Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
Viruses ; 14(7)2022 07 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1939016

ABSTRACT

The SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern, α, spread worldwide at the beginning of 2021. It was suggested that this variant was associated with a higher risk of mortality than other variants. We aimed to characterize the genetic diversity of SARS-CoV-2 variants isolated from patients with severe COVID-19 and unravel the relationships between specific viral mutations/mutational patterns and clinical outcomes. This is a prospective multicenter observational cohort study. Patients aged ≥18 years admitted to 11 intensive care units (ICUs) in hospitals in the Greater Paris area for SARS-CoV-2 infection and acute respiratory failure between 1 October 2020 and 30 May 2021 were included. The primary clinical endpoint was day-28 mortality. Full-length SARS-CoV-2 genomes were sequenced by means of next-generation sequencing (Illumina COVIDSeq). In total, 413 patients were included, 183 (44.3%) were infected with pre-existing variants, 197 (47.7%) were infected with variant α, and 33 (8.0%) were infected with other variants. The patients infected with pre-existing variants were significantly older (64.9 ± 11.9 vs. 60.5 ± 11.8 years; p = 0.0005) and had more frequent COPD (11.5% vs. 4.1%; p = 0.009) and higher SOFA scores (4 [3-8] vs. 3 [2-4]; 0.0002). The day-28 mortality was no different between the patients infected with pre-existing, α, or other variants (31.1% vs. 26.2% vs. 30.3%; p = 0.550). There was no association between day-28 mortality and specific variants or the presence of specific mutations. At ICU admission, the patients infected with pre-existing variants had a different clinical presentation from those infected with variant α, but mortality did not differ between these groups. There was no association between specific variants or SARS-CoV-2 genome mutational pattern and day-28 mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Adult , Critical Illness , Genomics , Humans , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics
2.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 208, 2022 07 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1928198

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many more patients were turned prone than before, resulting in a considerable increase in workload. Whether extending duration of prone position may be beneficial has received little attention. We report here benefits and detriments of a strategy of extended prone positioning duration for COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS: A eetrospective, monocentric, study was performed on intensive care unit patients with COVID-19-related ARDS who required tracheal intubation and who have been treated with at least one session of prone position of duration greater or equal to 24 h. When prone positioning sessions were initiated, patients were kept prone for a period that covered two nights. Data regarding the incidence of pressure injury and ventilation parameters were collected retrospectively on medical and nurse files of charts. The primary outcome was the occurrence of pressure injury of stage ≥ II during the ICU stay. RESULTS: For the 81 patients included, the median duration of prone positioning sessions was 39 h [interquartile range (IQR) 34-42]. The cumulated incidence of stage ≥ II pressure injuries was 26% [95% CI 17-37] and 2.5% [95% CI 0.3-8.8] for stages III/IV pressure injuries. Patients were submitted to a median of 2 sessions [IQR 1-4] and for 213 (94%) prone positioning sessions, patients were turned over to supine position during daytime, i.e., between 9 AM and 6 PM. This increased duration was associated with additional increase in oxygenation after 16 h with the PaO2/FiO2 ratio increasing from 150 mmHg [IQR 121-196] at H+ 16 to 162 mmHg [IQR 124-221] before being turned back to supine (p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: In patients with extended duration of prone position up to 39 h, cumulative incidence for stage ≥ II pressure injuries was 26%, with 25%, 2.5%, and 0% for stage II, III, and IV, respectively. Oxygenation continued to increase significantly beyond the standard 16-h duration. Our results may have significant impact on intensive care unit staffing and patients' respiratory conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Institutional review board 00006477 of HUPNVS, Université Paris Cité, APHP, with the reference: CER-2021-102, obtained on October 11th 2021. Registered at Clinicaltrials (NCT05124197).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Humans , Pandemics , Prone Position , Pulmonary Gas Exchange , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Retrospective Studies , Supine Position
3.
Intensive Care Med ; 48(3): 270-280, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1813641

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Previous studies support the potential efficacy of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vvECMO) for improving survival in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) cases. Prone positioning (PP) has been shown to improve the outcomes of moderate-to-severe ARDS patients. Few studies and no randomized controlled trials have evaluated the effect of PP performed in ECMO patients. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effect of prone positioning for ARDS patients receiving vvECMO on survival. All authors were contacted to obtain complementary information not mentioned in the original articles. The main objective was to compare 28-day survival in vvECMO patients with PP to vvECMO patients without PP (controls). RESULTS: Thirteen studies with a combined population of 1836 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. PP was associated with a significant improvement in 28-day survival (503 survivors among 681 patients in the PP group [74%; 95% CI 71-77] vs. 450 survivors among 770 patients in the control group [58%, 95% CI 55-62]; RR 1.31 [95% CI 1.21-1.41]; I2 22% [95% CI 0-62%]; P < 0.0001). Survival was also improved in terms of other endpoints (60-day survival, 90-day survival, ICU survival, and hospital survival). In contrast, the duration of mechanical ventilation was increased in vvECMO patients with PP (mean difference 11.4 days [95% CI 9.2-13.5]; 0.64 [95% CI 0.50-0.78]; I2 8%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: According to this meta-analysis, survival was improved when prone positioning was used in ARDS patients receiving vvECMO. The impact of this combination on survival should be investigated in prospective randomized controlled trials.


Subject(s)
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/adverse effects , Humans , Prone Position , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Retrospective Studies
4.
Vieillard-Baron, Antoine, Flicoteaux, Rémi, Salmona, Maud, Annane, Djillali, Ayed, Soufia, Azoulay, Elie, Bellaiche, Raphael, Beloucif, Sadek, Berti, Enora, Bertier, Astrid, Besset, Sébastien, Bret, Marlène, Cariou, Alain, Carpentier, Christophe, Chaouch, Oussama, Chariot, Appoline, Charron, Cyril, Charpentier, Julien, Cheurfa, Cherifa, Cholley, Bernard, Clerc, Sébastien, Combes, Alain, Chousterman, Benjamin, Cohen, Yves, Constantin, Jean-Michel, Damoisel, Charles, Darmon, Michael, Degos, Vincent, D’Ableiges, Bertrand De Maupeou, Demeret, Sophie, Montmollin, Etienne De, Demoule, Alexandre, Depret, Francois, Diehl, Jean-Luc, Djibré, Michel, Do, Chung-Hi, Dudoignon, Emmanuel, Duranteau, Jacques, Fartoukh, Muriel, Fieux, Fabienne, Gayat, Etienne, Gennequin, Mael, Guidet, Bertrand, Gutton, Christophe, Hamada, Sophie, Heming, Nicholas, Jouffroy, Romain, Keita-Meyer, Hawa, Langeron, Olivier, Lortat-Jacob, Brice, Marey, Jonathan, Mebazaa, Alexandre, Megarbane, Bruno, Mekontso-Dessap, Armand, Mira, Jean-Paul, Molle, Julie, Mongardon, Nicolas, Montravers, Philippe, Morelot-Panzini, Capucine, Nemlaghi, Safaa, Nguyen, Bao-long, Parrot, Antoine, Pasqualotto, Romain, Peron, Nicolas, Picard, Lucile, de Chambrun, Marc Pineton, Planquette, Benjamin, Plaud, Benoit, Pons, Stéphanie, Quesnel, Christophe, Raphalen, Jean-Herlé, Razazi, Keyvan, Ricard, Jean-Damien, Roche, Anne, Rohaut, Benjamin, Roux, Damien, Savale, Laurent, Sobotka, Jennifer, Teboul, Jean-Louis, Timsit, Jean-François, Voiriot, Guillaume, Weiss, Emmanuel, Wildenberg, Lucille, Zogheib, Elie, Riou, Bruno, Batteux, Frédéric.
EuropePMC;
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-327150

ABSTRACT

Importance Information about the severity of Omicron is scarce. Objective To report the respective risk of ICU admission in patients hospitalized with Delta and Omicron variants and to compare the characteristics and disease severity of critically ill patients infected with both variants according to vaccination status. Design Analysis from the APHP database, called Reality, prospectively recording the following information in consecutive patients admitted in the ICU for COVID-19: age, sex, immunosuppression, vaccination, pneumonia, need for invasive mechanical ventilation, time between symptom onset and ICU admission, and in-ICU mortality. Retrospective analysis on an administrative database, “Système d’Information pour le Suivi des Victimes” (SI-VIC), which lists hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Setting 39 hospitals in the Paris area from APHP group. Participants Patients hospitalized from December 1, 2021 to January 18, 2022 for COVID-19. Main outcomes and measures Risk of ICU admission was evaluated in 3761 patients and Omicron cases were compared to Delta cases in the ICU in 888 consecutive patients. Results On January 18, 45% of patients in the ICU and 63.8% of patients in conventional hospital units were infected with the Omicron variant (p < 0.001). The risk of ICU admission with Omicron was reduced by 64% than with Delta (9.3% versus 25.8% of cases, respectively, p < 0.001). In critically ill patients, 400 had the Delta variant, 229 the Omicron variant, 98 had an uninformative variant screening test and 161 did not have information on variant screening test. 747 patients (84.1%) were admitted for pneumonia. Compared to patients infected with Delta, Omicron patients were more vaccinated (p<0.001), even with 3 doses, more immunocompromised (p<0.001), less admitted for pneumonia (p<0.001), especially when vaccinated (62.1% in vaccinated versus 80.7% in unvaccinated, p<0.001), and less invasively ventilated (p=0.02). Similar results were found in the subgroup of pneumonia but Omicron cases were older. Unadjusted in-ICU mortality did not differ between Omicron and Delta cases, neither in the overall population (20.0% versus 27.9%, p = 0.08), nor in patients with pneumonia (31.6% versus 29.7%, respectively) where adjusted in-ICU mortality did not differ according to the variant (HR 1.43 95%CI [0.89;2.29], p=0.14). Conclusion and relevance Compared to the Delta variant, the Omicron variant is less likely to result in ICU admission and less likely to be associated with pneumonia. However, when patients with the Omicron variant are admitted for pneumonia, the severity seems similar to that of patients with the Delta variant, with more immunocompromised and vaccinated patients and no difference in adjusted in-ICU mortality. Further studies are needed to confirm our results.

6.
BMJ Open ; 11(9): e048591, 2021 09 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1495462

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Pre-emptive inhaled antibiotics may be effective to reduce the occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia among critically ill patients. Meta-analysis of small sample size trials showed a favourable signal. Inhaled antibiotics are associated with a reduced emergence of antibiotic resistant bacteria. The aim of this trial is to evaluate the benefit of a 3-day course of inhaled antibiotics among patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation for more than 3 days on the occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Academic, investigator-initiated, parallel two group arms, double-blind, multicentre superiority randomised controlled trial. Patients invasively ventilated more than 3 days will be randomised to receive 20 mg/kg inhaled amikacin daily for 3 days or inhaled placebo (0.9% Sodium Chloride). Occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia will be recorded based on a standardised diagnostic framework from randomisation to day 28 and adjudicated by a centralised blinded committee. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol and amendments have been approved by the regional ethics review board and French competent authorities (Comité de protection des personnes Ouest I, No.2016-R29). All patients will be included after informed consent according to French law. Results will be disseminated in international scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: EudraCT 2016-001054-17 and NCT03149640.


Subject(s)
Amikacin , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated , Administration, Inhalation , Amikacin/administration & dosage , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated/prevention & control , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
7.
Ann Intensive Care ; 11(1): 90, 2021 Jun 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1255966

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We investigated the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on mental health of professionals working in the intensive care unit (ICU) according to the intensity of the epidemic in France. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was conducted in 77 French hospitals from April 22 to May 13 2020. All ICU frontline healthcare workers were eligible. The primary endpoint was the mental health, assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire. Sources of stress during the crisis were assessed using the Perceived Stressors in Intensive Care Units (PS-ICU) scale. Epidemic intensity was defined as high or low for each region based on publicly available data from Santé Publique France. Effects were assessed using linear mixed models, moderation and mediation analyses. RESULTS: In total, 2643 health professionals participated; 64.36% in high-intensity zones. Professionals in areas with greater epidemic intensity were at higher risk of mental health issues (p < 0.001), and higher levels of overall perceived stress (p < 0.001), compared to low-intensity zones. Factors associated with higher overall perceived stress were female sex (B = 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.08-0.17), having a relative at risk of COVID-19 (B = 0.14; 95%-CI = 0.09-0.18) and working in high-intensity zones (B = 0.11; 95%-CI = 0.02-0.20). Perceived stress mediated the impact of the crisis context on mental health (B = 0.23, 95%-CI = 0.05, 0.41) and the impact of stress on mental health was moderated by positive thinking, b = - 0.32, 95% CI = - 0.54, - 0.11. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 negatively impacted the mental health of ICU professionals. Professionals working in zones where the epidemic was of high intensity were significantly more affected, with higher levels of perceived stress. This study is supported by a grant from the French Ministry of Health (PHRC-COVID 2020).

9.
Brain Sci ; 10(11)2020 Nov 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-918948

ABSTRACT

Predicting the functional recovery of patients with severe neurological condition due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a challenging task. Only limited outcome data are available, the pathophysiology is poorly understood, and the time-course of recovery is still largely unknown. Here, we report the case of a patient with COVID-19 associated encephalitis presenting as a prolonged state of unresponsiveness for two months, who finally fully recovered consciousness, functional communication, and autonomy after immunotherapy. In a multimodal approach, a high-density resting state EEG revealed a rich brain activity in spite of a severe clinical presentation. Using our previously validated algorithms, we could predict a possible improvement of consciousness in this patient. This case report illustrates the value of a multimodal approach capitalizing on advanced brain-imaging and bedside electrophysiology techniques to improve prognosis accuracy in this complex and new aetiology.

10.
Clin Anat ; 33(6): 927-928, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-730322

ABSTRACT

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection has recently spread globally and is now a pandemic. As a result, university hospitals have had to take unprecedented measures of containment, including asking nonessential staff to stay at home. Medical students practicing in the surgical departments find themselves idle, as nonurgent surgical activity has been canceled, until further notice. Likewise, universities are closed and medical training for students is likely to suffer if teachers do not implement urgent measures to provide continuing education. Thus, we sought to set up a daily medical education procedure for surgical students confined to their homes. We report a simple and free teaching method intended to compensate for the disappearance of daily lessons performed in the surgery department using the Google Hangouts application. This video conference method can be applied to clinical as well as anatomy lessons.


Subject(s)
Anatomy/education , Coronavirus Infections , Education, Distance , Education, Medical/methods , General Surgery/education , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Videoconferencing/organization & administration , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Education, Distance/methods , Education, Distance/organization & administration , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Surgery Department, Hospital , Teaching/trends
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL