Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
J Clin Med ; 11(15)2022 Jul 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1957362


BACKGROUND: Renal tubular acidosis (RTA) is an extremely rare cause of metabolic acidosis (10 in 100,000). RTA has been linked neither to pregnancy nor to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The purpose of this study was to analyze the prevalence and clinical course of normal anion gap metabolic acidosis in critically ill pregnant COVID-19 patients and to compare them to an age-matched nonpregnant female patient cohort. METHODS: Secondary analysis was conducted on a prospective observational cohort of critically ill patients suffering from COVID-19 consecutively admitted to a tertiary intensive care unit (ICU) between February 2020 and April 2021. RESULTS: A total of 321 COVID-19 patients required admission to the ICU; 95 (30%) were female, and 18 (19%) were of childbearing age. Seven of eight (88%) pregnant women (all in the last trimester) required advanced respiratory support due to COVID-19. The estimated glomerular filtration rate was 135 (123-158) mL/min/m2 body surface area, and six pregnant women (86%) were diagnosed with a normal, respiratory compensated, anion gap metabolic acidosis (pHmin 7.3 (7.18-7.31), HCO3-min 14.8 (12.8-18.6) mmol/L, and paCO2 3.4 (3.3-4.5) kPa). Three (43%) acidotic pregnant women fulfilled diagnostic criteria for RTA. All women recovered spontaneously within less 7 days. CONCLUSIONS: Metabolic acidosis seems to be very common (85%) in pregnant critically ill COVID-19 patients, and the prevalence of RTA might be higher than normal. It remains to be demonstrated if this observation is an indirect epiphenomenon or due to a direct viral effect on the tubular epithelium.

Front Med (Lausanne) ; 8: 607594, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1325533


The continued digitalization of medicine has led to an increased availability of longitudinal patient data that allows the investigation of novel and known diseases in unprecedented detail. However, to accurately describe any underlying pathophysiology and allow inter-patient comparisons, individual patient trajectories have to be synchronized based on temporal markers. In this pilot study, we use longitudinal data from critically ill ICU COVID-19 patients to compare the commonly used alignment markers "onset of symptoms," "hospital admission," and "ICU admission" with a novel objective method based on the peak value of the inflammatory marker C-reactive protein (CRP). By applying our CRP-based method to align the progression of neutrophils and lymphocytes, we were able to define a pathophysiological window that improved mortality risk stratification in our COVID-19 patient cohort. Our data highlights that proper synchronization of longitudinal patient data is crucial for accurate interpatient comparisons and the definition of relevant subgroups. The use of objective temporal disease markers will facilitate both translational research efforts and multicenter trials.

J Intensive Care Med ; 36(10): 1184-1193, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1261246


BACKGROUND: Lung-protective ventilation is key in bridging patients suffering from COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) to recovery. However, resource and personnel limitations during pandemics complicate the implementation of lung-protective protocols. Automated ventilation modes may prove decisive in these settings enabling higher degrees of lung-protective ventilation than conventional modes. METHOD: Prospective study at a Swiss university hospital. Critically ill, mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS patients were allocated, by study-blinded coordinating staff, to either closed-loop or conventional mechanical ventilation, based on mechanical ventilator availability. Primary outcome was the overall achieved percentage of lung-protective ventilation in closed-loop versus conventional mechanical ventilation, assessed minute-by-minute, during the initial 7 days and overall mechanical ventilation time. Lung-protective ventilation was defined as the combined target of tidal volume <8 ml per kg of ideal body weight, dynamic driving pressure <15 cmH2O, peak pressure <30 cmH2O, peripheral oxygen saturation ≥88% and dynamic mechanical power <17 J/min. RESULTS: Forty COVID-19 ARDS patients, accounting for 1,048,630 minutes (728 days) of cumulative mechanical ventilation, allocated to either closed-loop (n = 23) or conventional ventilation (n = 17), presenting with a median paO2/ FiO2 ratio of 92 [72-147] mmHg and a static compliance of 18 [11-25] ml/cmH2O, were mechanically ventilated for 11 [4-25] days and had a 28-day mortality rate of 20%. During the initial 7 days of mechanical ventilation, patients in the closed-loop group were ventilated lung-protectively for 65% of the time versus 38% in the conventional group (Odds Ratio, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.76-1.82; P < 0.001) and for 45% versus 33% of overall mechanical ventilation time (Odds Ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.21-1.23; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Among critically ill, mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS patients during an early highpoint of the pandemic, mechanical ventilation using a closed-loop mode was associated with a higher degree of lung-protective ventilation than was conventional mechanical ventilation.

COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Humans , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Tidal Volume