Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
J Clin Med ; 11(10)2022 May 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1862828

ABSTRACT

Blood transfusions have been the cornerstone of life support since the introduction of the ABO classification in the 20th century. The physiologic goal is to restore adequate tissue oxygenation when the demand exceeds the offer. Although it can be a life-saving therapy, blood transfusions can lead to serious adverse effects, and it is essential that physicians remain up to date with the current literature and are aware of the pathophysiology, initial management and risks of each type of transfusion reaction. We aim to provide a structured overview of the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic approach and management of acute transfusion reactions based on the literature available in 2022. The numbers of blood transfusions, transfusion reactions and the reporting rate of transfusion reactions differ between countries in Europe. The most frequent transfusion reactions in 2020 were alloimmunizations, febrile non-hemolytic transfusion reactions and allergic transfusion reactions. Transfusion-related acute lung injury, transfusion-associated circulatory overload and septic transfusion reactions were less frequent. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the healthcare system with decreasing blood donations and blood supplies, as well as rising concerns within the medical community but also in patients about blood safety and transfusion reactions in COVID-19 patients. The best way to prevent transfusion reactions is to avoid unnecessary blood transfusions and maintain a transfusion-restrictive strategy. Any symptom occurring within 24 h of a blood transfusion should be considered a transfusion reaction and referred to the hemovigilance reporting system. The initial management of blood transfusion reactions requires early identification, immediate interruption of the transfusion, early consultation of the hematologic and ICU departments and fluid resuscitation.

2.
Journal of Clinical Medicine ; 11(10):2859, 2022.
Article in English | MDPI | ID: covidwho-1856877

ABSTRACT

Blood transfusions have been the cornerstone of life support since the introduction of the ABO classification in the 20th century. The physiologic goal is to restore adequate tissue oxygenation when the demand exceeds the offer. Although it can be a life-saving therapy, blood transfusions can lead to serious adverse effects, and it is essential that physicians remain up to date with the current literature and are aware of the pathophysiology, initial management and risks of each type of transfusion reaction. We aim to provide a structured overview of the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic approach and management of acute transfusion reactions based on the literature available in 2022. The numbers of blood transfusions, transfusion reactions and the reporting rate of transfusion reactions differ between countries in Europe. The most frequent transfusion reactions in 2020 were alloimmunizations, febrile non-hemolytic transfusion reactions and allergic transfusion reactions. Transfusion-related acute lung injury, transfusion-associated circulatory overload and septic transfusion reactions were less frequent. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the healthcare system with decreasing blood donations and blood supplies, as well as rising concerns within the medical community but also in patients about blood safety and transfusion reactions in COVID-19 patients. The best way to prevent transfusion reactions is to avoid unnecessary blood transfusions and maintain a transfusion-restrictive strategy. Any symptom occurring within 24 h of a blood transfusion should be considered a transfusion reaction and referred to the hemovigilance reporting system. The initial management of blood transfusion reactions requires early identification, immediate interruption of the transfusion, early consultation of the hematologic and ICU departments and fluid resuscitation.

3.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 206(3): 281-294, 2022 Aug 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1832818

ABSTRACT

Rationale: Whether patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) may benefit from extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) compared with conventional invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) remains unknown. Objectives: To estimate the effect of ECMO on 90-day mortality versus IMV only. Methods: Among 4,244 critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 included in a multicenter cohort study, we emulated a target trial comparing the treatment strategies of initiating ECMO versus no ECMO within 7 days of IMV in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (PaO2/FiO2 < 80 or PaCO2 ⩾ 60 mm Hg). We controlled for confounding using a multivariable Cox model on the basis of predefined variables. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 1,235 patients met the full eligibility criteria for the emulated trial, among whom 164 patients initiated ECMO. The ECMO strategy had a higher survival probability on Day 7 from the onset of eligibility criteria (87% vs. 83%; risk difference, 4%; 95% confidence interval, 0-9%), which decreased during follow-up (survival on Day 90: 63% vs. 65%; risk difference, -2%; 95% confidence interval, -10 to 5%). However, ECMO was associated with higher survival when performed in high-volume ECMO centers or in regions where a specific ECMO network organization was set up to handle high demand and when initiated within the first 4 days of IMV and in patients who are profoundly hypoxemic. Conclusions: In an emulated trial on the basis of a nationwide COVID-19 cohort, we found differential survival over time of an ECMO compared with a no-ECMO strategy. However, ECMO was consistently associated with better outcomes when performed in high-volume centers and regions with ECMO capacities specifically organized to handle high demand.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Humans , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
4.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 41(4): 101092, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1803333

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Switzerland experienced two waves of COVID-19 in 2020, but with a different ICU admission and treatment management strategy. The timing of ICU admission and intubation remains a matter of debate in severe patients. The aim of our study was to describe the characteristics of ICU patients between two subsequent waves of COVID-19 who underwent a different management strategy and to assess whether the timing of intubation was associated with differences in mortality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study of all adult patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 who required intubation between the 9th of March 2020 and the 9th of January 2021 in the intensive care unit (ICU) at Geneva University Hospitals, Switzerland. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-three patients were intubated during the study period; 124 during the first wave, and 99 during the second wave. Patients admitted to the ICU during the second wave had a higher SAPS II severity score (52.5 vs. 60; p = 0.01). The time from hospital admission to intubation was significantly longer during the second compared to the first wave (4 days [IQR, 1-7] vs. 2 days [IQR, 0-4]; p < 0.01). All-cause ICU mortality was significantly higher during the second wave (42% vs. 23%; p < 0.01). In a multivariate analysis, the delay between hospital admission and intubation was significantly associated with ICU mortality (OR 3.25 [95% CI, 1.38-7.67]; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study, delayed intubation was associated with increased mortality in patients with severe COVID-19. Further randomised controlled trials are needed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Intubation, Intratracheal , Switzerland/epidemiology
5.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 71, 2022 03 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1765460

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Delaying time to prone positioning (PP) may be associated with higher mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We evaluated the use and the impact of early PP on clinical outcomes in intubated patients hospitalized in intensive care units (ICUs) for COVID-19. METHODS: All intubated patients with ARDS due to COVID-19 were involved in a secondary analysis from a prospective multicenter cohort study of COVID-ICU network including 149 ICUs across France, Belgium and Switzerland. Patients were followed-up until Day-90. The primary outcome was survival at Day-60. Analysis used a Cox proportional hazard model including a propensity score. RESULTS: Among 2137 intubated patients, 1504 (70.4%) were placed in PP during their ICU stay and 491 (23%) during the first 24 h following ICU admission. One hundred and eighty-one patients (36.9%) of the early PP group had a PaO2/FiO2 ratio > 150 mmHg when prone positioning was initiated. Among non-early PP group patients, 1013 (47.4%) patients had finally been placed in PP within a median delay of 3 days after ICU admission. Day-60 mortality in non-early PP group was 34.2% versus 39.3% in the early PP group (p = 0.038). Day-28 and Day-90 mortality as well as the need for adjunctive therapies was more important in patients with early PP. After propensity score adjustment, no significant difference in survival at Day-60 was found between the two study groups (HR 1.34 [0.96-1.68], p = 0.09 and HR 1.19 [0.998-1.412], p = 0.053 in complete case analysis or in multiple imputation analysis, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In a large multicentric international cohort of intubated ICU patients with ARDS due to COVID-19, PP has been used frequently as a main treatment. In this study, our data failed to show a survival benefit associated with early PP started within 24 h after ICU admission compared to PP after day-1 for all COVID-19 patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation regardless of their severity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Prone Position , Propensity Score , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy
6.
Eur J Clin Invest ; 51(11): e13661, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1398398

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Unravelling autoimmune targets triggered by SARS-CoV-2 infection may provide crucial insights into the physiopathology of the disease and foster the development of potential therapeutic candidate targets and prognostic tools. We aimed at determining (a) the association between anti-SARS-CoV-2 and anti-apoA-1 humoral response and (b) the degree of linear homology between SARS-CoV-2, apoA-1 and Toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2) epitopes. DESIGN: Bioinformatics modelling coupled with mimic peptides engineering and competition experiments were used to assess epitopes sequence homologies. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 and anti-apoA-1 IgG as well as cytokines were assessed by immunoassays on a case-control (n = 101), an intensive care unit (ICU; n = 126) and a general population cohort (n = 663) with available samples in the pre and post-pandemic period. RESULTS: Using bioinformatics modelling, linear sequence homologies between apoA-1, TLR2 and Spike epitopes were identified but without experimental evidence of cross-reactivity. Overall, anti-apoA-1 IgG levels were higher in COVID-19 patients or anti-SARS-CoV-2 seropositive individuals than in healthy donors or anti-SARS-CoV-2 seronegative individuals (P < .0001). Significant and similar associations were noted between anti-apoA-1, anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG, cytokines and lipid profile. In ICU patients, anti-SARS-CoV-2 and anti-apoA-1 seroconversion rates displayed similar 7-day kinetics, reaching 82% for anti-apoA-1 seropositivity. In the general population, SARS-CoV-2-exposed individuals displayed higher anti-apoA-1 IgG seropositivity rates than nonexposed ones (34% vs 16.8%; P = .004). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 induces a marked humoral response against the major protein of high-density lipoproteins. As a correlate of poorer prognosis in other clinical settings, such autoimmunity signatures may relate to long-term COVID-19 prognosis assessment and warrant further scrutiny in the current COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Apolipoprotein A-I/immunology , Autoantibodies/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Cytokines/immunology , Immunity, Humoral/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Apolipoprotein A-I/chemistry , Computational Biology , Epitopes/chemistry , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , Peptide Fragments/chemistry , Peptide Fragments/immunology , Peptides , SARS-CoV-2 , Sequence Homology, Amino Acid , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/chemistry , Toll-Like Receptor 2/chemistry , Toll-Like Receptor 2/immunology , Young Adult
7.
Clin Nutr ; 2021 Jun 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1252606

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused major organizational challenges to healthcare systems concerning staff, material and bed availability. Nutrition was not a priority in the intensive care unit (ICU) at the beginning of the pandemic with the need for simplified protocols. We aimed to assess the impact of a simplified nutritional protocol for critically ill COVID-19 patients during the pandemic first wave. METHODS: We included all patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections, admitted to the ICU of the Geneva University Hospitals for at least 4 days from March 9 to May 19, 2020. Data on the route and solution of nutritional therapy, prescribed and received volume, calorie and protein intake, amount of insulin, propofol and glucose administered were collected daily during the entire ICU stay. We compared nutritional outcomes between patients admitted to the ICU before and after implementing the simplified nutritional protocol using unpaired t-test. RESULTS: Out of 119 patients, 48 were hospitalized in the ICU before, 47 across and 24 after the implementation of the nutritional protocol. The mean age was 63.2 (±12.7) years and 76% were men without significant difference between before and after group. The nutritional protocol implementation led to an increase in caloric intake (1070 vs. 1357 kcal/day, p = 0.018) and in the percentage of days within 80-100% of the energy target (11 vs. 20%, p = 0.021). The protein debt decreased significantly from 48 g/day to 37 g/day (p = 0.015). No significant difference in the percentage of days within the protein target (80-100%) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Calorie and protein coverage improved after the implementation of the simplified nutritional protocol in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of such an approach on patients' clinical outcomes.

8.
Crit Care Explor ; 2(8): e0173, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-703523

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: In many countries, large numbers of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 are admitted to the ICUs within a short period of time, overwhelming usual care capacities. Preparedness and reorganization ahead of the wave to increase ICU surge capacity may be associated with favorable outcome. The purpose of this study was to report our experience in terms of ICU organization and anticipation, as well as reporting patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes. DESIGN: A prospective observational study. SETTING: The division of intensive care at the Geneva University Hospitals (Geneva, Switzerland). PATIENTS: All consecutive adult patients with acute respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 admitted in the ICU between March 9, 2020, and May 19, 2020, were enrolled. Patients' demographic data, comorbidities, laboratory values, treatments, and clinical outcomes were collected. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The ICU was reorganized into cells of six to eight patients under the care of three physicians and five nurses. Its capacity increased from 30 to 110 beds, fully equipped and staffed, transforming the surgical intermediate care unit, the postoperative care facility, and operating theaters into ICUs. Surge capacity has always exceeded the number of patients hospitalized. Among 129 critically ill patients with severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, 96% required invasive mechanical ventilation. A total of 105 patients (81%) were discharged alive and 24 died, corresponding to a mortality of 19%. Patients who died were significantly older, with higher severity scores at admission, had higher levels of d-dimers, plasma creatinine, high-sensitive troponin T, C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin, and required more frequent prone sessions. CONCLUSIONS: A rapid increase in ICU bed capacity, including adequate equipment and staffing, allowed for a large number of critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients to be taken care of within a short period of time. Anticipation and preparedness ahead of the wave may account for the low mortality observed in our center. These results highlight the importance of resources management strategy in the context of the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL