Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 48, 2022 02 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1703362

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) causes high mortality. Umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stromal cells (UC-MSCs) have potentially relevant immune-modulatory properties, whose place in ARDS treatment is not established. This phase 2b trial was undertaken to assess the efficacy of UC-MSCs in patients with SARS-CoV-2-induced ARDS. METHODS: This multicentre, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (STROMA-CoV-2) recruited adults (≥ 18 years) with SARS-CoV-2-induced early (< 96 h) mild-to-severe ARDS in 10 French centres. Patients were randomly assigned to receive three intravenous infusions of 106 UC-MSCs/kg or placebo (0.9% NaCl) over 5 days after recruitment. For the modified intention-to-treat population, the primary endpoint was the partial pressure of oxygen to fractional inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2)-ratio change between baseline (day (D) 0) and D7. RESULTS: Among the 107 patients screened for eligibility from April 6, 2020, to October 29, 2020, 45 were enrolled, randomized and analyzed. PaO2/FiO2 changes between D0 and D7 did not differ significantly between the UC-MSCs and placebo groups (medians [IQR] 54.3 [- 15.5 to 93.3] vs 25.3 [- 33.3 to 104.6], respectively; ANCOVA estimated treatment effect 7.4, 95% CI - 44.7 to 59.7; P = 0.77). Six (28.6%) of the 21 UC-MSCs recipients and six of 24 (25%) placebo-group patients experienced serious adverse events, none of which were related to UC-MSCs treatment. CONCLUSIONS: D0-to-D7 PaO2/FiO2 changes for intravenous UC-MSCs-versus placebo-treated adults with SARS-CoV-2-induced ARDS did not differ significantly. Repeated UC-MSCs infusions were not associated with any serious adverse events during treatment or thereafter (until D28). Larger trials enrolling patients earlier during the course of their ARDS are needed to further assess UC-MSCs efficacy in this context. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04333368. Registered 01 April 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/history/NCT04333368 .


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mesenchymal Stem Cells , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
2.
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.

3.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0261024, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1623650

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Tracheostomy has been proposed as an option to help organize the healthcare system to face the unprecedented number of patients hospitalized for a COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in intensive care units (ICU). It is, however, considered a particularly high-risk procedure for contamination. This paper aims to provide our experience in performing tracheostomies on COVID-19 critically ill patients during the pandemic and its long-term local complications. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients tracheostomized for a COVID-19-related ARDS in two university hospitals in the Paris region between January 27th (date of first COVID-19 admission) and May 18th, 2020 (date of last tracheostomy performed). We focused on tracheostomy technique (percutaneous versus surgical), timing (early versus late) and late complications. RESULTS: Forty-eight tracheostomies were performed with an equal division between surgical and percutaneous techniques. There was no difference in patients' characteristics between surgical and percutaneous groups. Tracheostomy was performed after a median of 17 [12-22] days of mechanical ventilation (MV), with 10 patients in the "early" group (≤ day 10) and 38 patients in the "late" group (> day 10). Survivors required MV for a median of 32 [22-41] days and were ultimately decannulated with a median of 21 [15-34] days spent on cannula. Patients in the early group had shorter ICU and hospital stays (respectively 15 [12-19] versus 35 [25-47] days; p = 0.002, and 21 [16-28] versus 54 [35-72] days; p = 0.002) and spent less time on MV (respectively 17 [14-20] and 35 [27-43] days; p<0.001). Interestingly, patients in the percutaneous group had shorter hospital and rehabilitation center stays (respectively 44 [34-81] versus 92 [61-118] days; p = 0.012, and 24 [11-38] versus 45 [22-71] days; p = 0.045). Of the 30 (67%) patients examined by a head and neck surgeon, 17 (57%) had complications with unilateral laryngeal palsy (n = 5) being the most prevalent. CONCLUSIONS: Tracheostomy seems to be a safe procedure that could help ICU organization by delegating work to a separate team and favoring patient turnover by allowing faster transfer to step-down units. Following guidelines alone was found sufficient to prevent the risk of aerosolization and contamination of healthcare professionals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/surgery , Tracheostomy/methods , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/methods , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Hospitals, University , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Paris , Personnel, Hospital , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
5.
PLoS One ; 16(4): e0249799, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1186607

