Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 40
Filter
1.
Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine ; : 101098, 2022.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-1821095

ABSTRACT

Background Solid-organ transplantation (SOT) from SARS-CoV-2 positive donors could be a life-saving opportunity worth grasping. We perform a systematic review of SOT using SARS-CoV-2 positive donors. Methods The search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and Web of Science databases, including studies conducted till the 31th of December 2021 from SOT adult recipients from a donor with past or current SARS-CoV-2 infection. Outcomes were viral transmission, COVID-19 symptoms, mortality, hospital stay, and complications. PROSPERO Register Number: CRD42022303242 Findings Sixty-nine recipients received 48 kidneys, 18 livers and 3 hearts from 57 donors. Six additional transplants from positive lungs were identified. IgG + anti-SARS-CoV-2 titers were detected among 10/16 recipients;only 4% (3/69) recipients were vaccinated. Non-lung transplant recipients received organs from 10/57 (17.5%) donors with persistent COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected (median 32 Cycle threshold [Ct]) in 18/57, at procurement. Among non-lung transplant recipients, SARS-CoV-2 viral transmission was not documented. Four patients presented delayed graft dysfunction, two patients acute rejection, and two patients died of septic shock. The median (IQR) hospital stay was 18 (11-28) days in recipients from symptomatic donors. Viral transmission occurred from three lung donors to their recipients, who developed COVID-19 symptoms. One of the recipients subsequently died. Conclusion Use of non-lung (kidney, liver and heart) organs from SARS-CoV-2 positive donors seem to be a safe practice, with a low risk of transmission irrespective of the presence of symptoms at the time of procurement. Low viral replication (Ct > 30) was safe among non-lung donors, even if persistently symptomatic at procurement.

2.
Intensive Crit Care Nurs ; : 103227, 2022 Mar 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1717726

ABSTRACT

Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at high risk for healthcare-acquired infections (HAI) due to the high prevalence of invasive procedures and devices, induced immunosuppression, comorbidity, frailty and increased age. Over the past decade we have seen a successful reduction in the incidence of HAI related to invasive procedures and devices. However, the rate of ICU-acquired infections remains high. Within this context, the ongoing emergence of new pathogens, further complicates treatment and threatens patient outcomes. Additionally, the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the challenge that an emerging pathogen provides in adapting prevention measures regarding both the risk of exposure to caregivers and the need to maintain quality of care. ICU nurses hold a special place in the prevention and management of HAI as they are involved in basic hygienic care, steering and implementing quality improvement initiatives, correct microbiological sampling, and aspects antibiotic stewardship. The emergence of more sensitive microbiological techniques and our increased knowledge about interactions between critically ill patients and their microbiota are leading us to rethink how we define HAIs and best strategies to diagnose, treat and prevent these infections in the ICU. This multidisciplinary expert review, focused on the ICU setting, will summarise the recent epidemiology of ICU-HAI, discuss the place of modern microbiological techniques in their diagnosis, review operational and epidemiological definitions and redefine the place of several controversial preventive measures including antimicrobial-impregnated medical devices, chlorhexidine-impregnated washcloths, catheter dressings and chlorhexidine-based mouthwashes. Finally, general guidance is suggested that may reduce HAI incidence and especially outbreaks in ICUs.

3.
ERJ Open Res ; 8(1)2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690978

ABSTRACT

Due to the large number of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many were treated outside the traditional walls of the intensive care unit (ICU), and in many cases, by personnel who were not trained in critical care. The clinical characteristics and the relative impact of caring for severe COVID-19 patients outside the ICU is unknown. This was a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium World Health Organization COVID-19 platform. Severe COVID-19 patients were identified as those admitted to an ICU and/or those treated with one of the following treatments: invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal cannula, inotropes or vasopressors. A logistic generalised additive model was used to compare clinical outcomes among patients admitted or not to the ICU. A total of 40 440 patients from 43 countries and six continents were included in this analysis. Severe COVID-19 patients were frequently male (62.9%), older adults (median (interquartile range (IQR), 67 (55-78) years), and with at least one comorbidity (63.2%). The overall median (IQR) length of hospital stay was 10 (5-19) days and was longer in patients admitted to an ICU than in those who were cared for outside the ICU (12 (6-23) days versus 8 (4-15) days, p<0.0001). The 28-day fatality ratio was lower in ICU-admitted patients (30.7% (5797 out of 18 831) versus 39.0% (7532 out of 19 295), p<0.0001). Patients admitted to an ICU had a significantly lower probability of death than those who were not (adjusted OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.65-0.75; p<0.0001). Patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to an ICU had significantly lower 28-day fatality ratio than those cared for outside an ICU.

4.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-312912

ABSTRACT

Objectives: There is increasing evidence of thrombotic events occurring in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). We evaluated dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) findings, particularly lung and kidney perfusion, in non-intubated COVID-19 patients. Methods: : Thirty-one COVID-19 patients who underwent pulmonary DECT angiography between March 15 and April 30, 2020, and were suspected of having pulmonary thromboembolism were included. Pulmonary and kidney images were reviewed. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of the perfused blood volume and iodine maps were performed. Results: : DECT images showed perfusion deficits (PDs) in eight patients (25.8%), which were not overlapping with areas of ground-glass opacity or consolidation. Two patients had pulmonary thromboembolism confirmed by CT angiography. Five of 10 patients who had been infected for more than 5 days had PDs documented. Patients with PDs had a longer hospital stay (12.25 ± 8.81 vs 6.83 ± 5.04 days, p= 0.14), higher intensive care unit admission rates (37.5% vs 4.3%, p=0.02), higher CT scores (13.3 ± 8.2 vs 5 ± 5.4, p= 0.02) and more severe disease (50% vs 4.3%, p=0.01). In the PD group, serum ferritin, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), fibrinogen, D-dimer, C-reactive protein (CRP), and troponin levels were significantly higher, whereas albumin level was lower (p<0.05). D-dimer levels ≥ 0.485 ug/L predicted PD with 100% specificity and 87% sensitivity (AUROC: 0.957). Renal iodine maps showed heterogeneous enhancement consistent with perfusion abnormality in 13 patients (50%). Sodium levels were significantly lower in this group (p=0.03). Conclusions: : Pulmonary perfusion abnormalities in COVID 19 patients is associated with more severe disease and in most of the patients can occur without macroscopic pulmonary thromboembolism. High rate of kidney perfusion abnormalities suggests subclinical systemic microvascular obstruction.

5.
EXCLI J ; 21: 93-103, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1667813

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to investigate the COVID-19 vaccination acceptance rate and its determinants among healthcare workers in a multicenter study. This was a cross-sectional multi-center survey conducted from February 5 to April 29, 2021. The questionnaire consisted of 26 items in 6 subscales. The English version of the questionnaire was translated into seven languages and distributed through Google Forms using snowball sampling; a colleague in each country was responsible for the forward and backward translation, and also the distribution of the questionnaire. A forward stepwise logistic regression was utilized to explore the variables and questionnaire factors tied to the intention to COVID-19 vaccination. 4630 participants from 91 countries completed the questionnaire. According to the United Nations Development Program 2020, 43.6 % of participants were from low Human Development Index (HDI) regions, 48.3 % high and very high, and 8.1 % from medium. The overall vaccination hesitancy rate was 37 %. Three out of six factors of the questionnaire were significantly related to intention to the vaccination. While 'Perceived benefits of the COVID-19 vaccination' (OR: 3.82, p-value<0.001) and 'Prosocial norms' (OR: 5.18, p-value<0.001) were associated with vaccination acceptance, 'The vaccine safety/cost concerns' with OR: 3.52, p-value<0.001 was tied to vaccination hesitancy. Medical doctors and pharmacists were more willing to take the vaccine in comparison to others. Importantly, HDI with OR: 12.28, 95 % CI: 6.10-24.72 was a strong positive determinant of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance. This study highlighted the vaccination hesitancy rate of 37 % in our sample among HCWs. Increasing awareness regarding vaccination benefits, confronting the misinformation, and strengthening the prosocial norms would be the primary domains for maximizing the vaccination coverage. The study also showed that the HDI is strongly associated with the vaccination acceptance/hesitancy, in a way that those living in low HDI contexts are more hesitant to receive the vaccine.

6.
ERJ open research ; 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1610380

ABSTRACT

Due to the large number of patients with severe COVID-19, many were treated outside of the traditional walls of the ICU, and in many cases, by personnel who were not trained in critical care. The clinical characteristics and the relative impact of caring for severe COVID-19 patients outside of the ICU is unknown. This was a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC WHO COVID-19 platform. Severe COVID-19 patients were identified as those admitted to an ICU and/or those treated with one of the following treatments: invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal cannula, inotropes, and vasopressors. A logistic Generalised Additive Model was used to compare clinical outcomes among patients admitted and not to the ICU. A total of 40 440 patients from 43 countries and six continents were included in this analysis. Severe COVID-19 patients were frequently male (62.9%), older adults (median [IQR], 67 years [55, 78]), and with at least one comorbidity (63.2%). The overall median (IQR) length of hospital stay was 10 days (5–19) and was longer in patients admitted to an ICU than in those that were cared for outside of ICU (12 [6–23] versus 8 [4–15] days, p<0.0001). The 28-day fatality ratio was lower in ICU-admitted patients (30.7% [5797/18831] versus 39.0% [7532/19295], p<0.0001). Patients admitted to an ICU had a significantly lower probability of death than those who were not (adjusted OR:0.70, 95%CI: 0.65-0.75, p<0.0001). Patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to an ICU had significantly lower 28-day fatality ratio than those cared for outside of an ICU.

7.
J Clin Med ; 11(1)2021 Dec 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1580635

ABSTRACT

The use of non-invasive respiratory strategies (NIRS) is crucial to improve oxygenation in COVID-19 patients with hypoxemia refractory to conventional oxygen therapy. However, the absence of respiratory symptoms may delay the start of NIRS. The aim of this study was to determine whether a simple bedside test such as single-breath counting test (SBCT) can predict the need for NIRS in the 24 h following the access to Emergency Department (ED). We performed a prospective observational study on 120 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. ROC curves were used to analyze factors which might predict NIRS requirement. We found that 36% of patients had normal respiratory rate and did not experience dyspnea at rest. 65% of study population required NIRS in the 24 h following the access to ED. NIRS-requiring group presented lower PaO2/FiO2 (235.09 vs. 299.02), SpO2/FiO2 ratio (357.83 vs. 431.07), PaCO2 (35.12 vs. 40.08), and SBCT (24.46 vs. 30.36) and showed higher incidence of dyspnea at rest (57.7% vs. 28.6%). Furthermore, SBCT predicted NIRS requirement even in the subgroup of patients without respiratory symptoms (AUC = 0.882, cut-off = 30). SBCT might be a valuable tool for bedside assessment of respiratory function in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and might be considered as an early clinical sign of impending respiratory deterioration.

8.
Pharmacotherapy ; 41(11): 884-906, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525482

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The results of studies of tocilizumab (TCZ) in COVID-19 are contradictory. Our study aims to update medical evidence from controlled observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on the use of TCZ in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We searched the following databases from January 1, 2020 to April 13, 2021 (date of the last search): MEDLINE database through the PubMed search engine and Scopus, using the terms ("COVID-19" [Supplementary Concept]) AND "tocilizumab" [Supplementary Concept]). RESULTS: Sixty four studies were included in the present study: 54 were controlled observational studies (50 retrospective and 4 prospective) and 10 were RCTs. The overall results provided data from 20,616 hospitalized patients with COVID-19: 7668 patients received TCZ in addition to standard of care (SOC) (including 1915 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with reported mortality) and 12,948 patients only receiving SOC (including 4410 patients admitted to the ICU with reported mortality). After applying the random-effects model, the hospital-wide (including ICU) pooled mortality odds ratio (OR) of patients with COVID-19 treated with TCZ was 0.73 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.56-0.93). The pooled hospital-wide mortality OR was 1.25 (95% CI = 0.74-2.18) in patients admitted at conventional wards versus 0.66 (95% CI = 0.59-0.76) in patients admitted to the ICU. The pooled OR of hospital-wide mortality (including ICU) of COVID-19 patients treated with TCZ plus corticosteroids (CS) was 0.67 (95% CI = 0.54-0.84). The pooled in-hospital mortality OR was 0.71 (95% CI = 0.35-1.42) when TCZ was early administered (≤10 days from symptom onset) versus 0.83 (95% CI 0.48-1.45) for late administration (>10 days from symptom onset). The meta-analysis did not find significantly higher risk for secondary infections in COVID-19 patients treated with TCZ. CONCLUSIONS: TCZ prevented mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. This benefit was seen to a greater extent in patients receiving concomitant CS and when TCZ administration occurred within the first 10 days after symptom onset.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , COVID-19 , Adrenal Cortex Hormones , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Humans , Observational Studies as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
10.
Encyclopedia of Respiratory Medicine (Second Edition) ; : 523-529, 2022.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-1414444

ABSTRACT

The use of specific care bundles to control infection has been demonstrated to be effective, including ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). However, the proposal of VAP rates as a quality indicator has generated debate due a lack of a gold standard definition. In 2013, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) replaced surveillance definitions from VAP to other preventable conditions related to mechanical ventilation (ventilator-associated events: VAE), which may predict outcomes. This represents a new opportunity to overcome many of the weaknesses of traditional VAP surveillance and broadens the focus of surveillance encompassing other preventable conditions related to mechanical ventilation.

11.
Head Neck ; 43(12): 3743-3756, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1409182

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Optimal timing for tracheotomy for critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is not established. METHODS: Multicenter prospective cohort including all COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) in 36 hospitals who required tracheotomy during first pandemic wave. With a target emulation trial framework, we studied the causal effects of early (7-10 days) versus late (>10 days) tracheotomy (LT) on time from tracheotomy to weaning, postoperative mortality, and tracheotomy complications. RESULTS: Of 696 patients, 20.4% received early tracheotomy (ET). ET was associated with faster weaning (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval, CI]: 1.25 [1.00-1.56]) without differences in mortality (HR [95% CI]: 0.85 [0.60-1.21]) or complications (adjusted rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.56 [0.23-1.33]). CONCLUSIONS: ET had a similar or lower post-tracheotomy weaning time than LT, potentially shortening IMV and ICU stays, without changing complication or mortality rates in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiration, Artificial , Critical Care , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tracheotomy
12.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 39(5): 553-561, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384795

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was detected in Spain in February 2020, with 216% intensive care unit (ICU) capacity expanded in Vitoria by March 18th, 2020. METHODS: We identified patients from the two public hospitals in Vitoria who were admitted to ICU with confirmed infection by SARS-CoV-2. Data reported here were available in April 6th, 2020. Mortality was assessed in those who completed 15-days of ICU stay. RESULTS: We identified 48 patients (27 males) with confirmed SARS-CoV-2. Median [interquartile range (IQR)] age of patients was 63 [51-75] years. Symptoms began a median of 7 [5-12] days before ICU admission. The most common comorbidities identified were obesity (48%), arterial hypertension (44%) and chronic lung disease (37%). All patients were admitted by hypoxemic respiratory failure and none received non-invasive mechanical ventilation. Forty-five (94%) underwent intubation, 3 (6%) high flow nasal therapy (HFNT), 1 (2%) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and 22 (46%) required prone position. After 15 days, 14/45 (31%) intubated patients died (13% within one week), 10/45 (22%) were extubated, and 21/45 (47%) underwent mechanical ventilation. Six patients had documented super-infection. Procalcitonin plasma above 0.5µg/L was associated with 16% vs. 19% (p=0.78) risk of death after 7 days. CONCLUSION: This early experience with SARS-CoV-2 in Spain suggests that a strategy of right oxygenation avoiding non-invasive mechanical ventilation was life-saving. Seven-day mortality in SARS-CoV-2 requiring intubation was lower than 15%, with 80% of patients still requiring mechanical ventilation. After 15 days of ICU admission, half of patients remained intubated, whereas one third died.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Hospitals, Public/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 , Combined Modality Therapy , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Disease Outbreaks , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Procalcitonin/blood , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology
13.
Journal of Intensive Medicine ; 2021.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-1347723

ABSTRACT

Invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA) has been recognized as a possible secondary infection complicating Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and increasing mortality. The aim of this review was to report and summarize the available data in the literature concerning the incidence, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA). Currently, the incidence of CAPA is unclear due to different definitions and diagnostic criteria used among the studies. It was estimated that approximately 8.6% (206/2383) of mechanically ventilated patients were diagnosed with either proven, probable, or putative CAPA. Classical host factors of invasive aspergillosis are rarely recognized in patients with CAPA, who are mainly immunocompetent presenting with comorbidities, while the role of steroids warrants further investigation. Direct epithelial injury and diffuse pulmonary microthrombi in combination with immune dysregulation, hyperinflammatory response, and immunosuppressive treatment may be implicated. Discrimination between two forms of CAPA (i.e., tracheobronchial and parenchymal) is required, whereas radiological signs of aspergillosis are not typically evident in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. In previous studies, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) criteria, a clinical algorithm to diagnose Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis in intensive care unit patients (AspICU algorithm), and influenza-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (IAPA) criteria were used for the diagnosis of proven/probable and putative CAPA, as well as the differentiation from colonization, which can be challenging. Aspergillus fumigatus is the most commonly isolated pathogen in respiratory cultures. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and serum galactomannan (GM), beta-d-glucan (with limited specificity), polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and Aspergillus-specific lateral-flow device test can be included in the diagnostic work-up;however, these approaches are characterized by low sensitivity. Early treatment of CAPA is necessary, and 71.4% (135/189) of patients received antifungal therapy, mainly with voriconazole (VRC), isavuconazole (ISV), and liposomal amphotericin B (L-AMB). Given the high mortality rate among patients with Aspergillus infection, the administration of prophylactic treatment is debated. In conclusion, different diagnostic strategies are necessary to differentiate colonization from bronchial or parenchymal infection in intubated COVID-19 patients with Aspergillus spp. in their respiratory specimens vs. those not infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Following confirmation, VRC or ISV should be used for the treatment of CAPA.

16.
Anesthésie & Réanimation ; 2021.
Article in French | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-1252447
18.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 40(3): 100882, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1219880
19.
BMJ Open ; 11(3): e043887, 2021 03 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1127585

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Very little is known about possible clinical sequelae that may persist after resolution of acute COVID-19. A recent longitudinal cohort from Italy including 143 patients followed up after hospitalisation with COVID-19 reported that 87% had at least one ongoing symptom at 60-day follow-up. Early indications suggest that patients with COVID-19 may need even more psychological support than typical intensive care unit patients. The assessment of risk factors for longer term consequences requires a longitudinal study linked to data on pre-existing conditions and care received during the acute phase of illness. The primary aim of this study is to characterise physical and psychosocial sequelae in patients post-COVID-19 hospital discharge. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is an international open-access prospective, observational multisite study. This protocol is linked with the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) and the WHO's Clinical Characterisation Protocol, which includes patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 during hospitalisation. This protocol will follow-up a subset of patients with confirmed COVID-19 using standardised surveys to measure longer term physical and psychosocial sequelae. The data will be linked with the acute phase data. Statistical analyses will be undertaken to characterise groups most likely to be affected by sequelae of COVID-19. The open-access follow-up survey can be used as a data collection tool by other follow-up studies, to facilitate data harmonisation and to identify subsets of patients for further in-depth follow-up. The outcomes of this study will inform strategies to prevent long-term consequences; inform clinical management, interventional studies, rehabilitation and public health management to reduce overall morbidity; and improve long-term outcomes of COVID-19. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol and survey are open access to enable low-resourced sites to join the study to facilitate global standardised, longitudinal data collection. Ethical approval has been given by sites in Colombia, Ghana, Italy, Norway, Russia, the UK and South Africa. New sites are welcome to join this collaborative study at any time. Sites interested in adopting the protocol as it is or in an adapted version are responsible for ensuring that local sponsorship and ethical approvals in place as appropriate. The tools are available on the ISARIC website (www.isaric.org). PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: osf.io/c5rw3/ PROTOCOL VERSION: 3 August 2020 EUROQOL ID: 37035.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/psychology , Colombia , Ghana , Humans , Italy , Longitudinal Studies , Norway , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Russia , South Africa , United Kingdom
20.
Journal of Intensive Medicine ; 2021.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-1121488

ABSTRACT

Silent hypoxemia is common in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. In this article, the possible pathophysiological mechanisms underlying respiratory symptoms have been reviewed, and the presence of hypoxemia without hypoxia is also discussed. The experience we have gained since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic has changed our point of view about which patients with respiratory involvement should be admitted to the intensive care unit/high-dependency unit for mechanical ventilation and monitoring. In patients with clinically well-tolerated mild to moderate hypoxemia (silent hypoxemia), regardless of the extent of pulmonary opacities found in radiological studies, the administration of supplemental oxygen therapy may increase the risk of endothelial damage. The risk of sudden respiratory arrest during emergency intubation, which could expose healthcare workers to infection, should be considered along with the risks of premature intubation. Criteria for intubation need to be revisited based on updated evidence showing that many patients with severe hypoxemia do not show increased work of breathing. This has implications in patient management and may explain in part reports of broad differences in outcomes among intubated patients.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL