Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 30
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
Montalto, Francesca, Ippolito, Mariachiara, Noto, Alberto, Madotto, Fabiana, Gelardi, Filippa, Savatteri, Paolino, Giarratano, Antonino, Cortegiani, Andrea, Brescia, Fabrizio, Fabiani, Fabio, Zanier, Chiara, Nadalini, Elisa, Gambaretti, Eros, Gabriele, Francesco, Astuto, Marinella, Murabito, Paolo, Sanfilippo, Filippo, Misseri, Giovanni, Moscarelli, Alessandra, Spadaro, Savino, Bussolati, Enrico, Squadrani, Eleonora, Villa, Gianluca, D’Errico, Raffaella, Cocci, Giulia, Lanini, Iacopo, Mirabella, Lucia, Morelli, Alessandra, Tullo, Livio, Caggianelli, Girolamo, Ball, Lorenzo, Iiriti, Margherita, Giordani, Francesca, Giardina, Massimiliano, Mazzeo, Anna Teresa, Grasselli, Giacomo, Cattaneo, Emanuele, Alongi, Salvatore, Marenghi, Cristina, Marmiere, Marilena, Rocchi, Margherita, Turi, Stefano, Landoni, Giovanni, Torrano, Vito, Tinti, Giulia, Giorgi, Antonio, Fumagalli, Roberto, Salvo, Francesco, Blangetti, Ilaria, Cascella, Marco, Forte, Cira Antonietta, Navalesi, Paolo, Montalbano, Marta, Chiarelli, Valentina, Bonanno, Giuseppe, Ferrara, Francesco Paolo, Pernice, Innocenza, Catalisano, Giulia, Marino, Claudia, Presti, Gabriele, Fricano, Dario Calogero, Fucà, Rosa, Palmeri di Villalba, Cesira, Strano, Maria Teresa, Caruso, Sabrina, Scafidi, Antonino, Mazzarese, Vincenzo, Augugliaro, Ettore, Terranova, Valeria, Forfori, Francesco, Corradi, Francesco, Taddei, Erika, Isirdi, Alessandro, Pratesi, Giorgia, Puccini, Francesca, Paternoster, Gianluca, Barile, Alessio, Tescione, Marco, Santacaterina, Irene, Siclari, Eliana Maria, Tripodi, Vincenzo Francesco, Vadalà, Mariacristina, Agrò, Felice Eugenio, Pascarella, Giuseppe, Piliego, Chiara, Aceto, Paola, De Pascale, Gennaro, Dottarelli, Alessandra, Romanò, Bruno, Russo, Andrea, Covotta, Marco, Giorgerini, Valeria, Sardellitti, Federica, Vitelli, Giulia Maria, Coluzzi, Flaminia, Bove, Tiziana, Vetrugno, Luigi.
Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care ; 1(1):17-17, 2021.
Article in English | BioMed Central | ID: covidwho-1542137
3.
Ultraschall Med ; 2021 Nov 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1500782

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The goal of this survey was to describe the use and diffusion of lung ultrasound (LUS), the level of training received before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the clinical impact LUS has had on COVID-19 cases in intensive care units (ICU) from February 2020 to May 2020. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Italian Lung Ultrasound Survey (ITALUS) was a nationwide online survey proposed to Italian anesthesiologists and intensive care physicians carried out after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. It consisted of 27 questions, both quantitative and qualitative. RESULTS: 807 responded to the survey. The median previous LUS experience was 3 years (IQR 1.0-6.0). 473 (60.9 %) reported having attended at least one training course on LUS before the COVID-19 pandemic. 519 (73.9 %) reported knowing how to use the LUS score. 404 (52 %) reported being able to use LUS without any supervision. 479 (68.2 %) said that LUS influenced their clinical decision-making, mostly with respect to patient monitoring. During the pandemic, the median of patients daily evaluated with LUS increased 3-fold (p < 0.001), daily use of general LUS increased from 10.4 % to 28.9 % (p < 0.001), and the daily use of LUS score in particular increased from 1.6 % to 9.0 % (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This survey showed that LUS was already extensively used during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic by anesthesiologists and intensive care physicians in Italy, and then its adoption increased further. Residency programs are already progressively implementing LUS teaching. However, 76.7 % of the sample did not undertake any LUS certification.

4.
J Multidiscip Healthc ; 14: 2719-2730, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1456172

ABSTRACT

Background: Palliative care is a person-centered approach aiming to relieve patient's health-related suffering and it is often needed when caring for critically ill patients to manage symptoms and identify goals of care. Aim: To describe the integration of palliative care principles in anesthesiology clinical practice, within and outside the ICU and to analyze the additional challenges that COVID-19 pandemic is posing in this context. Methods: For the purpose of this review, PubMed database was searched for studies concerning palliative care and end of life care, in contexts involving anesthesiologists and intensivists, published in the last 5 years. Results: Anesthesiologists and intensivists integrate palliative care within their daily practice providing symptoms management as well as family counseling. High-quality communicational skills are fundamental for anesthesiologists and intensivists especially when interfacing with surrogate decision makers in the ICU or with patients in the preoperative setting while discussing goals of care. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged many aspects of palliative care delivery: reduced family presence within the ICU, communication with families through phone calls or video calls, patient-physician relationship mediated by bulky personal protective equipment and healthcare workers physical and psychological distress due to the increased workload and limitations in resources are some of the most evident. Conclusion: Anesthesiologists and intensivists are increasingly facing challenging clinical situations where principles and practice of palliative care have to be applied. In this sense, increasing knowledge on palliative care and providing specific training would allow to deliver high-quality symptom management, family counseling and end of life guidance in critical care settings. COVID-19 pandemic sets additional difficulties to palliative care delivery.

5.
Intensive Care Med ; 47(12): 1475-1477, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1453699

Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Microorganisms ; 9(10)2021 Sep 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1438669

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the occurrence of bloodstream infections in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and the related clinical consequences. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to estimate the pooled occurrence of BSIs among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and mortality of this patient population. METHODS: A systematic search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science from inception to 19 April 2021. The primary outcome was the occurrence of BSIs among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The secondary outcome was mortality at the longest available follow-up. RESULTS: Forty-six studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 42,694 patients evaluated. The estimated occurrence of BSIs was 7.3% (95% CI 4.7-1.1%) among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 41% (95% CI 30%-52.8%). The subgroup analysis conducted on patients admitted to ICU provided an estimated occurrence of 29.6% (95% CI 21.7%-38.8%). A higher occurrence of BSI was observed in patients with COVID-19, in comparison with patients without COVID-19 (OR 2.77; 95% CI 1.53-5.02; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis estimated the occurrence of BSIs among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at around 7%. A four-times higher occurrence was estimated among patients admitted to ICU.

8.
Acta Biomed ; 92(2): e2021096, 2021 05 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1261512

ABSTRACT

From February 2019 the World faces the Covid19 pandemic. The data in our possession are still insufficient to effectively combat this pathology. The gold standard for diagnosis remains molecular testing, while clinical and instrumental and serological diagnostics are highly nonspecific leading to a slowdown in the battle against covid19.[3] Can Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) help us? The use of large databases to cross-reference data to stratify the diagnostic scores, to quickly differentiate a critical Covid-19 patient from a non-critical one is the challenge of the future. All to achieve better management of resources in the field and a more effective therapeutic approach.[2].


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pharmaceutical Preparations , Artificial Intelligence , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Breathe (Sheff) ; 17(1): 200276, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1234551

ABSTRACT

In severe COVID-19, a 5-day remdesivir regimen seems as effective as a 10-day course of treatment and it may be safer. To date, the drug has no clearly proven efficacy over time. https://bit.ly/3tKOuvt.

12.
Antibiotics (Basel) ; 10(5)2021 May 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1223914

ABSTRACT

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to estimate the pooled occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) among patients admitted to an intensive care unit with COVID-19 and mortality of those who developed VAP. We performed a systematic search on PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science from inception to 2nd March 2021 for nonrandomized studies specifically addressing VAP in adult patients with COVID-19 and reporting data on at least one primary outcome of interest. Random effect single-arm meta-analysis was performed for the occurrence of VAP and mortality (at the longest follow up) and ICU length of stay. Twenty studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, for a total of 2611 patients with at least one episode of VAP. The pooled estimated occurrence of VAP was of 45.4% (95% C.I. 37.8-53.2%; 2611/5593 patients; I2 = 96%). The pooled estimated occurrence of mortality was 42.7% (95% C.I. 34-51.7%; 371/946 patients; I2 = 82%). The estimated summary estimated metric mean ICU LOS was 28.58 days (95% C.I. 21.4-35.8; I2 = 98%). Sensitivity analysis showed that patients with COVID-19 may have a higher risk of developing VAP than patients without COVID-19 (OR 3.24; 95% C.I. 2.2-4.7; P = 0.015; I2 = 67.7%; five studies with a comparison group).

13.
Resuscitation ; 164: 122-129, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1219386

ABSTRACT

AIM: To estimate the mortality rate, the rate of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival with favorable neurological outcome in patients with COVID-19 after in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and attempted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, bioRxiv and medRxiv were surveyed up to 8th February 2021 for studies reporting data on mortality of patients with COVID-19 after IHCA. The primary outcome sought was mortality (in-hospital or at 30 days) after IHCA with attempted CPR. Additional outcomes were the overall rate of IHCA, the rate of non-shockable presenting rhythms, the rate of ROSC and the rate of survival with favorable neurological status. RESULTS: Ten articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, for a total of 1179 COVID-19 patients after IHCA with attempted CPR. The estimated overall mortality rate (in-hospital or at 30 days) was 89.9% (95% Predicted Interval [P.I.] 83.1%-94.2%; 1060/1179 patients; I2 = 82%). The estimated rate of non-shockable presenting rhythms was 89% (95% P.I. 82.8%-93.1%; 1022/1205 patients; I2 = 85%), and the estimated rate of ROSC was 32.9% (95% P.I. 26%-40.6%; 365/1205 patients; I2 = 82%). The estimated overall rate of survival with favorable neurological status at 30 days was 6.3% (95% P.I. 4%-9.7%; 50/851 patients; I2 = 48%). Sensitivity analysis showed that COVID-19 patients had higher risk of death after IHCA than non COVID-19 patients (OR 2.34; 95% C.I. 1.37-3.99; number of studies = 3; 1215 patients). CONCLUSIONS: Although one of three COVID-19 patients undergoing IHCA may achieve ROSC, almost 90% may not survive at 30 days or to hospital discharge.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation , Heart Arrest , Heart Arrest/therapy , Hospitals , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
14.
Chest ; 159(4): 1426-1436, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-921554

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Sigh is a cyclic brief recruitment maneuver: previous physiologic studies showed that its use could be an interesting addition to pressure support ventilation to improve lung elastance, decrease regional heterogeneity, and increase release of surfactant. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is the clinical application of sigh during pressure support ventilation (PSV) feasible? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter noninferiority randomized clinical trial on adult intubated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure or ARDS undergoing PSV. Patients were randomized to the no-sigh group and treated by PSV alone, or to the sigh group, treated by PSV plus sigh (increase in airway pressure to 30 cm H2O for 3 s once per minute) until day 28 or death or successful spontaneous breathing trial. The primary end point of the study was feasibility, assessed as noninferiority (5% tolerance) in the proportion of patients failing assisted ventilation. Secondary outcomes included safety, physiologic parameters in the first week from randomization, 28-day mortality, and ventilator-free days. RESULTS: Two-hundred and fifty-eight patients (31% women; median age, 65 [54-75] years) were enrolled. In the sigh group, 23% of patients failed to remain on assisted ventilation vs 30% in the no-sigh group (absolute difference, -7%; 95% CI, -18% to 4%; P = .015 for noninferiority). Adverse events occurred in 12% vs 13% in the sigh vs no-sigh group (P = .852). Oxygenation was improved whereas tidal volume, respiratory rate, and corrected minute ventilation were lower over the first 7 days from randomization in the sigh vs no-sigh group. There was no significant difference in terms of mortality (16% vs 21%; P = .337) and ventilator-free days (22 [7-26] vs 22 [3-25] days; P = .300) for the sigh vs no-sigh group. INTERPRETATION: Among hypoxemic intubated ICU patients, application of sigh was feasible and without increased risk. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03201263; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.


Subject(s)
Positive-Pressure Respiration , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Aged , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal , Male , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/physiopathology , Respiratory Insufficiency/physiopathology , Respiratory Mechanics
15.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 115, 2021 03 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1143244

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The mortality of critically ill patients with COVID-19 is high, particularly among those receiving mechanical ventilation (MV). Despite the high number of patients treated worldwide, data on respiratory mechanics are currently scarce and the optimal setting of MV remains to be defined. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of available data about respiratory mechanics, gas exchange and MV settings in patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) for COVID-19-associated acute respiratory failure, and to identify knowledge gaps. MAIN TEXT: PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases were searched from inception to October 30, 2020 for studies providing at least one ventilatory parameter collected within 24 h from the ICU admission. The quality of the studies was independently assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form for Cohort Studies. A total of 26 studies were included for a total of 14,075 patients. At ICU admission, positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) values ranged from 9 to 16.5 cm of water (cmH2O), suggesting that high levels of PEEP were commonly used for setting MV for these patients. Patients with COVID-19 are severely hypoxemic at ICU admission and show a median ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ranging from 102 to 198 mmHg. Static respiratory system compliance (Crs) values at ICU admission were highly heterogenous, ranging between 24 and 49 ml/cmH2O. Prone positioning and neuromuscular blocking agents were widely used, ranging from 17 to 81 and 22 to 88%, respectively; both rates were higher than previously reported in patients with "classical" acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). CONCLUSIONS: Available data show that, in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19, respiratory mechanics and MV settings within 24 h from ICU admission are heterogeneous but similar to those reported for "classical" ARDS. However, to date, complete data regarding mechanical properties of respiratory system, optimal setting of MV and the role of rescue treatments for refractory hypoxemia are still lacking in the medical literature.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Respiration, Artificial , COVID-19/complications , Critical Illness , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/physiopathology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology , Respiratory Mechanics
16.
Ther Adv Infect Dis ; 8: 2049936121998562, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1133538

ABSTRACT

Background: Italy was the first Western country to be heavily affected by COVID-19. Healthcare workers (HCWs) were exposed to a high risk of occupational infection, partially due to insufficient personal protective equipment (PPE) supplies. This study aimed to describe the practices, availability, training, confidence in PPE use and the adverse effects due to extended PPE use, as reported by HCWs in Italy. We also aimed to provide a comparison between Italian data and those from other countries. Methods: This study was a secondary analysis of a previously published international study, the PPE-SAFE Survey, conducted in April 2020. Data were analysed from the original study database. Results: We analysed the responses from 380 healthcare workers based in Italy, out of the 2711 respondents to the international survey. Among the Italian respondents, FFP2 and FFP3 respirators or equivalent were the most used masks for routine tasks (respectively 188/380, 50%; and 163/380, 43%). The median time of wearing PPE without taking a break was 5 h [interquartile range (IQR) 4-6], with statistically significant difference from other countries [median 4 h (IQR 2-5) p < 0.0001]. In Italy, 249 out of 380 (65%) HCWs had never performed a formal fit test for a N95 mask or equivalent and 91/380 (24%) never had a partner for donning and doffing procedures. Most of the respondents (299/380, 79%) had received formal training in PPE use at any time. Conclusion: Most of the surveyed Italian HCWs reported working at above usual capacity, long shifts with PPE without breaks and routine use in intensive care unit of aerosol protection (e.g. FFP2/FFP3), hazmat suits and face shields/visors. The correct adherence to safety procedures (e.g. donning/doffing in pairs, performing fit test) has substantial scope for improvement in the future.

17.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 5559, 2021 03 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1125054

ABSTRACT

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for noninvasive respiratory support devices has dramatically increased, sometimes exceeding hospital capacity. The full-face Decathlon snorkeling mask, EasyBreath (EB mask), has been adapted to deliver continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) as an emergency respiratory interface. We aimed to assess the performance of this modified EB mask and to test its use during different gas mixture supplies. CPAP set at 5, 10, and 15 cmH2O was delivered to 10 healthy volunteers with a high-flow system generator set at 40, 80, and 120 L min-1 and with a turbine-driven ventilator during both spontaneous and loaded (resistor) breathing. Inspiratory CO2 partial pressure (PiCO2), pressure inside the mask, breathing pattern and electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdi) were measured at all combinations of CPAP/flows delivered, with and without the resistor. Using the high-flow generator set at 40 L min-1, the PiCO2 significantly increased and the system was unable to maintain the target CPAP of 10 and 15 cmH2O and a stable pressure within the respiratory cycle; conversely, the turbine-driven ventilator did. EAdi significantly increased with flow rates of 40 and 80 L min-1 but not at 120 L min-1 and with the turbine-driven ventilator. EB mask can be safely used to deliver CPAP only under strict constraints, using either a high-flow generator at a flow rate greater than 80 L min-1, or a high-performance turbine-driven ventilator.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure/instrumentation , Respiration, Artificial/instrumentation , Adult , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure/methods , Diving , Female , Healthy Volunteers , Humans , Male , Masks , Pandemics , Respiration , Respiration, Artificial/methods , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Ventilators, Mechanical
18.
Br J Anaesth ; 126(4): e155-e156, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1037015
19.
Clin Case Rep ; 8(12): 3352-3358, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-891201

ABSTRACT

Prone positioning is feasible in pregnancy and may have contributed to the positive outcome in this case. Doctors should not be reluctant to move a patient to a prone position just because they are pregnant.

20.
Am J Emerg Med ; 38(11): 2416-2424, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-754030

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The ongoing pandemic of COVID-19 brought to the fore prone positioning as treatment for patients with acute respiratory failure. With the increasing number of patients in prone position, both spontaneously breathing and mechanically ventilated, cardiac arrest in this position is more likely to occur. This scoping review aimed to summarize the available evidence on cardiopulmonary resuscitation in prone position ('reverse CPR') and knowledge or research gaps to be further evaluated. The protocol of this scoping review was prospectively registered on 10th May 2020 in Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/nfuh9). METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and pre-print repositories (bioRxiv and medRxiv) for simulation, pre-clinical and clinical studies on reverse CPR until 31st May 2020. RESULTS: We included 1 study on manikins, 31 case reports (29 during surgery requiring prone position) and 2 nonrandomized studies describing reverse CPR. No studies were found regarding reverse CPR in patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Even if the algorithms provided by the guidelines on basic and advanced life support remain valid in cardiac arrest in prone position, differences exist in the methods of performing CPR. There is no clear evidence of superiority in terms of effectiveness of reverse compared to supine CPR in patients with cardiac arrest occurring in prone position. The quality of evidence is low and knowledge gaps (e.g. protocols, training of healthcare personnel, devices for skill acquisition) should be fulfilled by further research. Meanwhile, a case-by-case evaluation of patient and setting characteristics should guide the decision on how to start CPR in such cases.


Subject(s)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Heart Arrest/therapy , Patient Positioning , Prone Position , COVID-19 , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...