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome caused by the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is frequently associated with gastrointestinal manifestations. Herein we evaluated the interest in measuring the intestinal fatty acid-binding protein (I-FABP), a biomarker of intestinal injury, in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Serum I-FABP was analyzed in 28 consecutive patients hospitalized for a PCR-confirmed COVID-19, in 24 hospitalized patients with non-COVID-19 pulmonary diseases, and 79 patients admitted to the emergency room for abdominal pain. RESULTS: I-FABP serum concentrations were significantly lower in patients with COVID-19, as compared to patients with non-COVID-19 pulmonary diseases [70.3 pg/mL (47-167.9) vs. 161.1 pg/mL (88.98-305.2), respectively, p = 0.008]. I-FABP concentrations in these two populations were significantly lower than in patients with abdominal pain without COVID-19 [344.8 pg/mL (268.9-579.6)]. I-FABP was neither associated with severity nor the duration of symptoms. I-FABP was correlated with polymorphonuclear cell counts. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, we observed a low I-FABP concentration in COVID-19 patients either with or without gastrointestinal symptoms, of which the pathophysiological mechanisms and clinical impact remain to be established. Further explorations on a larger cohort of patients will be needed to unravel the molecular mechanism of such observation, including the effects of malabsorption and/or abnormal lipid metabolism.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , Fatty Acid-Binding Proteins/blood , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Aged , Biomarkers/blood , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Prognosis
6.
Ann Med ; 52(7): 367-375, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-684538

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To identify predictive factors of unfavourable outcome among patients hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a monocentric retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 patients hospitalized in Paris area. An unfavourable outcome was defined as the need for artificial ventilation and/or death. Characteristics at admission were analysed to identify factors predictive of unfavourable outcome using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. Based on the results, a nomogram to predict 14-day probability of poor outcome was proposed. RESULTS: Between March 15th and April 14th, 2020, 279 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized after a median of 7 days after the first symptoms. Among them, 88 (31.5%) patients had an unfavourable outcome: 48 were admitted to the ICU for artificial ventilation, and 40 patients died without being admitted to ICU. Multivariable analyses retained age, overweight, polypnoea, fever, high C-reactive protein, elevated us troponin-I, and lymphopenia as risk factors of an unfavourable outcome. A nomogram was established with sufficient discriminatory power (C-index 0.75), and proper consistence between the prediction and the observation. CONCLUSION: We identified seven easily available prognostic factors and proposed a simple nomogram for early detection of patients at risk of aggravation, in order to optimize clinical care and initiate specific therapies. KEY MESSAGES Since novel coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, a minority of patients develops severe respiratory distress syndrome, leading to death despite intensive care. Tools to identify patients at risk in European populations are lacking. In our series, age, respiratory rate, overweight, temperature, C-reactive protein, troponin and lymphocyte counts were risk factors of an unfavourable outcome in hospitalized adult patients. We propose an easy-to-use nomogram to predict unfavourable outcome for hospitalized adult patients to optimize clinical care and initiate specific therapies.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Critical Care , Hospitalization , Nomograms , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Paris , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Proportional Hazards Models , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
9.
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med ; 39(3): 395-415, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-549176

ABSTRACT

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


Subject(s)
Analgesia/standards , Anesthesia/standards , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections , Infection Control/standards , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Adult , Airway Management , Analgesia/adverse effects , Analgesia/methods , Anesthesia/adverse effects , Anesthesia/methods , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Child , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Critical Pathways , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/transmission , Disinfection , Elective Surgical Procedures , Equipment Contamination/prevention & control , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Informed Consent , Occupational Diseases/prevention & control , Operating Rooms/standards , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Isolation , Personal Protective Equipment/supply & distribution , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Preoperative Care , Professional Staff Committees , Risk , SARS-CoV-2 , Symptom Assessment , Universal Precautions
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL