Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 39
Filter
Add filters

Year range
1.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 8, 2022 01 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1590188

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Prone positioning (PP) reduces mortality of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The potential benefit of prone positioning maneuvers during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between the use of prone positioning during extracorporeal support and ICU mortality in a pooled population of patients from previous European cohort studies. METHODS: We performed a pooled individual patient data analysis of European cohort studies which compared patients treated with prone positioning during ECMO (Prone group) to "conventional" ECMO management (Supine group) in patients with severe ARDS. RESULTS: 889 patients from five studies were included. Unadjusted ICU mortality was 52.8% in the Supine Group and 40.8% in the Prone group. At a Cox multiple regression analysis PP during ECMO was not significantly associated with a reduction of ICU mortality (HR 0.67 95% CI: 0.42-1.06). Propensity score matching identified 227 patients in each group. ICU mortality of the matched samples was 48.0% and 39.6% for patients in the Supine and Prone group, respectively (p = 0.072). CONCLUSIONS: In a large population of ARDS patients receiving venovenous extracorporeal support, the use of prone positioning during ECMO was not significantly associated with reduced ICU mortality. The impact of this procedure will have to be definitively assessed by prospective randomized controlled trials.


Subject(s)
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Data Analysis , Humans , Patient Positioning , Prone Position , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Retrospective Studies
2.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 2021 Dec 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1551111

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: The "Berlin definition" of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) does not allow inclusion of patients receiving high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO). However, several articles proposed that criteria for defining ARDS should be broadened to allow inclusion of patients receiving HFNO. OBJECTIVE: To compare the proportion of patients fulfilling ARDS criteria during HFNO and soon after intubation, and 28-day mortality between patients treated exclusively with HFNO and patients transitioned from HFNO to IMV. METHODS: From previously published studies we analyzed COVID-19 patients who had PaO2/FiO2 ≤300 while treated with HFNO ≥40 L/min, or NIV with PEEP ≥5 cmH2O (comparator). In patients transitioned from HFNO/NIV to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), we compared ARDS severity during HFNO/NIV and soon after IMV. We compared 28-day mortality in patients treated exclusively with HFNO/NIV vs. transitioned to IMV. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analyzed 184 and 131 patients receiving HFNO or NIV, respectively. 112 HFNO, and 69 NIV patients transitioned to IMV. 104 (92.9%) HFNO patients and 66 (95.7%) NIV patients continued to have PaO2/FiO2 ≤300 under IMV. 28-day mortality in patients who remained on HFNO was 4.2% (3/72) while in patients transitioned from HFNO to IMV it was 28.6% (32/112) (p<0.001). 28-day mortality in patients who remained on NIV was 1.6% (1/62), while in patients who transitioned from NIV to IMV it was 44.9% (31/69) (p<0.001). Overall mortality was 19.0% (35/184) and 24.4% (32/131) for HFNO and NIV, respectively (p=0.2479). CONCLUSIONS: Broadening ARDS definition to include HFNO patients with PaO2/FiO2 ≤300 may identify patients at earlier stages of disease but with lower mortality. This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

3.
JAMA ; 323(16): 1574-1581, 2020 04 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1453471

ABSTRACT

Importance: In December 2019, a novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]) emerged in China and has spread globally, creating a pandemic. Information about the clinical characteristics of infected patients who require intensive care is limited. Objective: To characterize patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring treatment in an intensive care unit (ICU) in the Lombardy region of Italy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective case series of 1591 consecutive patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 referred for ICU admission to the coordinator center (Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy) of the COVID-19 Lombardy ICU Network and treated at one of the ICUs of the 72 hospitals in this network between February 20 and March 18, 2020. Date of final follow-up was March 25, 2020. Exposures: SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay of nasal and pharyngeal swabs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Demographic and clinical data were collected, including data on clinical management, respiratory failure, and patient mortality. Data were recorded by the coordinator center on an electronic worksheet during telephone calls by the staff of the COVID-19 Lombardy ICU Network. Results: Of the 1591 patients included in the study, the median (IQR) age was 63 (56-70) years and 1304 (82%) were male. Of the 1043 patients with available data, 709 (68%) had at least 1 comorbidity and 509 (49%) had hypertension. Among 1300 patients with available respiratory support data, 1287 (99% [95% CI, 98%-99%]) needed respiratory support, including 1150 (88% [95% CI, 87%-90%]) who received mechanical ventilation and 137 (11% [95% CI, 9%-12%]) who received noninvasive ventilation. The median positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) was 14 (IQR, 12-16) cm H2O, and Fio2 was greater than 50% in 89% of patients. The median Pao2/Fio2 was 160 (IQR, 114-220). The median PEEP level was not different between younger patients (n = 503 aged ≤63 years) and older patients (n = 514 aged ≥64 years) (14 [IQR, 12-15] vs 14 [IQR, 12-16] cm H2O, respectively; median difference, 0 [95% CI, 0-0]; P = .94). Median Fio2 was lower in younger patients: 60% (IQR, 50%-80%) vs 70% (IQR, 50%-80%) (median difference, -10% [95% CI, -14% to 6%]; P = .006), and median Pao2/Fio2 was higher in younger patients: 163.5 (IQR, 120-230) vs 156 (IQR, 110-205) (median difference, 7 [95% CI, -8 to 22]; P = .02). Patients with hypertension (n = 509) were older than those without hypertension (n = 526) (median [IQR] age, 66 years [60-72] vs 62 years [54-68]; P < .001) and had lower Pao2/Fio2 (median [IQR], 146 [105-214] vs 173 [120-222]; median difference, -27 [95% CI, -42 to -12]; P = .005). Among the 1581 patients with ICU disposition data available as of March 25, 2020, 920 patients (58% [95% CI, 56%-61%]) were still in the ICU, 256 (16% [95% CI, 14%-18%]) were discharged from the ICU, and 405 (26% [95% CI, 23%-28%]) had died in the ICU. Older patients (n = 786; age ≥64 years) had higher mortality than younger patients (n = 795; age ≤63 years) (36% vs 15%; difference, 21% [95% CI, 17%-26%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this case series of critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 admitted to ICUs in Lombardy, Italy, the majority were older men, a large proportion required mechanical ventilation and high levels of PEEP, and ICU mortality was 26%.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Hospital Mortality , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Positive-Pressure Respiration/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Age Distribution , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Critical Illness/therapy , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Sex Distribution , Young Adult
4.
Biomedicines ; 9(9)2021 Sep 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1408456

ABSTRACT

The synergic combination of D-dimer (as proxy of thrombotic/vascular injury) and static compliance (as proxy of parenchymal injury) in predicting mortality in COVID-19-ARDS has not been systematically evaluated. The objective is to determine whether the combination of elevated D-dimer and low static compliance can predict mortality in patients with COVID-19-ARDS. A "training sample" (March-June 2020) and a "testing sample" (September 2020-January 2021) of adult patients invasively ventilated for COVID-19-ARDS were collected in nine hospitals. D-dimer and compliance in the first 24 h were recorded. Study outcome was all-cause mortality at 28-days. Cut-offs for D-dimer and compliance were identified by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Mutually exclusive groups were selected using classification tree analysis with chi-square automatic interaction detection. Time to death in the resulting groups was estimated with Cox regression adjusted for SOFA, sex, age, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, and sample (training/testing). "Training" and "testing" samples amounted to 347 and 296 patients, respectively. Three groups were identified: D-dimer ≤ 1880 ng/mL (LD); D-dimer > 1880 ng/mL and compliance > 41 mL/cmH2O (LD-HC); D-dimer > 1880 ng/mL and compliance ≤ 41 mL/cmH2O (HD-LC). 28-days mortality progressively increased in the three groups (from 24% to 35% and 57% (training) and from 27% to 39% and 60% (testing), respectively; p < 0.01). Adjusted mortality was significantly higher in HD-LC group compared with LD (HR = 0.479, p < 0.001) and HD-HC (HR = 0.542, p < 0.01); no difference was found between LD and HD-HC. In conclusion, combination of high D-dimer and low static compliance identifies a clinical phenotype with high mortality in COVID-19-ARDS.

6.
Lorenzoni, Giulia, Sella, Nicolò, Boscolo, Annalisa, Azzolina, Danila, Bartolotta, Patrizia, Pasin, Laura, Pettenuzzo, Tommaso, De Cassai, Alessandro, Baratto, Fabio, Toffoletto, Fabio, De Rosa, Silvia, Fullin, Giorgio, Peta, Mario, Rosi, Paolo, Polati, Enrico, Zanella, Alberto, Grasselli, Giacomo, Pesenti, Antonio, Navalesi, Paolo, Gregori, Dario, Tocco, Martina, Pretto, Chiara, Tamburini, Enrico, Fregolent, Davide, Pirelli, Pier Francesco, Marchesin, Davide, Perona, Matteo, Franchetti, Nicola, Paolera, Michele Della, Simoni, Caterina, Falcioni, Tatiana, Tresin, Alessandra, Schiavolin, Chiara, Schiavi, Aldo, Vathi, Sonila, Sartori, Daria, Sorgato, Alice, Pistollato, Elisa, Linassi, Federico, Gianoli, Sara, Gaspari, Silvia, Gruppo, Francesco, Maggiolo, Alessandra, Giurisato, Elena, Furlani, Elisa, Calore, Alvise, Serra, Eugenio, Pittarello, Demetrio, Tiberio, Ivo, Bond, Ottavia, Michieletto, Elisa, Muraro, Luisa, Peralta, Arianna, Persona, Paolo, Petranzan, Enrico, Zarantonello, Francesco, Graziano, Alessandro, Piasentini, Eleonora, Bernardi, Lorenzo, Pianon, Roberto, Mazzon, Davide, Poole, Daniele, Badii, Flavio, Bosco, Enrico, Agostini, Moreno, Trevisiol, Paride, Farnia, Antonio, Altafini, Lorella, Calò, Mauro Antonio, Meggiolaro, Marco, Lazzari, Francesco, Martinello, Ivan, Papaccio, Francesco, di Gregorio, Guido, Bonato, Alfeo, Sgarabotto, Camilla, Montacciani, Francesco, Alessandra, Parnigotto, Gagliardi, Giuseppe, Ferraro, Gioconda, Ongaro, Luigi, Baiocchi, Marco, Danzi, Vinicio, Zanatta, Paolo, Donadello, Katia, Gottin, Leonardo, Sinigaglia, Ezio, da Ros, Alessandra, Marchiotto, Simonetta, Bassanini, Silvia, Zamperini, Massimo, Daroui, Ivan, Mosaner, Walter.
Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care ; 1(1):3-3, 2021.
Article in English | BioMed Central | ID: covidwho-1388853
7.
Intensive Care Med ; 47(9): 995-1008, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1349283

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate the daily values and trends over time of relevant clinical, ventilatory and laboratory parameters during the intensive care unit (ICU) stay and their association with outcome in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). METHODS: In this retrospective-prospective multicentric study, we enrolled COVID-19 patients admitted to Italian ICUs from February 22 to May 31, 2020. Clinical data were daily recorded. The time course of 18 clinical parameters was evaluated by a polynomial maximum likelihood multilevel linear regression model, while a full joint modeling was fit to study the association with ICU outcome. RESULTS: 1260 consecutive critically ill patients with COVID-19 admitted in 24 ICUs were enrolled. 78% were male with a median age of 63 [55-69] years. At ICU admission, the median ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) was 122 [89-175] mmHg. 79% of patients underwent invasive mechanical ventilation. The overall mortality was 34%. Both the daily values and trends of respiratory system compliance, PaO2/FiO2, driving pressure, arterial carbon dioxide partial pressure, creatinine, C-reactive protein, ferritin, neutrophil, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, and platelets were associated with survival, while for lactate, pH, bilirubin, lymphocyte, and urea only the daily values were associated with survival. The trends of PaO2/FiO2, respiratory system compliance, driving pressure, creatinine, ferritin, and C-reactive protein showed a higher association with survival compared to the daily values. CONCLUSION: Daily values or trends over time of parameters associated with acute organ dysfunction, acid-base derangement, coagulation impairment, or systemic inflammation were associated with patient survival.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Critical Illness , Aged , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Minerva Anestesiol ; 87(10): 1080-1090, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1337893

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 patients developing the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) show increased production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, including interleukin-6 (IL-6). The use of humanized monoclonal antibody against interleukin-6 receptor (IL-6R) may represent a potential treatment strategy. We analyzed the effects of compassionate use of tocilizumab and sarilumab on clinical outcome of patients affected by ARDS due COVID-19. METHODS: This single-center, observational, exploratory study was performed during the acute phase of COVID-19 outbreak, between March 7th and April 21st, 2020 in a University Hospital in Rome, Italy. All consecutive adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and fulfilling ARDS criteria were enrolled. Patients who were treated with anti-IL-6R therapy were compared to those who were not, as per clinical decision. Inverse probability weights were applied to weight individual's contribution to survival curves and in the multivariate regression model. RESULTS: Among 105 ARDS patients, 65 received compassionate treatment with anti-IL-6R therapy (43 [66%] Tocilizumab [Hoffmann-La Roche, Basel, Switzerland] and 22 [34%] Sarilumab, respectively], with oxygenation improvement. In the multivariable Cox proportional regression hazards model with propensity score inverse probability weighting, patients who received anti-IL-6R treatment had lower risk of death compared to those who did not, with a hazard ration of 0.34 [95% confidence interval 0.17-0.74], P=0.001. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggested that immune modulator therapy based on anti-human IL-6 receptor monoclonal antibodies might lead to improved outcome in patients with ARDS due to COVID-19. These data support the need for confirmatory randomized trials to assess the effect of immune modulator therapies on mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Compassionate Use Trials , Critical Illness , Humans , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 268, 2021 07 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1330231

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) has been diffusely employed outside the intensive care unit (ICU) to face the high request of ventilatory support due to the massive influx of patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) caused by coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19). We sought to summarize the evidence on clinically relevant outcomes in COVID-19 patients supported by NIV outside the ICU. METHODS: We searched PUBMED®, EMBASE®, and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical trials register, along with medRxiv and bioRxiv repositories for pre-prints, for observational studies and randomized controlled trials, from inception to the end of February 2021. Two authors independently selected the investigations according to the following criteria: (1) observational study or randomized clinical trials enrolling ≥ 50 hospitalized patients undergoing NIRS outside the ICU, (2) laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, and (3) at least the intra-hospital mortality reported. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines were followed. Data extraction was independently performed by two authors to assess: investigation features, demographics and clinical characteristics, treatments employed, NIRS regulations, and clinical outcomes. Methodological index for nonrandomized studies tool was applied to determine the quality of the enrolled studies. The primary outcome was to assess the overall intra-hospital mortality of patients under NIRS outside the ICU. The secondary outcomes included the proportions intra-hospital mortalities of patients who underwent invasive mechanical ventilation following NIRS failure and of those with 'do-not-intubate' (DNI) orders. RESULTS: Seventeen investigations (14 peer-reviewed and 3 pre-prints) were included with a low risk of bias and a high heterogeneity, for a total of 3377 patients. The overall intra-hospital mortality of patients receiving NIRS outside the ICU was 36% [30-41%]. 26% [21-30%] of the patients failed NIRS and required intubation, with an intra-hospital mortality rising to 45% [36-54%]. 23% [15-32%] of the patients received DNI orders with an intra-hospital mortality of 72% [65-78%]. Oxygenation on admission was the main source of between-study heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: During COVID-19 outbreak, delivering NIRS outside the ICU revealed as a feasible strategy to cope with the massive demand of ventilatory assistance. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , CRD42020224788, December 11, 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Noninvasive Ventilation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , COVID-19/mortality , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Intubation/statistics & numerical data , Observational Studies as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology
10.
Membranes (Basel) ; 11(7)2021 Jul 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1323302

ABSTRACT

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a shortage of mechanical ventilators was reported and ventilator sharing between patients was proposed as an ultimate solution. Two lung simulators were ventilated by one anesthesia machine connected through two respiratory circuits and T-pieces. Five different combinations of compliances (30-50 mL × cmH2O-1) and resistances (5-20 cmH2O × L-1 × s-1) were tested. The ventilation setting was: pressure-controlled ventilation, positive end-expiratory pressure 15 cmH2O, inspiratory pressure 10 cmH2O, respiratory rate 20 bpm. Pressures and flows from all the circuit sections have been recorded and analyzed. Simulated patients with equal compliance and resistance received similar ventilation. Compliance reduction from 50 to 30 mL × cmH2O-1 decreased the tidal volume (VT) by 32% (418 ± 49 vs. 285 ± 17 mL). The resistance increase from 5 to 20 cmH2O × L-1 × s-1 decreased VT by 22% (425 ± 69 vs. 331 ± 51 mL). The maximal alveolar pressure was lower at higher compliance and resistance values and decreased linearly with the time constant (r² = 0.80, p < 0.001). The minimum alveolar pressure ranged from 15.5 ± 0.04 to 16.57 ± 0.04 cmH2O. Cross-flows between the simulated patients have been recorded in all the tested combinations, during both the inspiratory and expiratory phases. The simultaneous ventilation of two patients with one ventilator may be unable to match individual patient's needs and has a high risk of cross-interference.

11.
World J Emerg Surg ; 16(1): 39, 2021 07 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1318287

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUNDS: The COVID-19 pandemic drastically strained the health systems worldwide, obligating the reassessment of how healthcare is delivered. In Lombardia, Italy, a Regional Emergency Committee (REC) was established and the regional health system reorganized, with only three hospitals designated as hubs for trauma care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of this reorganization of regional care, comparing the distribution of patients before and during the COVID-19 outbreak and to describe changes in the epidemiology of severe trauma among the two periods. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted using retrospectively collected data from the Regional Trauma Registry of Lombardia (LTR). We compared the data of trauma patients admitted to three hub hospitals before the COVID-19 outbreak (September 1 to November 19, 2019) with those recorded during the pandemic (February 21 to May 10, 2020) in the same hospitals. Demographic data, level of pre-hospital care (Advanced Life Support-ALS, Basic Life Support-BLS), type of transportation, mechanism of injury (MOI), abbreviated injury score (AIS, 1998 version), injury severity score (ISS), revised trauma score (RTS), and ICU admission and survival outcome of all the patients admitted to the three trauma centers designed as hubs, were reviewed. Screening for COVID-19 was performed with nasopharyngeal swabs, chest ultrasound, and/or computed tomography. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, trauma patients admitted to the hubs increased (46.4% vs 28.3%, p < 0.001) with an increase in pre-hospital time (71.8 vs 61.3 min, p < 0.01), while observed in hospital mortality was unaffected. TRISS, ISS, AIS, and ICU admission were similar in both periods. During the COVID-19 outbreak, we observed substantial changes in MOI of severe trauma patients admitted to three hubs, with increases of unintentional (31.9% vs 18.5%, p < 0.05) and intentional falls (8.4% vs 1.2%, p < 0.05), whereas the pandemic restrictions reduced road- related injuries (35.6% vs 60%, p < 0.05). Deaths on scene were significantly increased (17.7% vs 6.8%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 outbreak affected the epidemiology of severe trauma patients. An increase in trauma patient admissions to a few designated facilities with high level of care obtained satisfactory results, while COVID-19 patients overwhelmed resources of most other hospitals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care/trends , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Registries , Trauma Centers/statistics & numerical data , Wounds and Injuries/epidemiology , Adult , Comorbidity , Female , Hospital Mortality/trends , Hospitalization/trends , Humans , Injury Severity Score , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Wounds and Injuries/diagnosis , Wounds and Injuries/therapy
12.
J Thromb Haemost ; 18(7): 1738-1742, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1317984

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The severe inflammatory state secondary to COVID-19 leads to a severe derangement of hemostasis that has been recently described as a state of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) and consumption coagulopathy, defined as decreased platelet count, increased fibrin(ogen) degradation products such as D-dimer, as well as low fibrinogen. AIMS: Whole blood from 24 patients admitted at the intensive care unit because of COVID-19 was collected and evaluated with thromboelastography by the TEG point-of-care device on a single occasion and six underwent repeated measurements on two consecutive days for a total of 30 observations. Plasma was evaluated for the other parameters of hemostasis. RESULTS: TEG parameters are consistent with a state of hypercoagulability as shown by decreased values, and increased values of K angle and MA. Platelet count was normal or increased, prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time were near(normal). Fibrinogen was increased and D-dimer was dramatically increased. C-reactive protein was increased. Factor VIII and von Willebrand factor (n = 11) were increased. Antithrombin (n = 11) was marginally decreased and protein C (n = 11) was increased. CONCLUSION: The results of this cohort of patients with COVID-19 are not consistent with acute DIC, rather they support hypercoagulability together with a severe inflammatory state. These findings may explain the events of venous thromboembolism observed in some of these patients and support antithrombotic prophylaxis/treatment. Clinical trials are urgently needed to establish the type of drug, dosage, and optimal duration of prophylaxis.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , Blood Coagulation , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Intensive Care Units , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Thrombelastography , Thrombophilia/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19 , Case-Control Studies , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Host-Pathogen Interactions , Humans , Inflammation Mediators/blood , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Predictive Value of Tests , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombophilia/blood , Thrombophilia/virology , Young Adult
13.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 199, 2021 06 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1262513

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneous respiratory system static compliance (CRS) values and levels of hypoxemia in patients with novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) requiring mechanical ventilation have been reported in previous small-case series or studies conducted at a national level. METHODS: We designed a retrospective observational cohort study with rapid data gathering from the international COVID-19 Critical Care Consortium study to comprehensively describe CRS-calculated as: tidal volume/[airway plateau pressure-positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)]-and its association with ventilatory management and outcomes of COVID-19 patients on mechanical ventilation (MV), admitted to intensive care units (ICU) worldwide. RESULTS: We studied 745 patients from 22 countries, who required admission to the ICU and MV from January 14 to December 31, 2020, and presented at least one value of CRS within the first seven days of MV. Median (IQR) age was 62 (52-71), patients were predominantly males (68%) and from Europe/North and South America (88%). CRS, within 48 h from endotracheal intubation, was available in 649 patients and was neither associated with the duration from onset of symptoms to commencement of MV (p = 0.417) nor with PaO2/FiO2 (p = 0.100). Females presented lower CRS than males (95% CI of CRS difference between females-males: - 11.8 to - 7.4 mL/cmH2O p < 0.001), and although females presented higher body mass index (BMI), association of BMI with CRS was marginal (p = 0.139). Ventilatory management varied across CRS range, resulting in a significant association between CRS and driving pressure (estimated decrease - 0.31 cmH2O/L per mL/cmH20 of CRS, 95% CI - 0.48 to - 0.14, p < 0.001). Overall, 28-day ICU mortality, accounting for the competing risk of being discharged within the period, was 35.6% (SE 1.7). Cox proportional hazard analysis demonstrated that CRS (+ 10 mL/cm H2O) was only associated with being discharge from the ICU within 28 days (HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.28, p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: This multicentre report provides a comprehensive account of CRS in COVID-19 patients on MV. CRS measured within 48 h from commencement of MV has marginal predictive value for 28-day mortality, but was associated with being discharged from ICU within the same period. Trial documentation: Available at https://www.covid-critical.com/study . TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12620000421932.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Lung Compliance/physiology , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Adult , Cohort Studies , Critical Care/methods , Europe , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index
14.
Anesthesiol Clin ; 39(2): 265-284, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1240164

ABSTRACT

Italy was the first western country facing an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The first Italian patient diagnosed with COVID-19 was admitted, on Feb. 20, 2020, to the intensive care unit (ICU) in Codogno (Lodi, Lombardy, Italy), and the number of reported positive cases increased to 36 in the next 24 hours, and then exponentially for 18 days. This triggered a response that resulted in a massive surge in ICU bed capacity. The COVID19 Lombardy Network organized a structured logistic response and provided scientific evidence to highlight information on COVID-19 associated respiratory failure.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Critical Care/organization & administration , Pandemics , Airway Management , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Italy
17.
Chest ; 160(2): 454-465, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1184884

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Few small studies have described hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) occurring in patients with COVID-19. RESEARCH QUESTION: What characteristics in critically ill patients with COVID-19 are associated with HAIs and how are HAIs associated with outcomes in these patients? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Multicenter retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data including adult patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to eight Italian hub hospitals from February 20, 2020, through May 20, 2020. Descriptive statistics and univariate and multivariate Weibull regression models were used to assess incidence, microbial cause, resistance patterns, risk factors (ie, demographics, comorbidities, exposure to medication), and impact on outcomes (ie, ICU discharge, length of ICU and hospital stays, and duration of mechanical ventilation) of microbiologically confirmed HAIs. RESULTS: Of the 774 included patients, 359 patients (46%) demonstrated 759 HAIs (44.7 infections/1,000 ICU patient-days; 35% multidrug-resistant [MDR] bacteria). Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP; n = 389 [50%]), bloodstream infections (BSIs; n = 183 [34%]), and catheter-related BSIs (n = 74 [10%]) were the most frequent HAIs, with 26.0 (95% CI, 23.6-28.8) VAPs per 1,000 intubation-days, 11.7 (95% CI, 10.1-13.5) BSIs per 1,000 ICU patient-days, and 4.7 (95% CI, 3.8-5.9) catheter-related BSIs per 1,000 ICU patient-days. Gram-negative bacteria (especially Enterobacterales) and Staphylococcus aureus caused 64% and 28% of cases of VAP, respectively. Variables independently associated with infection were age, positive end expiratory pressure, and treatment with broad-spectrum antibiotics at admission. Two hundred thirty-four patients (30%) died in the ICU (15.3 deaths/1,000 ICU patient-days). Patients with HAIs complicated by septic shock showed an almost doubled mortality rate (52% vs 29%), whereas noncomplicated infections did not affect mortality. HAIs prolonged mechanical ventilation (median, 24 days [interquartile range (IQR), 14-39 days] vs 9 days [IQR, 5-13 days]; P < .001), ICU stay (24 days [IQR, 16-41 days] vs 9 days [IQR, 6-14 days]; P = .003), and hospital stay (42 days [IQR, 25-59 days] vs 23 days [IQR, 13-34 days]; P < .001). INTERPRETATION: Critically ill patients with COVID-19 are at high risk for HAIs, especially VAPs and BSIs resulting from MDR organisms. HAIs prolong mechanical ventilation and hospitalization, and HAIs complicated by septic shock almost double mortality. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04388670; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Cross Infection/complications , Aged , Critical Illness , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/complications , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Sepsis/complications , Sepsis/epidemiology
18.
Chest ; 159(4): 1426-1436, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-921554

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Sigh is a cyclic brief recruitment maneuver: previous physiologic studies showed that its use could be an interesting addition to pressure support ventilation to improve lung elastance, decrease regional heterogeneity, and increase release of surfactant. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is the clinical application of sigh during pressure support ventilation (PSV) feasible? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter noninferiority randomized clinical trial on adult intubated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure or ARDS undergoing PSV. Patients were randomized to the no-sigh group and treated by PSV alone, or to the sigh group, treated by PSV plus sigh (increase in airway pressure to 30 cm H2O for 3 s once per minute) until day 28 or death or successful spontaneous breathing trial. The primary end point of the study was feasibility, assessed as noninferiority (5% tolerance) in the proportion of patients failing assisted ventilation. Secondary outcomes included safety, physiologic parameters in the first week from randomization, 28-day mortality, and ventilator-free days. RESULTS: Two-hundred and fifty-eight patients (31% women; median age, 65 [54-75] years) were enrolled. In the sigh group, 23% of patients failed to remain on assisted ventilation vs 30% in the no-sigh group (absolute difference, -7%; 95% CI, -18% to 4%; P = .015 for noninferiority). Adverse events occurred in 12% vs 13% in the sigh vs no-sigh group (P = .852). Oxygenation was improved whereas tidal volume, respiratory rate, and corrected minute ventilation were lower over the first 7 days from randomization in the sigh vs no-sigh group. There was no significant difference in terms of mortality (16% vs 21%; P = .337) and ventilator-free days (22 [7-26] vs 22 [3-25] days; P = .300) for the sigh vs no-sigh group. INTERPRETATION: Among hypoxemic intubated ICU patients, application of sigh was feasible and without increased risk. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03201263; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.


Subject(s)
Positive-Pressure Respiration , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Aged , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal , Male , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/physiopathology , Respiratory Insufficiency/physiopathology , Respiratory Mechanics
19.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 128, 2021 04 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1169981

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on the use of prone position in intubated, invasively ventilated patients with Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). Aim of this study is to investigate the use and effect of prone position in this population during the first 2020 pandemic wave. METHODS: Retrospective, multicentre, national cohort study conducted between February 24 and June 14, 2020, in 24 Italian Intensive Care Units (ICU) on adult patients needing invasive mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure caused by COVID-19. Clinical data were collected on the day of ICU admission. Information regarding the use of prone position was collected daily. Follow-up for patient outcomes was performed on July 15, 2020. The respiratory effects of the first prone position were studied in a subset of 78 patients. Patients were classified as Oxygen Responders if the PaO2/FiO2 ratio increased ≥ 20 mmHg during prone position and as Carbon Dioxide Responders if the ventilatory ratio was reduced during prone position. RESULTS: Of 1057 included patients, mild, moderate and severe ARDS was present in 15, 50 and 35% of patients, respectively, and had a resulting mortality of 25, 33 and 41%. Prone position was applied in 61% of the patients. Patients placed prone had a more severe disease and died significantly more (45% vs. 33%, p < 0.001). Overall, prone position induced a significant increase in PaO2/FiO2 ratio, while no change in respiratory system compliance or ventilatory ratio was observed. Seventy-eight % of the subset of 78 patients were Oxygen Responders. Non-Responders had a more severe respiratory failure and died more often in the ICU (65% vs. 38%, p = 0.047). Forty-seven % of patients were defined as Carbon Dioxide Responders. These patients were older and had more comorbidities; however, no difference in terms of ICU mortality was observed (51% vs. 37%, p = 0.189 for Carbon Dioxide Responders and Non-Responders, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, prone position has been widely adopted to treat mechanically ventilated patients with respiratory failure. The majority of patients improved their oxygenation during prone position, most likely due to a better ventilation perfusion matching. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT04388670.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/standards , Intubation/standards , Patient Positioning/standards , Prone Position , Respiration, Artificial/standards , Supine Position , Aged , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Retrospective Studies
20.
Front Cell Infect Microbiol ; 11: 639579, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1167305

ABSTRACT

A multidisciplinary group, mainly from Bergamo region - the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic crisis in Italy on march 2020- has developed concept of creating intermediate care facilities and proposes a three-tier model of community-based care, with the goal of reducing hospital admissions, contagion and mortality related to hospital overloading and optimizing human resources.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Pandemics , COVID-19/prevention & control , Home Care Services , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Patient Care/classification , Patient Care/methods , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...