Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine ; 25(12):1341-1342, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1619193

ABSTRACT

How to cite this article: Divatia JV. Are Mechanically Ventilated Patients with COVID-19 More Likely to Die Than Those without COVID-19? Perhaps Not. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(12):1341–1342.

2.
Indian J Crit Care Med ; 25(12): 1341-1342, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1561715

ABSTRACT

How to cite this article: Divatia JV. Are Mechanically Ventilated Patients with COVID-19 More Likely to Die Than Those without COVID-19? Perhaps Not. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(12):1341-1342.

3.
JAMA ; 326(18): 1807-1817, 2021 11 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1527380

ABSTRACT

Importance: A daily dose with 6 mg of dexamethasone is recommended for up to 10 days in patients with severe and critical COVID-19, but a higher dose may benefit those with more severe disease. Objective: To assess the effects of 12 mg/d vs 6 mg/d of dexamethasone in patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter, randomized clinical trial was conducted between August 2020 and May 2021 at 26 hospitals in Europe and India and included 1000 adults with confirmed COVID-19 requiring at least 10 L/min of oxygen or mechanical ventilation. End of 90-day follow-up was on August 19, 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to 12 mg/d of intravenous dexamethasone (n = 503) or 6 mg/d of intravenous dexamethasone (n = 497) for up to 10 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the number of days alive without life support (invasive mechanical ventilation, circulatory support, or kidney replacement therapy) at 28 days and was adjusted for stratification variables. Of the 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, 5 are included in this analysis (the number of days alive without life support at 90 days, the number of days alive out of the hospital at 90 days, mortality at 28 days and at 90 days, and ≥1 serious adverse reactions at 28 days). Results: Of the 1000 randomized patients, 982 were included (median age, 65 [IQR, 55-73] years; 305 [31%] women) and primary outcome data were available for 971 (491 in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group and 480 in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group). The median number of days alive without life support was 22.0 days (IQR, 6.0-28.0 days) in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group and 20.5 days (IQR, 4.0-28.0 days) in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted mean difference, 1.3 days [95% CI, 0-2.6 days]; P = .07). Mortality at 28 days was 27.1% in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group vs 32.3% in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted relative risk, 0.86 [99% CI, 0.68-1.08]). Mortality at 90 days was 32.0% in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group vs 37.7% in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted relative risk, 0.87 [99% CI, 0.70-1.07]). Serious adverse reactions, including septic shock and invasive fungal infections, occurred in 11.3% in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group vs 13.4% in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted relative risk, 0.83 [99% CI, 0.54-1.29]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia, 12 mg/d of dexamethasone compared with 6 mg/d of dexamethasone did not result in statistically significantly more days alive without life support at 28 days. However, the trial may have been underpowered to identify a significant difference. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04509973 and ctri.nic.in Identifier: CTRI/2020/10/028731.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Glucocorticoids/administration & dosage , Life Support Care , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Dexamethasone/adverse effects , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Glucocorticoids/adverse effects , Humans , Hypoxia/etiology , Hypoxia/therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Mycoses/etiology , Respiration, Artificial , Shock, Septic/etiology , Single-Blind Method
5.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 22(3): e74-e87, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1510480

ABSTRACT

During the current COVID-19 pandemic, health-care workers and uninfected patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 as a result of transmission from infected patients and health-care workers. In the absence of high-quality evidence on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, clinical practice of infection control and prevention in ICUs varies widely. Using a Delphi process, international experts in intensive care, infectious diseases, and infection control developed consensus statements on infection control for SARS-CoV-2 in an ICU. Consensus was achieved for 31 (94%) of 33 statements, from which 25 clinical practice statements were issued. These statements include guidance on ICU design and engineering, health-care worker safety, visiting policy, personal protective equipment, patients and procedures, disinfection, and sterilisation. Consensus was not reached on optimal return to work criteria for health-care workers who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 or the acceptable disinfection strategy for heat-sensitive instruments used for airway management of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Well designed studies are needed to assess the effects of these practice statements and address the remaining uncertainties.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Consensus , Infection Control/standards , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Intensive Care Units/standards , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Delphi Technique , Health Personnel/standards , Humans , Personal Protective Equipment/standards
6.
JAMA ; 326(18): 1807-1817, 2021 11 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1482066

ABSTRACT

Importance: A daily dose with 6 mg of dexamethasone is recommended for up to 10 days in patients with severe and critical COVID-19, but a higher dose may benefit those with more severe disease. Objective: To assess the effects of 12 mg/d vs 6 mg/d of dexamethasone in patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter, randomized clinical trial was conducted between August 2020 and May 2021 at 26 hospitals in Europe and India and included 1000 adults with confirmed COVID-19 requiring at least 10 L/min of oxygen or mechanical ventilation. End of 90-day follow-up was on August 19, 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to 12 mg/d of intravenous dexamethasone (n = 503) or 6 mg/d of intravenous dexamethasone (n = 497) for up to 10 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the number of days alive without life support (invasive mechanical ventilation, circulatory support, or kidney replacement therapy) at 28 days and was adjusted for stratification variables. Of the 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, 5 are included in this analysis (the number of days alive without life support at 90 days, the number of days alive out of the hospital at 90 days, mortality at 28 days and at 90 days, and ≥1 serious adverse reactions at 28 days). Results: Of the 1000 randomized patients, 982 were included (median age, 65 [IQR, 55-73] years; 305 [31%] women) and primary outcome data were available for 971 (491 in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group and 480 in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group). The median number of days alive without life support was 22.0 days (IQR, 6.0-28.0 days) in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group and 20.5 days (IQR, 4.0-28.0 days) in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted mean difference, 1.3 days [95% CI, 0-2.6 days]; P = .07). Mortality at 28 days was 27.1% in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group vs 32.3% in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted relative risk, 0.86 [99% CI, 0.68-1.08]). Mortality at 90 days was 32.0% in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group vs 37.7% in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted relative risk, 0.87 [99% CI, 0.70-1.07]). Serious adverse reactions, including septic shock and invasive fungal infections, occurred in 11.3% in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group vs 13.4% in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted relative risk, 0.83 [99% CI, 0.54-1.29]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia, 12 mg/d of dexamethasone compared with 6 mg/d of dexamethasone did not result in statistically significantly more days alive without life support at 28 days. However, the trial may have been underpowered to identify a significant difference. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04509973 and ctri.nic.in Identifier: CTRI/2020/10/028731.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Glucocorticoids/administration & dosage , Life Support Care , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Dexamethasone/adverse effects , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Glucocorticoids/adverse effects , Humans , Hypoxia/etiology , Hypoxia/therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Mycoses/etiology , Respiration, Artificial , Shock, Septic/etiology , Single-Blind Method
7.
JCO Glob Oncol ; 7: 1286-1305, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1362071

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: There are scarce data to aid in prognostication of the outcome of critically ill cancer patients with COVID-19. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we investigated the mortality of critically ill cancer patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We searched online databases and manually searched for studies in English that reported on outcomes of adult cancer patients with COVID-19 admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) or those with severe COVID-19 between December 2019 and October 2020. Risk of bias was assessed by the Modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. We also determined the odds of death for cancer patients versus noncancer patients, as also outcomes by cancer subtypes, presence of recent anticancer therapy, and presence of one or more comorbidities. Random-effects modeling was used. RESULTS: In 28 studies (1,276 patients), pooled mortality in cancer patients with COVID-19 admitted to an ICU was 60.2% (95% CI, 53.6 to 6.7; I2 = 80.27%), with four studies (7,259 patients) showing higher odds of dying in cancer versus noncancer patients (odds ratio 1.924; 95% CI, 1.596 to 2.320). In four studies (106 patients) of patients with cancer and severe COVID-19, pooled mortality was 59.4% (95% CI, -39.4 to 77.5; I2 = 72.28%); in one study, presence of hematologic malignancy was associated with significantly higher mortality compared with nonhematologic cancers (odds ratio 1.878; 95% CI, 1.171 to 3.012). Risk of bias was low. CONCLUSION: Most studies were reported before the results of trials suggesting the benefit of dexamethasone and tocilizumab, potentially overestimating mortality. The observed mortality of 60% in cancer patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU is not prohibitively high, and admission to the ICU should be considered for selected patients (registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020207209).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Adult , COVID-19/complications , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/mortality , Neoplasms/therapy , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Indian J Surg Oncol ; 12(Suppl 2): 234-239, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1240096

ABSTRACT

Multiple studies have reported the increased risk of pulmonary complications and mortality in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative COVID-19 infection. With several reports of long-term sequelae in patients recovered from COVID-19 infection, this survey was conducted to collect the opinions of anesthesiologists regarding modifications to pre-anesthesia checkup (PAC) when COVID-19 survivors are posted for elective surgeries. We designed, validated and distributed a detailed online questionnaire, about various modifications in PAC in different patient populations like asymptomatic patients, patients with mild, moderate or severe hypoxia, significant cardiac complaints during COVID-19 and also geriatric, pediatric and pregnant patients with a history of COVID-19. We received 154 responses. Majority of responders agree that 0-2 weeks from the date of negative for SARS-CoV-2, is the ideal duration for all elective surgeries. Greater than 50% responders agree that a fresh PAC evaluation should be done for such patients which should include documentation of current functional status, fresh chest X-ray, electrocardiogram and coagulation profile. All patients who had hypoxia or cardiac symptoms during COVID-19 infection and even recovered asymptomatic geriatric patients should undergo cardiorespiratory evaluation with investigations such as HRCT chest, ABG, PFT, echocardiography and troponin I levels. Patients' PAC should be individualized, factoring in the severity of COVID-19 infection, post recovery functional status, associated co-morbidities and the urgency as well as the risk of surgical intervention. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13193-021-01347-z.

9.
Ann Surg ; 272(3): e249-e252, 2020 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1066501

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Overburdened systems and concerns of adverse outcomes have resulted in deferred cancer surgeries with devastating consequences. In this COVID pandemic, the decision to continue elective cancer surgeries, and their subsequent outcomes, are sparsely reported from hotspots. METHODS: A prospective database of the Department of Surgical Oncology was analysed from March 23rd to April 30th, 2020. FINDINGS: Four hundred ninety-four elective surgeries were performed (377 untested and 117 tested for Covid 19 before surgery). Median age was 48 years with 13% (n = 64) above the age of 60 years. Sixty-eight percent patients were American Society of Anaesthesiology (ASA) grade I. As per surgical complexity grading, 71 (14·4%) cases were lower grade (I-III) and 423 (85.6%) were higher grade complex surgeries (IV - VI).Clavien-Dindo ≥ grade III complications were 5.6% (n = 28) and there were no postoperative deaths. Patients >60 years documented 9.3% major complications compared to 5.2% in <60 years (P = 0.169). The median hospital stay was 1 to 9 days across specialties.Postoperatively, 26 patients were tested for COVID 19 and 6 tested positive. They all had higher grade surgeries but none required escalated or intensive care treatment related to COVID infection. INTERPRETATION: A combination of scientific and administrative rationale contributed to favorable outcomes after major elective cancer surgeries. These results support the continuation of elective major cancer surgery in regions with Covid 19 trends similar to India.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Elective Surgical Procedures , Neoplasms/surgery , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Cohort Studies , Databases, Factual , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , India , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/mortality , Neoplasms/pathology , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Patient Selection
11.
Indian J Anaesth ; 64(Suppl 2): S97-S102, 2020 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-710391

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has gripped the world and is evolving day by day with deaths every hour. Being immunocompromised, cancer patients are more susceptible to contract the infection. Onco-surgeries on such immunocompromised patients have an increased risk of infection of COVID-19 to patients and health care workers. The society of Onco-Anesthesia and Perioperative Care (SOAPC) thereby came out with an advisory for safe perioperative management of cancer surgery during this challenging time of the COVID-19 pandemic.

12.
J Surg Oncol ; 122(6): 1013-1019, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-694538

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCWs) are at risk of getting infected while at work, for example, operating room (OR), hence it is pertinent that they don all the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) to minimize the chance of getting infected. METHODS: A COVID-19 specific briefing and debriefing form was created and used in the OR along with the World Health Organization surgical safety checklist to reinforce the use of appropriate PPE. An audit was subsequently done to understand the compliance to PPE use, followed by a survey based on the findings of the audit to understand the issues related to noncompliance. RESULTS: The form was used in 183 out of the 238 (77%) surgeries performed during a months' time. The overall compliance for PPE usage was 96.3%. Noncompliance was seen most often for eye protection (45/567) (P = .01). The survey revealed that this was mostly among surgeons mainly due to discomfort, poor visibility, and frequent fogging. CONCLUSIONS: Our HCW were adapting well to the new normal of donning appropriate PPE in the OR, except for the eye protection due to discomfort and visibility related issues. This is important to know so that necessary changes could be introduced to better the compliance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Guideline Adherence/standards , Health Personnel/psychology , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Neoplasms/surgery , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , Guidelines as Topic , Health Personnel/education , Humans , Infection Control/organization & administration , Operating Rooms , Perception , Protective Clothing
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL