ABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We aim to examine the most recent findings in the area of invasive pulmonary fungal infections to determine the appropriate/and or lack of prevention measures and treatment of upper fungal respiratory tract infections in the critically ill. RECENT FINDINGS: This will be addressed by focusing on the pathogens and prognosis over different bedridden periods in ICU patients, the occurrence of invasive fungal respiratory superinfections in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 which has been recently noted following the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Relevant reports referenced within include randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, observational studies, systematic reviews, and international guidelines, where applicable. Of note, it is clear there is a significant gap in our knowledge regarding whether bacterial and fungal infections in coronavirus disease 2019 are directly attributable to SARS-CoV-2 or a consequence of factors such as managing high numbers of critically unwell patients, and the prolonged duration of mechanical ventilation/ICU admission duration of stay. SUMMARY: An optimal diagnostic algorithm incorporating fungal biomarkers and molecular tools for early and accurate diagnosis of Pneumocystis pneumonia, invasive aspergillosis, candidemia, and endemic mycoses continues to be limited clinically. There is a lack of standardized molecular approach to identify fungal pathogens directly in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues and suboptimal diagnostic approaches for mould blood cultures, tissue culture processing for Mucorales, and fungal respiratory cultures (i.e., the routine use of bronchoscopic examination in ICU patients with influenza-associated pulmonary aspergillosis) for fungal point-of-care testing to detect and identify new, emerging or underrecognized, rare, or uncommon fungal pathogens.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mycoses , Respiratory Tract Infections , Critical Illness , Humans , Mycoses/diagnosis , Mycoses/drug therapy , Respiratory Tract Infections/diagnosis , Respiratory Tract Infections/therapy , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: We aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety on antibiotic exposure of a strategy combining a respiratory multiplex PCR (mPCR) with enlarged panel and daily procalcitonin (PCT) measurements, as compared with a conventional strategy, in adult patients who were critically ill with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. METHODS: This multicentre, parallel-group, open-label, randomized controlled trial enrolled patients admitted to 13 intensive care units (ICUs) in France. Patients were assigned (1:1) to the control strategy, in which antibiotic streamlining remained at the discretion of the physicians, or interventional strategy, consisting of using mPCR and daily PCT measurements within the first 7 days of randomization to streamline initial antibiotic therapy, with antibiotic continuation encouraged when PCT was >1 ng/mL and discouraged if < 1 ng/mL or decreased by 80% from baseline. All patients underwent conventional microbiological tests and cultures. The primary end point was antibiotic-free days at day 28. RESULTS: Between April 20th and November 23rd 2020, 194 patients were randomized, of whom 191 were retained in the intention-to-treat analysis. Respiratory bacterial co-infection was detected in 48.4% (45/93) and 21.4% (21/98) in the interventional and control group, respectively. The number of antibiotic-free days was 12.0 (0.0; 25.0) and 14.0 (0.0; 24.0) days, respectively (difference, -2.0, (95% CI, -10.6 to 6.6), p=0.89). Superinfection rates were high (51.6% and 48.5%, respectively). Mortality rates and ICU lengths of stay did not differ between groups. DISCUSSION: In severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, the mPCR/PCT algorithm strategy did not affect 28-day antibiotics exposure nor the major clinical outcomes, as compared with routine practice.
Subject(s)
Bacterial Infections , COVID-19 , Respiratory Tract Infections , Adult , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Procalcitonin/therapeutic use , COVID-19/diagnosis , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction , Respiratory Tract Infections/diagnosis , Respiratory Tract Infections/drug therapy , Bacterial Infections/drug therapy , Treatment Outcome , COVID-19 TestingABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is common in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. The aim of this ancillary analysis of the coVAPid multicenter observational retrospective study is to assess the relationship between adjuvant corticosteroid use and the incidence of VAP. METHODS: Planned ancillary analysis of a multicenter retrospective European cohort in 36 ICUs. Adult patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia were consecutively included between February and May 2020. VAP diagnosis required strict definition with clinical, radiological and quantitative microbiological confirmation. We assessed the association of VAP with corticosteroid treatment using univariate and multivariate cause-specific Cox's proportional hazard models with adjustment on pre-specified confounders. RESULTS: Among the 545 included patients, 191 (35%) received corticosteroids. The proportional hazard assumption for the effect of corticosteroids on the incidence of VAP could not be accepted, indicating that this effect varied during ICU stay. We found a non-significant lower risk of VAP for corticosteroid-treated patients during the first days in the ICU and an increased risk for longer ICU stay. By modeling the effect of corticosteroids with time-dependent coefficients, the association between corticosteroids and the incidence of VAP was not significant (overall effect p = 0.082), with time-dependent hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) of 0.47 (0.17-1.31) at day 2, 0.95 (0.63-1.42) at day 7, 1.48 (1.01-2.16) at day 14 and 1.94 (1.09-3.46) at day 21. CONCLUSIONS: No significant association was found between adjuvant corticosteroid treatment and the incidence of VAP, although a time-varying effect of corticosteroids was identified along the 28-day follow-up.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated , Adult , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Intensive Care Units , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/etiology , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coinfection , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Humans , Medical Futility , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) may concern up to one third of intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The purpose of this review is to discuss the diagnostic criteria, the pathogenesis, the risk factors, the incidence, the impact on outcome, and the diagnostic and therapeutic management of CAPA in critically ill patients. RECENT FINDINGS: The incidence of CAPA ranges 3--28% of critically ill patients, depending on the definition used, study design, and systematic or triggered screening. COVID-19 is associated with direct damage of the respiratory epithelium, immune dysregulation, and common use of immunosuppressive drugs which might promote Aspergillus respiratory tract colonization and invasion. Positive Aspergillus tests among COVID-19 critically patients might reflect colonization rather than invasive disease. CAPA usually appears during the second week after starting invasive mechanical ventilation and is independently associated with ICU mortality. SUMMARY: Further studies are needed to validate CAPA case definitions, to determine the accurate incidence of CAPA in comparison to adequate controls, and its evolution during the pandemic. A pro-active diagnostic strategy, based on risk stratification, clinical assessment, and bronchoalveolar lavage could be recommended to provide early antifungal treatment in patients with high probability of CAPA and clinical deterioration.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pulmonary Aspergillosis , COVID-19/complications , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Pandemics , Pulmonary Aspergillosis/diagnosis , Pulmonary Aspergillosis/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
COVID pneumonitis can cause patients to become critically ill. They may require intensive care and mechanical ventilation. Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a concern. This review discusses VAP in this group. Several reasons have been proposed to explain the elevated rates of VAP in critically ill COVID patients compared to non-COVID patients. Extrinsic factors include understaffing, lack of personal protective equipment and use of immunomodulating agents. Intrinsic factors include severe parenchymal damage and immune dysregulation, along with pulmonary vascular endothelial inflammation and thrombosis. The rate of VAP has been reported at 45.4%, with an intensive care unit mortality rate of 42.7%. Multiple challenges to diagnosis exist. Other conditions such as acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary oedema and atelectasis can present with similar features. Frequent growth of gram-negative bacteria has been shown in multiple studies, with particularly high rates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The rate of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis has been reported at 4-30%. We would recommend the use of invasive techniques when possible. This will enable de-escalation of antibiotics as soon as possible, decreasing overuse. It is also important to keep other possible causes of VAP in mind, e.g. COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis or cytomegalovirus. Diagnostic tests such as galactomannan and ß-D-glucan should be considered. These patients may face a long treatment course, with risk of re-infection, along with prolonged weaning, which carries its own long-term consequences.
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 OutcomeABSTRACT
COVID pneumonitis can cause patients to become critically ill. They may require intensive care and mechanical ventilation. Ventilator-associated pneumonia is a concern. This review aims to discuss the topic of ventilator-associated pneumonia in this group. Several reasons have been proposed to explain the elevated rates of VAP in critically ill COVID patients compared to non-COVID patients. Extrinsic factors include understaffing, lack of PPE and use of immunomodulating agents. Intrinsic factors include severe parenchymal damage, immune dysregulation, along with pulmonary vascular endothelial inflammation and thrombosis. The rate of VAP has been reported at 45.4%, with an ICU mortality rate of 42.7%. Multiple challenges to diagnosis exist. Other conditions such as acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary oedema and atelectasis can present with similar features. Frequent growth of gram-negative bacteria has been shown in multiple studies, with particularly high rates of pseudomonas aeruginosa. The rate of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis has been reported at 4–30%. We would recommend the use of invasive techniques when possible. This will enable de-escalation of antibiotics as soon as possible, decreasing overuse. It is also important to keep other possible causes of ventilator-associated pneumonia in mind, such as COVID-19 associated pulmonary aspergillosis, cytomegalovirus, etc. Diagnostic tests such as galactomannan and B-D-glucan should be considered. These patients may face a long treatment course, with risk of re-infection, along with prolonged weaning, which carries its own long-term consequences.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Prognosis of patients with COVID-19 depends on the severity of the pulmonary affection. The most severe cases may progress to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which is associated with a risk of long-term repercussions on respiratory function and neuromuscular outcomes. The functional repercussions of severe forms of COVID-19 may have a major impact on quality of life, and impair the ability to return to work or exercise. Social inequalities in healthcare may influence prognosis, with socially vulnerable individuals more likely to develop severe forms of disease. We describe here the protocol for a prospective, multicentre study that aims to investigate the influence of social vulnerability on functional recovery in patients who were hospitalised in intensive care for ARDS caused by COVID-19. This study will also include an embedded qualitative study that aims to describe facilitators and barriers to compliance with rehabilitation, describe patients' health practices and identify social representations of health, disease and care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The "Functional Recovery From Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Due to COVID-19: Influence of Socio-Economic Status" (RECOVIDS) study is a mixed-methods, observational, multicentre cohort study performed during the routine follow-up of post-intensive care unit (ICU) functional recovery after ARDS. All patients admitted to a participating ICU for PCR-proven SARS-CoV-2 infection and who underwent chest CT scan at the initial phase AND who received respiratory support (mechanical or not) or high-flow nasal oxygen, AND had ARDS diagnosed by the Berlin criteria will be eligible. The primary outcome is the presence of lung sequelae at 6 months after ICU discharge, defined either by alterations on pulmonary function tests, oxygen desaturation during a standardised 6 min walk test or fibrosis-like pulmonary findings on chest CT. Patients will be considered to be socially disadvantaged if they have an "Evaluation de la Précarité et des Inégalités de santé dans les Centres d'Examen de Santé" (EPICES) score ≥30.17 at inclusion. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol and the informed consent form were approved by an independent ethics committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes Sud Méditerranée II) on 10 July 2020 (2020-A02014-35). All patients will provide informed consent before participation. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international congresses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04556513.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , COVID-19/complications , Cohort Studies , Humans , Oxygen , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Class , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Although few studies evaluated the incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) or ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis in COVID-19 patients, several studies evaluated the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in these patients. Based on the results of a large multicenter European study, VAP incidence is higher in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia (36.1%), as compared with those with influenza pneumonia (22.2%), or no viral infection at intensive care unit (ICU) admission (16.5%). Potential explanation for the high incidence of VAP in COVID-19 patients includes long duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, high incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome, and immune-suppressive treatment. Specific risk factors for VAP, including SARS-CoV-2-related pulmonary lesions, and bacteria-virus interaction in lung microbiota might also play a role in VAP pathogenesis. VAP is associated with increased mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU length of stay in COVID-19 patients. Further studies should focus on the incidence of HAP especially in ICU non-ventilated patients, better determine the pathophysiology of these infections, and evaluate the accuracy of currently available treatment guidelines in COVID-19 patients.
Subject(s)
Bronchitis , COVID-19 , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated , Tracheitis , Bronchitis/epidemiology , Bronchitis/etiology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Hospitals , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/epidemiology , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2 , Tracheitis/epidemiology , Tracheitis/etiology , Ventilators, MechanicalABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning has been reported to improve oxygenation for patients with COVID-19 in retrospective and observational studies, but whether it improves patient-centred outcomes is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of awake prone positioning to prevent intubation or death in patients with severe COVID-19 in a large-scale randomised trial. METHODS: In this prospective, a priori set up and defined, collaborative meta-trial of six randomised controlled open-label superiority trials, adults who required respiratory support with high-flow nasal cannula for acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 were randomly assigned to awake prone positioning or standard care. Hospitals from six countries were involved: Canada, France, Ireland, Mexico, USA, Spain. Patients or their care providers were not masked to allocated treatment. The primary composite outcome was treatment failure, defined as the proportion of patients intubated or dying within 28 days of enrolment. The six trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04325906, NCT04347941, NCT04358939, NCT04395144, NCT04391140, and NCT04477655. FINDINGS: Between April 2, 2020 and Jan 26, 2021, 1126 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to awake prone positioning (n=567) or standard care (n=559). 1121 patients (excluding five who withdrew from the study) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Treatment failure occurred in 223 (40%) of 564 patients assigned to awake prone positioning and in 257 (46%) of 557 patients assigned to standard care (relative risk 0·86 [95% CI 0·75-0·98]). The hazard ratio (HR) for intubation was 0·75 (0·62-0·91), and the HR for mortality was 0·87 (0·68-1·11) with awake prone positioning compared with standard care within 28 days of enrolment. The incidence of prespecified adverse events was low and similar in both groups. INTERPRETATION: Awake prone positioning of patients with hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 reduces the incidence of treatment failure and the need for intubation without any signal of harm. These results support routine awake prone positioning of patients with COVID-19 who require support with high-flow nasal cannula. FUNDING: Open AI inc, Rice Foundation, Projet Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique Interrégional, Appel d'Offre 2020, Groupement Interrégional de Recherche Clinique et d'Innovation Grand Ouest, Association pour la Promotion à Tours de la Réanimation Médicale, Fond de dotation du CHRU de Tours, Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Ltd.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Patient Positioning , Prone Position , Respiratory Insufficiency , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Canada , France , Humans , Ireland , Mexico , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain , Treatment Outcome , United States , WakefulnessABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has seen a global surge in anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and stress. AIMS: This study aimed to describe the perspectives of patients with COVID-19, their family, health professionals, and the general public on the impact of COVID-19 on mental health. METHODS: A secondary thematic analysis was conducted using data from the COVID-19 COS project. We extracted data on the perceived causes and impact of COVID-19 on mental health from an international survey and seven online consensus workshops. RESULTS: We identified four themes (with subthemes in parenthesis): anxiety amidst uncertainty (always on high alert, ebb and flow of recovery); anguish of a threatened future (intense frustration of a changed normality, facing loss of livelihood, trauma of ventilation, a troubling prognosis, confronting death); bearing responsibility for transmission (fear of spreading COVID-19 in public; overwhelming guilt of infecting a loved one); and suffering in isolation (severe solitude of quarantine, sick and alone, separation exacerbating grief). CONCLUSION: We found that the unpredictability of COVID-19, the fear of long-term health consequences, burden of guilt, and suffering in isolation profoundly impacted mental health. Clinical and public health interventions are needed to manage the psychological consequences arising from this pandemic.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , Depression/psychology , Family , Humans , Mental Health , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV 2) and requiring intensive care unit (ICU) have a high incidence of hospital-acquired infections; however, data regarding hospital acquired bloodstream infections (BSI) are scarce. We aimed to investigate risk factors and outcome of BSI in critically ill coronavirus infectious disease-19 (COVID-19) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed an ancillary analysis of a multicenter prospective international cohort study (COVID-ICU study) that included 4010 COVID-19 ICU patients. For the present analysis, only those with data regarding primary outcome (death within 90 days from admission) or BSI status were included. Risk factors for BSI were analyzed using Fine and Gray competing risk model. Then, for outcome comparison, 537 BSI-patients were matched with 537 controls using propensity score matching. RESULTS: Among 4010 included patients, 780 (19.5%) acquired a total of 1066 BSI (10.3 BSI per 1000 patients days at risk) of whom 92% were acquired in the ICU. Higher SAPS II, male gender, longer time from hospital to ICU admission and antiviral drug before admission were independently associated with an increased risk of BSI, and interestingly, this risk decreased over time. BSI was independently associated with a shorter time to death in the overall population (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.28, 95% CI 1.05-1.56) and, in the propensity score matched data set, patients with BSI had a higher mortality rate (39% vs 33% p = 0.036). BSI accounted for 3.6% of the death of the overall population. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 ICU patients have a high risk of BSI, especially early after ICU admission, risk that increases with severity but not with corticosteroids use. BSI is associated with an increased mortality rate.
ABSTRACT
We performed an observational study to investigate intensive care unit incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of coronavirus disease-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA). We found 10%-15% CAPA incidence among 823 patients in 2 cohorts. Several factors were independently associated with CAPA in 1 cohort and mortality rates were 43%-52%.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis , Pulmonary Aspergillosis , Cohort Studies , Humans , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with severe COVID-19 have emerged as a population at high risk of invasive fungal infections (IFIs). However, to our knowledge, the prevalence of IFIs has not yet been assessed in large populations of mechanically ventilated patients. We aimed to identify the prevalence, risk factors, and mortality associated with IFIs in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 under intensive care. METHODS: We performed a national, multicentre, observational cohort study in 18 French intensive care units (ICUs). We retrospectively and prospectively enrolled adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and requiring mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory distress syndrome, with all demographic and clinical and biological follow-up data anonymised and collected from electronic case report forms. Patients were systematically screened for respiratory fungal microorganisms once or twice a week during the period of mechanical ventilation up to ICU discharge. The primary outcome was the prevalence of IFIs in all eligible participants with a minimum of three microbiological samples screened during ICU admission, with proven or probable (pr/pb) COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) classified according to the recent ECMM/ISHAM definitions. Secondary outcomes were risk factors of pr/pb CAPA, ICU mortality between the pr/pb CAPA and non-pr/pb CAPA groups, and associations of pr/pb CAPA and related variables with ICU mortality, identified by regression models. The MYCOVID study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04368221. FINDINGS: Between Feb 29 and July 9, 2020, we enrolled 565 mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. 509 patients with at least three screening samples were analysed (mean age 59·4 years [SD 12·5], 400 [79%] men). 128 (25%) patients had 138 episodes of pr/pb or possible IFIs. 76 (15%) patients fulfilled the criteria for pr/pb CAPA. According to multivariate analysis, age older than 62 years (odds ratio [OR] 2·34 [95% CI 1·39-3·92], p=0·0013), treatment with dexamethasone and anti-IL-6 (OR 2·71 [1·12-6·56], p=0·027), and long duration of mechanical ventilation (>14 days; OR 2·16 [1·14-4·09], p=0·019) were independently associated with pr/pb CAPA. 38 (7%) patients had one or more other pr/pb IFIs: 32 (6%) had candidaemia, six (1%) had invasive mucormycosis, and one (<1%) had invasive fusariosis. Multivariate analysis of associations with death, adjusted for candidaemia, for the 509 patients identified three significant factors: age older than 62 years (hazard ratio [HR] 1·71 [95% CI 1·26-2·32], p=0·0005), solid organ transplantation (HR 2·46 [1·53-3·95], p=0·0002), and pr/pb CAPA (HR 1·45 [95% CI 1·03-2·03], p=0·033). At time of ICU discharge, survival curves showed that overall ICU mortality was significantly higher in patients with pr/pb CAPA than in those without, at 61·8% (95% CI 50·0-72·8) versus 32·1% (27·7-36·7; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: This study shows the high prevalence of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis and candidaemia and high mortality associated with pr/pb CAPA in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. These findings highlight the need for active surveillance of fungal pathogens in patients with severe COVID-19. FUNDING: Pfizer.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pulmonary Aspergillosis , Adolescent , Adult , Child, Preschool , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Initial reports have described the poor outcome of unexpected cardiac arrest (CA) in intensive care unit (ICU) among COVID-19 patients in China and the USA. However, there are scarce data on characteristics and outcomes of such CA patients in Europe. METHODS: Prospective registry in 35 French ICUs, including all in-ICU CA in COVID-19 adult patients with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) attempt. Favorable outcome was defined as modified Rankin scale ranging from 0 to 3 at day 90 after CA. RESULTS: Among the 2425 COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU from March to June 2020, 186 (8%) experienced in-ICU CA, of whom 146/186 (78%) received CPR. Among these 146 patients, 117 (80%) had sustained return of spontaneous circulation, 102 (70%) died in the ICU, including 48 dying within the first day after CA occurrence and 21 after withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy. Most of CA were non-shockable rhythm (90%). At CA occurrence, 132 patients (90%) were mechanically ventilated, 83 (57%) received vasopressors and 75 (51%) had almost three organ failures. Thirty patients (21%) had a favorable outcome. Sepsis-related organ failure assessment score > 9 before CA occurrence was the single parameter constantly associated with unfavorable outcome in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In-ICU CA incidence remains high among a large multicenter cohort of French critically ill adults with COVID-19. However, 21% of patients with CPR attempt remained alive at 3 months with good functional status. This contrasts with other recent reports showing poor outcome in such patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NTC04373759) in April 2020 ( https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04373759?term=acicovid&draw=2&rank=1 ).
ABSTRACT
Rationale: Early empirical antimicrobial treatment is frequently prescribed to critically ill patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) based on Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines.Objectives: We aimed to determine the prevalence of early bacterial identification in intubated patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia, as compared with influenza pneumonia, and to characterize its microbiology and impact on outcomes.Methods: A multicenter retrospective European cohort was performed in 36 ICUs. All adult patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation >48 hours were eligible if they had SARS-CoV-2 or influenza pneumonia at ICU admission. Bacterial identification was defined by a positive bacterial culture within 48 hours after intubation in endotracheal aspirates, BAL, blood cultures, or a positive pneumococcal or legionella urinary antigen test.Measurements and Main Results: A total of 1,050 patients were included (568 in SARS-CoV-2 and 482 in influenza groups). The prevalence of bacterial identification was significantly lower in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia compared with patients with influenza pneumonia (9.7 vs. 33.6%; unadjusted odds ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.30; adjusted odds ratio, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.16-0.33; P < 0.0001). Gram-positive cocci were responsible for 58% and 72% of coinfection in patients with SARS-CoV-2 and influenza pneumonia, respectively. Bacterial identification was associated with increased adjusted hazard ratio for 28-day mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia (1.57; 95% CI, 1.01-2.44; P = 0.043). However, no significant difference was found in the heterogeneity of outcomes related to bacterial identification between the two study groups, suggesting that the impact of coinfection on mortality was not different between patients with SARS-CoV-2 and influenza.Conclusions: Bacterial identification within 48 hours after intubation is significantly less frequent in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia than patients with influenza pneumonia.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04359693).
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coinfection , Influenza, Human , Adult , COVID-19/complications , Humans , Influenza, Human/complications , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Although patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection have several risk factors for ventilator-associated lower respiratory tract infections (VA-LRTI), the reported incidence of hospital-acquired infections is low. We aimed to determine the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, as compared to influenza pneumonia or no viral infection, and the incidence of VA-LRTI. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective European cohort performed in 36 ICUs. All adult patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation > 48 h were eligible if they had: SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, influenza pneumonia, or no viral infection at ICU admission. VA-LRTI, including ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (VAT) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), were diagnosed using clinical, radiological and quantitative microbiological criteria. All VA-LRTI were prospectively identified, and chest-X rays were analyzed by at least two physicians. Cumulative incidence of first episodes of VA-LRTI was estimated using the Kalbfleisch and Prentice method, and compared using Fine-and Gray models. RESULTS: 1576 patients were included (568 in SARS-CoV-2, 482 in influenza, and 526 in no viral infection groups). VA-LRTI incidence was significantly higher in SARS-CoV-2 patients (287, 50.5%), as compared to influenza patients (146, 30.3%, adjusted sub hazard ratio (sHR) 1.60 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26 to 2.04)) or patients with no viral infection (133, 25.3%, adjusted sHR 1.7 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.39)). Gram-negative bacilli were responsible for a large proportion (82% to 89.7%) of VA-LRTI, mainly Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterobacter spp., and Klebsiella spp. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of VA-LRTI is significantly higher in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, as compared to patients with influenza pneumonia, or no viral infection after statistical adjustment, but residual confounding may still play a role in the effect estimates.