long-term mortality. However, the component network meta-analysis suggested an association of high-dose (>6 g/day) and very-high dose vitamin C (>12 g/day) and decreased mortality but with low certainty. The preclinical investigations have, however, advanced to much higher doses of intravenous vitamin C therapy since a scoping review on harm reported that mega-doses of intravenous vitamin C (50-100 g/day) had been administered without any conclusive adverse effects. In a Gram-negative sheep model, renal tissue hypoperfusion was reversed, followed by improvements in kidney function when a mega-dose of vitamin C (150 g/day equivalent) was administered. SUMMARY: The effect of intravenous vitamin C in critically ill patients has yet to be determined and might be dose-dependent. Clinical studies of very high or mega doses of vitamin C are justified by preclinical data.


Subject(s)
Ascorbic Acid , Sepsis , Animals , Ascorbic Acid/therapeutic use , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Hydrocortisone/therapeutic use , Sepsis/drug therapy , Sheep , Thiamine/therapeutic use , Vitamins/therapeutic use
4.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 36(12): 4496-4500, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1956429

ABSTRACT

The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), whose major vasopressor effector is angiotensin II (ATII), has multiple activities and regulates sodium-water homeostasis and fluid and blood pressure homeostasis. RAAS plays a crucial role in cardiocirculatory shock because it counteracts hypotension and hypovolemia by activating different physiologic responses. Based on the encouraging results of the ATHOS-3 trial, the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency approved the use of ATII for catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock. More recently, ATII was used for the compassionate treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19. Beyond its vasopressor properties, ATII was hypothesized to have antiviral activity because it induces internalization and degradation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors used by SARS-Cov-2 to infect cells. Overall, the use of ATII in patients with COVID-19 showed promising results because its administration was associated with the achievement and maintenance of target mean arterial pressure, increased PaO2/FIO2 ratio, and decreased FIO2. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the available knowledge on the use of ATII in patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Sepsis , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Angiotensin II/therapeutic use , Renin-Angiotensin System/physiology , Vasoconstrictor Agents/therapeutic use , Vasoconstrictor Agents/pharmacology , Sepsis/drug therapy
5.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 205(10): 1159-1168, 2022 05 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1846610

ABSTRACT

Rationale: The outcomes of survivors of critical illness due to coronavirus disease (COVID-19) compared with non-COVID-19 are yet to be established. Objectives: We aimed to investigate new disability at 6 months in mechanically ventilated patients admitted to Australian ICUs with COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19. Methods: We included critically ill patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 from two prospective observational studies. Patients were eligible if they were adult (age ⩾ 8 yr) and received ⩾24 hours of mechanical ventilation. In addition, patients with COVID-19 were eligible with a positive laboratory PCR test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Measurements and Main Results: Demographic, intervention, and hospital outcome data were obtained from electronic medical records. Survivors were contacted by telephone for functional outcomes with trained outcome assessors using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Between March 6, 2020, and April 21, 2021, 120 critically ill patients with COVID-19, and between August 2017 and January 2019, 199 critically ill patients without COVID-19, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Patients with COVID-19 were older (median [interquartile range], 62 [55-71] vs. 58 [44-69] yr; P = 0.019) with a lower Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (17 [13-20] vs. 19 [15-23]; P = 0.011). Although duration of ventilation was longer in patients with COVID-19 than in those without COVID-19 (12 [5-19] vs. 4.8 [2.3-8.8] d; P < 0.001), 180-day mortality was similar between the groups (39/120 [32.5%] vs. 70/199 [35.2%]; P = 0.715). The incidence of death or new disability at 180 days was similar (58/93 [62.4%] vs. 99/150 [66/0%]; P = 0.583). Conclusions: At 6 months, there was no difference in new disability for patients requiring mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04401254).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Australia/epidemiology , Critical Illness , Humans , Respiration, Artificial , Survivors
6.
J Med Virol ; 94(5): 2079-2088, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1777582

ABSTRACT

To expand our understanding of the role of angiotensin II (ANGII) in coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19), we conducted an international, multicenter registry study to assess the use of ANGII in patients with COVID-19 compared to patients not receiving ANGII. Critically ill adult patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and received ANGII were matched with COVID-19 patients not receiving ANGII according to age, respiratory support, history of hypertension, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and/or ANGII receptor blocker, and date of admission. All outcomes were exploratory in nature and included improvement in oxygenation, duration of organ support, and mortality. In one year, 132 patients were included (65 in the ANGII group and 67 in the control group), and patients were comparable in baseline characteristics. During the first 12 h of infusion, patients in the ANGII had a faster decrease in FiO2  and maintained similar mean arterial pressure levels. Hospital mortality was not statistically significantly different between the groups (53.8% vs. 40.3%; p = 0.226). Within the limitations of such a study design, our findings confirm previous observations of a potentially positive effect of ANGII on blood pressure and FiO2 but no effect on patient-centered outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases , Adult , Angiotensin II/pharmacology , COVID-19/drug therapy , Humans , Registries , SARS-CoV-2
7.
N Engl J Med ; 386(9): 815-826, 2022 03 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1721751

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Whether the use of balanced multielectrolyte solution (BMES) in preference to 0.9% sodium chloride solution (saline) in critically ill patients reduces the risk of acute kidney injury or death is uncertain. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, we assigned critically ill patients to receive BMES (Plasma-Lyte 148) or saline as fluid therapy in the intensive care unit (ICU) for 90 days. The primary outcome was death from any cause within 90 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes were receipt of new renal-replacement therapy and the maximum increase in the creatinine level during ICU stay. RESULTS: A total of 5037 patients were recruited from 53 ICUs in Australia and New Zealand - 2515 patients were assigned to the BMES group and 2522 to the saline group. Death within 90 days after randomization occurred in 530 of 2433 patients (21.8%) in the BMES group and in 530 of 2413 patients (22.0%) in the saline group, for a difference of -0.15 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -3.60 to 3.30; P = 0.90). New renal-replacement therapy was initiated in 306 of 2403 patients (12.7%) in the BMES group and in 310 of 2394 patients (12.9%) in the saline group, for a difference of -0.20 percentage points (95% CI, -2.96 to 2.56). The mean (±SD) maximum increase in serum creatinine level was 0.41±1.06 mg per deciliter (36.6±94.0 µmol per liter) in the BMES group and 0.41±1.02 mg per deciliter (36.1±90.0 µmol per liter) in the saline group, for a difference of 0.01 mg per deciliter (95% CI, -0.05 to 0.06) (0.5 µmol per liter [95% CI, -4.7 to 5.7]). The number of adverse and serious adverse events did not differ meaningfully between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that the risk of death or acute kidney injury among critically ill adults in the ICU was lower with the use of BMES than with saline. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the Health Research Council of New Zealand; PLUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02721654.).


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury/prevention & control , Critical Illness/therapy , Saline Solution/therapeutic use , Acute Kidney Injury/etiology , Adult , Aged , Critical Care/methods , Critical Illness/mortality , Double-Blind Method , Female , Fluid Therapy , Gluconates/adverse effects , Gluconates/therapeutic use , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Magnesium Chloride/adverse effects , Magnesium Chloride/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , Potassium Chloride/adverse effects , Potassium Chloride/therapeutic use , Saline Solution/adverse effects , Sodium Acetate/adverse effects , Sodium Acetate/therapeutic use , Sodium Chloride/adverse effects , Sodium Chloride/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome
10.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 382, 2021 11 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506095

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are few reports of new functional impairment following critical illness from COVID-19. We aimed to describe the incidence of death or new disability, functional impairment and changes in health-related quality of life of patients after COVID-19 critical illness at 6 months. METHODS: In a nationally representative, multicenter, prospective cohort study of COVID-19 critical illness, we determined the prevalence of death or new disability at 6 months, the primary outcome. We measured mortality, new disability and return to work with changes in the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 12L (WHODAS) and health status with the EQ5D-5LTM. RESULTS: Of 274 eligible patients, 212 were enrolled from 30 hospitals. The median age was 61 (51-70) years, and 124 (58.5%) patients were male. At 6 months, 43/160 (26.9%) patients died and 42/108 (38.9%) responding survivors reported new disability. Compared to pre-illness, the WHODAS percentage score worsened (mean difference (MD), 10.40% [95% CI 7.06-13.77]; p < 0.001). Thirteen (11.4%) survivors had not returned to work due to poor health. There was a decrease in the EQ-5D-5LTM utility score (MD, - 0.19 [- 0.28 to - 0.10]; p < 0.001). At 6 months, 82 of 115 (71.3%) patients reported persistent symptoms. The independent predictors of death or new disability were higher severity of illness and increased frailty. CONCLUSIONS: At six months after COVID-19 critical illness, death and new disability was substantial. Over a third of survivors had new disability, which was widespread across all areas of functioning. Clinical trial registration NCT04401254 May 26, 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Disabled Persons , Recovery of Function/physiology , Return to Work/trends , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Australia/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Critical Illness/therapy , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Health Status , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality/trends , Prospective Studies , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
11.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand ; 66(1): 65-75, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462715

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The prediction of in-hospital mortality for ICU patients with COVID-19 is fundamental to treatment and resource allocation. The main purpose was to develop an easily implemented score for such prediction. METHODS: This was an observational, multicenter, development, and validation study on a national critical care dataset of COVID-19 patients. A systematic literature review was performed to determine variables possibly important for COVID-19 mortality prediction. Using a logistic multivariable model with a LASSO penalty, we developed the Rapid Evaluation of Coronavirus Illness Severity (RECOILS) score and compared its performance against published scores. RESULTS: Our development (validation) cohort consisted of 1480 (937) adult patients from 14 (11) Dutch ICUs admitted between March 2020 and April 2021. Median age was 65 (65) years, 31% (26%) died in hospital, 74% (72%) were males, average length of ICU stay was 7.83 (10.25) days and average length of hospital stay was 15.90 (19.92) days. Age, platelets, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, pH, blood urea nitrogen, temperature, PaCO2, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score measured within +/-24 h of ICU admission were used to develop the score. The AUROC of RECOILS score was 0.75 (CI 0.71-0.78) which was higher than that of any previously reported predictive scores (0.68 [CI 0.64-0.71], 0.61 [CI 0.58-0.66], 0.67 [CI 0.63-0.70], 0.70 [CI 0.67-0.74] for ISARIC 4C Mortality Score, SOFA, SAPS-III, and age, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Using a large dataset from multiple Dutch ICUs, we developed a predictive score for mortality of COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU, which outperformed other predictive scores reported so far.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Aged , Critical Care , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Observational Studies as Topic , Patient Acuity , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Br J Pharmacol ; 178(19): 3864-3868, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1402887

ABSTRACT

Sepsis induced by bacteria or viruses can result in multiorgan dysfunction, which is a major cause of death in intensive care units. Current treatments are only supportive, and there are no treatments that reverse the pathophysiological effects of sepsis. Vitamin C has antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anticoagulant and immune modulatory actions, so it is a rational treatment for sepsis. Here, we summarise data that support the use of megadose vitamin C as a treatment for sepsis and COVID-19. Megadose intravenous sodium ascorbate (150 g per 40 kg over 7 h) dramatically improved the clinical state and cardiovascular, pulmonary, hepatic and renal function and decreased body temperature, in a clinically relevant ovine model of Gram-negative bacteria-induced sepsis. In a critically ill COVID-19 patient, intravenous sodium ascorbate (60 g) restored arterial pressure, improved renal function and increased arterial blood oxygen levels. These findings suggest that megadose vitamin C should be trialled as a treatment for sepsis and COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Sepsis , Animals , Ascorbic Acid , Humans , Multiple Organ Failure/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Sepsis/drug therapy , Sheep
13.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 250, 2021 07 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1312651

ABSTRACT

A personalized mechanical ventilation approach for patients with adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) based on lung physiology and morphology, ARDS etiology, lung imaging, and biological phenotypes may improve ventilation practice and outcome. However, additional research is warranted before personalized mechanical ventilation strategies can be applied at the bedside. Ventilatory parameters should be titrated based on close monitoring of targeted physiologic variables and individualized goals. Although low tidal volume (VT) is a standard of care, further individualization of VT may necessitate the evaluation of lung volume reserve (e.g., inspiratory capacity). Low driving pressures provide a target for clinicians to adjust VT and possibly to optimize positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), while maintaining plateau pressures below safety thresholds. Esophageal pressure monitoring allows estimation of transpulmonary pressure, but its use requires technical skill and correct physiologic interpretation for clinical application at the bedside. Mechanical power considers ventilatory parameters as a whole in the optimization of ventilation setting, but further studies are necessary to assess its clinical relevance. The identification of recruitability in patients with ARDS is essential to titrate and individualize PEEP. To define gas-exchange targets for individual patients, clinicians should consider issues related to oxygen transport and dead space. In this review, we discuss the rationale for personalized approaches to mechanical ventilation for patients with ARDS, the role of lung imaging, phenotype identification, physiologically based individualized approaches to ventilation, and a future research agenda.


Subject(s)
Precision Medicine/methods , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Humans , Precision Medicine/trends , Respiration, Artificial/trends , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/physiopathology , Respiratory Mechanics/physiology
14.
Minerva Anestesiol ; 87(8): 891-902, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1262728

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is associated with elevated levels of inflammatory cytokines. We present the characteristics and outcomes of patients treated in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) with immunosuppressive drugs, either tocilizumab or anakinra compared with controls. METHODS: A single-center observational prospective study on ICU invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients. The primary outcome was the clinical improvement at day 28. A Bayesian framework was employed, and all analyses were adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: Sixty-one consecutive invasively ventilated patients were included, nine (14.7%) received tocilizumab and 15 (24.6%) received anakinra. Over the first seven days, tocilizumab was associated with a greater decrease in C-reactive protein (P<0.001). After adjusting for confounders, the probability of clinical improvement at day 28 compared to control was 7∙6% (OR=0.36 [95% CrI: 0.09-1.46]) for tocilizumab and 40.9% (OR=0.89 [95% CrI: 0.32-2.43]) for anakinra. At day 28, the probability of being in a better clinical category was 2.5% (OR=2.98 [95% CrI: 1.00-8.88]) for tocilizumab, and 49.5% (OR=1.00 [95% CrI: 0.42-2.42]) for anakinra. CONCLUSIONS: In invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients, treatment with anakinra was associated with a higher probability of clinical improvement compared to tocilizumab; however, treatment with either drug did not result in clinically meaningful improvements compared with controls.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Bayes Theorem , Humans , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
15.
Crit Care Med ; 49(4): e479-e480, 2021 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1238253
16.
J Med Virol ; 93(5): 3261-3267, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1206829

ABSTRACT

Zinc inhibits replication of the SARS-CoV virus. We aimed to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and biological effect of administering high-dose intravenous zinc (HDIVZn) to patients with COVID-19. We performed a Phase IIa double-blind, randomized controlled trial to compare HDIVZn to placebo in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We administered trial treatment per day for a maximum of 7 days until either death or hospital discharge. We measured zinc concentration at baseline and during treatment and observed patients for any significant side effects. For eligible patients, we randomized and administered treatment to 33 adult participants to either HDIVZn (n = 15) or placebo (n = 18). We observed no serious adverse events throughout the study for a total of 94 HDIVZn administrations. However, three participants in the HDIVZn group reported infusion site irritation. Mean serum zinc on Day 1 in the placebo, and the HDIVZn group was 6.9 ± 1.1 and 7.7 ± 1.6 µmol/l, respectively, consistent with zinc deficiency. HDIVZn, but not placebo, increased serum zinc levels above the deficiency cutoff of 10.7 µmol/l (p < .001) on Day 6. Our study did not reach its target enrollment because stringent public health measures markedly reduced patient hospitalizations. Hospitalized COVID-19 patients demonstrated zinc deficiency. This can be corrected with HDIVZn. Such treatment appears safe, feasible, and only associated with minimal peripheral infusion site irritation. This pilot study justifies further investigation of this treatment in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Zinc/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Injections, Intravenous , Inpatients , Male , Middle Aged , Oxygen/blood , Pilot Projects , Respiration, Artificial , Zinc/administration & dosage
17.
Chest ; 160(2): 538-548, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1202982

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented demand for ICUs, with the need to triage admissions along with the development of ICU triage criteria. However, how these criteria relate to outcomes in patients already admitted to the ICU is unknown, as is the incremental ICU capacity that triage of these patients might create given existing admission practices. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the short- and long-term survival of low- vs high-priority patients for ICU admission according to current pandemic triage criteria? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This study analyzed prospectively collected registry data (2007-2018) in 23 ICUs in Victoria, Australia, with probabilistic linkage with death registries. After excluding elective surgery, admissions were stratified according to existing ICU triage protocol prioritization as low (age ≥ 85 years, or severe chronic illness, or Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA] score = 0 or ≥ 12), medium (SOFA score = 8-11) or high (SOFA score = 1-7) priority. The primary outcome was long-term survival. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, ICU length of stay (LOS) and bed-day usage. RESULTS: This study examined 126,687 ICU admissions. After 5 years of follow-up, 1,093 of 3,296 (33%; 95% CI, 32-34) of "low-priority" patients aged ≥ 85 years or with severe chronic illness and 86 of 332 (26%; 95% CI, 24-28) with a SOFA score ≥ 12 were still alive. Sixty-three of 290 (22%; 95% CI, 17-27) of patients in these groups followed up for 10 years were still alive. Together, low-priority patients accounted for 27% of all ICU bed-days and had lower in-hospital mortality (22%) than the high-priority patients (28%). Among nonsurvivors, low-priority admissions had shorter ICU LOS than medium- or high-priority admissions. INTERPRETATION: Current SOFA score or age or severe comorbidity-based ICU pandemic triage protocols exclude patients with a close to 80% hospital survival, a > 30% five-year survival, and 27% of ICU bed-day use. These findings imply the need for stronger evidence-based ICU triage protocols.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Critical Illness/classification , Critical Illness/mortality , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Triage/standards , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate , Time Factors
18.
Br J Clin Pharmacol ; 87(10): 3737-3746, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1142872

ABSTRACT

An outbreak of a novel coronavirus (COVID-19 or 2019-CoV) infection has posed significant threats to international health and the economy. Patients with COVID-19 are at risk of cytokine storm, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), reduced blood oxygenation, mechanical ventilation, and a high death rate. Although recent studies have shown remdesivir and dexamethasone as treatment options, there is an urgent need to find a treatment to inhibit virus replication and to control the progression of the disease. Essential biometal zinc has generated a lot of excitement as one of the promising candidates to reduce the severity of COVID-19 infection. Several published observations outlined in the review are the reasons why there is a global enthusiasm that zinc therapy could be a possible therapeutic option. However, the biggest challenge in realising the therapeutic value of zinc is lack of optimal treatment modalities such as dose, duration of zinc supplementation and the mode of delivery. In this review, we discuss the regulatory mechanism that hinges upon the bioavailability of zinc. Finally, we propose that intravenous zinc could circumvent the confounding factors affecting the bioavailability of zinc and allow zinc to achieve its therapeutic potential. If successful, due to advantages such as lack of toxicity, low cost and ease of availability, intravenous zinc could be rapidly implemented clinically.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cytokine Release Syndrome , Dietary Supplements , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Zinc
20.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 18(8): 1380-1389, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-999862

ABSTRACT

Rationale: Both 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are transmitted by respiratory secretions and in severe cases result in a viral pneumonitis, requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. However, no studies have compared the clinical characteristics and outcomes of such patients. Objectives: To report and compare the demographic characteristics, treatments, use of critical care resources, and outcomes of patients admitted to an Australian ICU with H1N1 influenza during the winter of 2009, and SARS-CoV-2 during the winter of 2020. Methods: This was a multicenter project, using national data from previous and ongoing epidemiological studies concerning severe acute respiratory infections in Australia. All ICUs admitting patients with H1N1 or coronavirus disease (COVID-19) were included and contributed data. We compared clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with H1N1 admitted to ICU in the winter of 2009 versus patients with COVID-19 admitted to ICU in the winter of 2020. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Potential years of life lost (PYLL) were calculated according to sex-adjusted life expectancy in Australia. Results: Across the two epochs, 861 patients were admitted to ICUs; 236 (27.4%) with COVID-19 and 625 (72.6%) with H1N1 influenza. The number of ICU admissions and bed-days occupied were higher with 2009 H1N1 influenza. Patients with COVID-19 were older, more often male and overweight, and had lower Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores at ICU admission. The highest age-specific incidence of ICU admission was among infants (0-1 yr of age) for H1N1, and among the elderly (≥65 yr) for COVID-19. Unadjusted in-hospital mortality was similar (11.5% in COVID-19 vs. 16.1% in H1N1; odds ratio, 0.68 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.42-1.06]; P = 0.10). The PYLL was greater with H1N1 influenza than with COVID-19 at 154.1 (95% CI, 148.7-159.4) versus 13.6 (95% CI, 12.2-15.1) PYLL per million inhabitants. Conclusions: In comparison with 2009 H1N1 influenza, COVID-19 admissions overwinter in Australia resulted in fewer ICU admissions, and lower bed-day occupancy. Crude in-hospital mortality was similar, but because of demographic differences in affected patients, deaths due to 2009 H1N1 influenza led to an 11-fold increase in the number of PYLL in critically ill patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype , Influenza, Human , Aged , Australia/epidemiology , Critical Care , Critical Illness , Humans , Infant , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/therapy , Intensive Care Units , Male , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL