Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
Cell Death Differ ; 2022 Jan 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1641945

ABSTRACT

Severe SARS-CoV-2 infections are characterized by lymphopenia, but the mechanisms involved are still elusive. Based on our knowledge of HIV pathophysiology, we hypothesized that SARS-CoV-2 infection-mediated lymphopenia could also be related to T cell apoptosis. By comparing intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU COVID-19 patients with age-matched healthy donors, we found a strong positive correlation between plasma levels of soluble FasL (sFasL) and T cell surface expression of Fas/CD95 with the propensity of T cells to die and CD4 T cell counts. Plasma levels of sFasL and T cell death are correlated with CXCL10 which is part of the signature of 4 biomarkers of disease severity (ROC, 0.98). We also found that members of the Bcl-2 family had modulated in the T cells of COVID-19 patients. More importantly, we demonstrated that the pan-caspase inhibitor, Q-VD, prevents T cell death by apoptosis and enhances Th1 transcripts. Altogether, our results are compatible with a model in which T-cell apoptosis accounts for T lymphopenia in individuals with severe COVID-19. Therefore, a strategy aimed at blocking caspase activation could be beneficial for preventing immunodeficiency in COVID-19 patients.

2.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 40(4): 100931, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1306763

ABSTRACT

AIM: Describing acute respiratory distress syndrome patterns, therapeutics management, and outcomes of ICU COVID-19 patients and indentifying risk factors of 28-day mortality. METHODS: Prospective multicentre, cohort study conducted in 29 French ICUs. Baseline characteristics, comorbidities, adjunctive therapies, ventilatory support at ICU admission and survival data were collected. RESULTS: From March to July 2020, 966 patients were enrolled with a median age of 66 (interquartile range 58-73) years and a median SAPS II of 37 (29-48). During the first 24 h of ICU admission, COVID-19 patients received one of the following respiratory supports: mechanical ventilation for 559 (58%), standard oxygen therapy for 228 (24%) and high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) for 179 (19%) patients. Overall, 721 (75%) patients were mechanically ventilated during their ICU stay. Prone positioning and neuromuscular blocking agents were used in 494 (51%) and 460 (48%) patients, respectively. Bacterial co-infections and ventilator-associated pneumonia were diagnosed in 79 (3%) and 411 (43%) patients, respectively. The overall 28-day mortality was 18%. Age, pre-existing comorbidities, severity of respiratory failure and the absence of antiviral therapy on admission were identified as independent predictors of 28-day outcome. CONCLUSION: Severity of hypoxaemia on admission, older age (> 70 years), cardiovascular and renal comorbidities were associated with worse outcome in COVID-19 patients. Antiviral treatment on admission was identified as a protective factor for 28-day mortality. Ascertaining the outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients is crucial to optimise hospital and ICU resources and provide the appropriate intensity level of care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , Cohort Studies , Critical Care , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial
3.
Intensive Care Med ; 47(6): 653-664, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1263138

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The effect of the routine use of a stylet during tracheal intubation on first-attempt intubation success is unclear. We hypothesised that the first-attempt intubation success rate would be higher with tracheal tube + stylet than with tracheal tube alone. METHODS: In this multicentre randomised controlled trial, conducted in 32 intensive care units, we randomly assigned patients to tracheal tube + stylet or tracheal tube alone (i.e. without stylet). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with first-attempt intubation success. The secondary outcome was the proportion of patients with complications related to tracheal intubation. Serious adverse events, i.e., traumatic injuries related to tracheal intubation, were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 999 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 501 (50%) to tracheal tube + stylet and 498 (50%) to tracheal tube alone. First-attempt intubation success occurred in 392 patients (78.2%) in the tracheal tube + stylet group and in 356 (71.5%) in the tracheal tube alone group (absolute risk difference, 6.7; 95%CI 1.4-12.1; relative risk, 1.10; 95%CI 1.02-1.18; P = 0.01). A total of 194 patients (38.7%) in the tracheal tube + stylet group had complications related to tracheal intubation, as compared with 200 patients (40.2%) in the tracheal tube alone group (absolute risk difference, - 1.5; 95%CI - 7.5 to 4.6; relative risk, 0.96; 95%CI 0.83-1.12; P = 0.64). The incidence of serious adverse events was 4.0% and 3.6%, respectively (absolute risk difference, 0.4; 95%CI, - 2.0 to 2.8; relative risk, 1.10; 95%CI 0.59-2.06. P = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Among critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation, using a stylet improves first-attempt intubation success.


Subject(s)
Critical Illness , Intubation, Intratracheal , Adult , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects
4.
Adv Ther ; 38(5): 2599-2612, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1182322

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreaks have led to massive admissions to intensive care units (ICUs). An ultrasound examination of the thorax is widely performed on admission in these patients. The primary objective of our study was to assess the performance of the lung ultrasound score (LUS) on ICU admission to predict the 28-day mortality rate in patients with SARS-CoV-2. The secondary objective was to asses the performance of thoracic ultrasound and biological markers of cardiac injury to predict mortality. METHODS: This multicentre, retrospective, observational study was conducted in six ICUs of four university hospitals in France from 15 March to 3 May 2020. Patients admitted to ICUs because of SARS-CoV-2-related acute respiratory failure and those who received an LUS examination at admission were included. The area under the receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curve was determined for the LUS score to predict the 28-day mortality rate. The same analysis was performed for the Simplified Acute Physiology Score, left ventricular ejection fraction, cardiac output, brain natriuretic peptide and ultra-sensitive troponin levels at admission. RESULTS: In 57 patients, the 28-day mortality rate was 21%. The area under the ROC curve of the LUS score value on ICU admission was 0.68 [95% CI 0.54-0.82; p = 0.05]. In non-intubated patients on ICU admission (n = 40), the area under the ROC curves was 0.84 [95% CI 0.70-0.97; p = 0.005]. The best cut-off of 22 corresponded to 85% specificity and 83% sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: LUS scores on ICU admission for SARS-CoV-2 did not efficiently predict the 28-day mortality rate. Performance was better for non-intubated patients at admission. Performance of biological cardiac markers may be equivalent to the LUS score.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Critical Illness , France , Humans , Intensive Care Units , ROC Curve , Retrospective Studies , Stroke Volume , Ventricular Function, Left
5.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 39(6): 709-715, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1059695

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Whereas 5415 Intensive Care Unit (ICU) beds were initially available, 7148 COVID-19 patients were hospitalised in the ICU at the peak of the outbreak. The present study reports how the French Health Care system created temporary ICU beds to avoid being overwhelmed. METHODS: All French ICUs were contacted for answering a questionnaire focusing on the available beds and health care providers before and during the outbreak. RESULTS: Among 336 institutions with ICUs before the outbreak, 315 (94%) participated, covering 5054/5531 (91%) ICU beds. During the outbreak, 4806 new ICU beds (+95% increase) were created from Acute Care Unit (ACU, 2283), Post Anaesthetic Care Unit and Operating Theatre (PACU & OT, 1522), other units (374) or real build-up of new ICU beds (627), respectively. At the peak of the outbreak, 9860, 1982 and 3089 ICU, ACU and PACU beds were made available. Before the outbreak, 3548 physicians (2224 critical care anaesthesiologists, 898 intensivists and 275 from other specialties, 151 paediatrics), 1785 residents, 11,023 nurses and 6763 nursing auxiliaries worked in established ICUs. During the outbreak, 2524 physicians, 715 residents, 7722 nurses and 3043 nursing auxiliaries supplemented the usual staff in all ICUs. A total number of 3212 new ventilators were added to the 5997 initially available in ICU. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 outbreak, the French Health Care system created 4806 ICU beds (+95% increase from baseline), essentially by transforming beds from ACUs and PACUs. Collaboration between intensivists, critical care anaesthesiologists, emergency physicians as well as the mobilisation of nursing staff were primordial in this context.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospital Bed Capacity/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , National Health Programs , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Bed Conversion/statistics & numerical data , France/epidemiology , Health Care Surveys/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/statistics & numerical data , Personnel, Hospital/supply & distribution , Retrospective Studies , Ventilators, Mechanical/supply & distribution
7.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 39(3): 395-415, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-549176

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The world is currently facing an unprecedented healthcare crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of these guidelines is to produce a framework to facilitate the partial and gradual resumption of intervention activity in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The group has endeavoured to produce a minimum number of recommendations to highlight the strengths to be retained in the 7 predefined areas: (1) protection of staff and patients; (2) benefit/risk and patient information; (3) preoperative assessment and decision on intervention; (4) modalities of the preanaesthesia consultation; (5) specificity of anaesthesia and analgesia; (6) dedicated circuits and (7) containment exit type of interventions. RESULTS: The SFAR Guideline panel provides 51 statements on anaesthesia management in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. After one round of discussion and various amendments, a strong agreement was reached for 100% of the recommendations and algorithms. CONCLUSION: We present suggestions for how the risk of transmission by and to anaesthetists can be minimised and how personal protective equipment policies relate to COVID-19 pandemic context.


Subject(s)
Analgesia/standards , Anesthesia/standards , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections , Infection Control/standards , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Adult , Airway Management , Analgesia/adverse effects , Analgesia/methods , Anesthesia/adverse effects , Anesthesia/methods , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Child , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Critical Pathways , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/transmission , Disinfection , Elective Surgical Procedures , Equipment Contamination/prevention & control , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Informed Consent , Occupational Diseases/prevention & control , Operating Rooms/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Isolation , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Preoperative Care , Professional Staff Committees , Risk , SARS-CoV-2 , Symptom Assessment , Universal Precautions
9.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 39(3): 333-339, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-276489

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Relying on capacity increases and patient transfers to deal with the huge and continuous inflow of COVID-19 critically ill patients is a strategy limited by finite human and logistical resources. RATIONALE: Prioritising both critical care initiation and continuation is paramount to save the greatest number of lives. It enables to allocate scarce resources in priority to those with the highest probability of benefiting from them. It is fully ethical provided it relies on objective and widely shared criteria, thus preventing arbitrary decisions and guaranteeing equity. Prioritisation seeks to fairly allocate treatments, maximise saved lives, gain indirect life benefits from prioritising exposed healthcare and similar workers, give priority to those most penalised as a last resort, and apply similar prioritisation schemes to all patients. PRIORITISATION STRATEGY: Prioritisation schemes and their criteria are adjusted to the level of resource scarcity: strain (level A) or saturation (level B). Prioritisation yields a four level priority for initiation or continuation of critical care: P1-high priority, P2-intermediate priority, P3-not needed, P4-not appropriate. Prioritisation schemes take into account the patient's wishes, clinical frailty, pre-existing chronic condition, along with severity and evolution of acute condition. Initial priority level must be reassessed, at least after 48h once missing decision elements are available, at the typical turning point in the disease's natural history (ICU days 7 to 10 for COVID-19), and each time resource scarcity levels change. For treatments to be withheld or withdrawn, a collegial decision-making process and information of patient and/or next of kin are paramount. PERSPECTIVE: Prioritisation strategy is bound to evolve with new knowledge and with changes within the epidemiological situation.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Critical Care/organization & administration , Critical Illness , Health Priorities/standards , Health Resources/supply & distribution , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Triage/standards , COVID-19 , Canada , Caregivers , Continuity of Patient Care/organization & administration , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Critical Care/ethics , Critical Care/standards , France/epidemiology , Health Personnel , Health Priorities/ethics , Health Services Accessibility/ethics , Humans , Intensive Care Units/supply & distribution , Patient Transfer , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Refusal to Treat/ethics , Resource Allocation/ethics , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Justice , Switzerland , Triage/ethics , Triage/organization & administration
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL