Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 21
Filter
1.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 224, 2022 07 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1957066

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is a promising alternative to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) with a particular importance amidst the shortage of intensive care unit (ICU) beds during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to evaluate the use of NIV in Europe and factors associated with outcomes of patients treated with NIV. METHODS: This is a substudy of COVIP study-an international prospective observational study enrolling patients aged ≥ 70 years with confirmed COVID-19 treated in ICU. We enrolled patients in 156 ICUs across 15 European countries between March 2020 and April 2021.The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Cohort included 3074 patients, most of whom were male (2197/3074, 71.4%) at the mean age of 75.7 years (SD 4.6). NIV frequency was 25.7% and varied from 1.1 to 62.0% between participating countries. Primary NIV failure, defined as need for endotracheal intubation or death within 30 days since ICU admission, occurred in 470/629 (74.7%) of patients. Factors associated with increased NIV failure risk were higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (OR 3.73, 95% CI 2.36-5.90) and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) on admission (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.06-2.00). Patients initially treated with NIV (n = 630) lived for 1.36 fewer days (95% CI - 2.27 to - 0.46 days) compared to primary IMV group (n = 1876). CONCLUSIONS: Frequency of NIV use varies across European countries. Higher severity of illness and more severe frailty were associated with a risk of NIV failure among critically ill older adults with COVID-19. Primary IMV was associated with better outcomes than primary NIV. Clinical Trial Registration NCT04321265 , registered 19 March 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov .


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Frailty , Noninvasive Ventilation , Respiratory Insufficiency , Aged , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Noninvasive Ventilation/adverse effects , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy
2.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 9: 808221, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1817974

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring intensive care treatment remains a clinical challenge to date. Dexamethasone was reported as a promising treatment option, leading to a reduction of mortality rates in severe COVID-19 disease. However, the effect of dexamethasone treatment on cardiac injury and pulmonary embolism remains largely elusive. METHODS: In total 178 critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring intensive care treatment and mechanical ventilation were recruited in three European medical centres and included in the present retrospective study. One hundred thirteen patients (63.5%) were treated with dexamethasone for a median duration of 10 days (IQR 9-10). Sixty five patients (36.5%) constituted the non-dexamethasone control group. RESULTS: While peak inflammatory markers were reduced by dexamethasone treatment, the therapy also led to a significant reduction in peak troponin levels (231 vs. 700% indicated as relative to cut off value, p = 0.001). Similar, dexamethasone resulted in significantly decreased peak D-Dimer levels (2.16 mg/l vs. 6.14 mg/l, p = 0.002) reflected by a significant reduction in pulmonary embolism rate (4.4 vs. 20.0%, p = 0.001). The antithrombotic effect of dexamethasone treatment was also evident in the presence of therapeutic anticoagulation (pulmonary embolism rate: 6 vs. 34.4%, p < 0.001). Of note, no significant changes in baseline characteristics were observed between the dexamethasone and non-dexamethasone group. CONCLUSION: In severe COVID-19, anti-inflammatory effects of dexamethasone treatment seem to be associated with a significant reduction in myocardial injury. Similar, a significant decrease in pulmonary embolism, independent of anticoagulation, was evident, emphasizing the beneficial effect of dexamethasone treatment in severe COVID-19.

3.
J Intern Med ; 292(3): 438-449, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1774862

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Previous studies reported regional differences in end-of-life care (EoLC) for critically ill patients in Europe. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this post-hoc analysis of the prospective multicentre COVIP study was to investigate variations in EoLC practices among older patients in intensive care units during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. METHODS: A total of 3105 critically ill patients aged 70 years and older were enrolled in this study (Central Europe: n = 1573; Northern Europe: n = 821; Southern Europe: n = 711). Generalised estimation equations were used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) to population averages. Data were adjusted for patient-specific variables (demographic, disease-specific) and health economic data (gross domestic product, health expenditure per capita). The primary outcome was any treatment limitation, and 90-day mortality was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: The frequency of the primary endpoint (treatment limitation) was highest in Northern Europe (48%), intermediate in Central Europe (39%) and lowest in Southern Europe (24%). The likelihood for treatment limitations was lower in Southern than in Central Europe (aOR 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-0.73; p = 0.004), even after multivariable adjustment, whereas no statistically significant differences were observed between Northern and Central Europe (aOR 0.57; 95%CI 0.27-1.22; p = 0.15). After multivariable adjustment, no statistically relevant mortality differences were found between Northern and Central Europe (aOR 1.29; 95%CI 0.80-2.09; p = 0.30) or between Southern and Central Europe (aOR 1.07; 95%CI 0.66-1.73; p = 0.78). CONCLUSION: This study shows a north-to-south gradient in rates of treatment limitation in Europe, highlighting the heterogeneity of EoLC practices across countries. However, mortality rates were not affected by these results.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Terminal Care , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Prospective Studies
4.
JMIR Med Inform ; 10(3): e32949, 2022 Mar 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1770908

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 is challenging health care systems globally. The disease disproportionately affects the elderly population, both in terms of disease severity and mortality risk. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate machine learning-based prognostication models for critically ill elderly COVID-19 patients, which dynamically incorporated multifaceted clinical information on evolution of the disease. METHODS: This multicenter cohort study (COVIP study) obtained patient data from 151 intensive care units (ICUs) from 26 countries. Different models based on the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), and extreme gradient boosting (XGB) were derived as baseline models that included admission variables only. We subsequently included clinical events and time-to-event as additional variables to derive the final models using the same algorithms and compared their performance with that of the baseline group. Furthermore, we derived baseline and final models on a European patient cohort, which were externally validated on a non-European cohort that included Asian, African, and US patients. RESULTS: In total, 1432 elderly (≥70 years old) COVID-19-positive patients admitted to an ICU were included for analysis. Of these, 809 (56.49%) patients survived up to 30 days after admission. The average length of stay was 21.6 (SD 18.2) days. Final models that incorporated clinical events and time-to-event information provided superior performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81; 95% CI 0.804-0.811), with respect to both the baseline models that used admission variables only and conventional ICU prediction models (SOFA score, P<.001). The average precision increased from 0.65 (95% CI 0.650-0.655) to 0.77 (95% CI 0.759-0.770). CONCLUSIONS: Integrating important clinical events and time-to-event information led to a superior accuracy of 30-day mortality prediction compared with models based on the admission information and conventional ICU prediction models. This study shows that machine-learning models provide additional information and may support complex decision-making in critically ill elderly COVID-19 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04321265; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04321265.

5.
Ann Intensive Care ; 12(1): 26, 2022 Mar 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1753126

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Critically ill old intensive care unit (ICU) patients suffering from Sars-CoV-2 disease (COVID-19) are at increased risk for adverse outcomes. This post hoc analysis investigates the association of the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) with the outcome in this vulnerable patient group. METHODS: The COVIP study is a prospective international observational study that recruited ICU patients ≥ 70 years admitted with COVID-19 (NCT04321265). Several parameters including ADL (ADL; 0 = disability, 6 = no disability), Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), SOFA score, intensive care treatment, ICU- and 3-month survival were recorded. A mixed-effects Weibull proportional hazard regression analyses for 3-month mortality adjusted for multiple confounders. RESULTS: This pre-specified analysis included 2359 patients with a documented ADL and CFS. Most patients evidenced independence in their daily living before hospital admission (80% with ADL = 6). Patients with no frailty and no disability showed the lowest, patients with frailty (CFS ≥ 5) and disability (ADL < 6) the highest 3-month mortality (52 vs. 78%, p < 0.001). ADL was independently associated with 3-month mortality (ADL as a continuous variable: aHR 0.88 (95% CI 0.82-0.94, p < 0.001). Being "disable" resulted in a significant increased risk for 3-month mortality (aHR 1.53 (95% CI 1.19-1.97, p 0.001) even after adjustment for multiple confounders. CONCLUSION: Baseline Activities of Daily Living (ADL) on admission provides additional information for outcome prediction, although most critically ill old intensive care patients suffering from COVID-19 had no restriction in their ADL prior to ICU admission. Combining frailty and disability identifies a subgroup with particularly high mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04321265.

6.
ESC Heart Fail ; 9(3): 1756-1765, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1739148

ABSTRACT

AIMS: Chronic heart failure (CHF) is a major risk factor for mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This prospective international multicentre study investigates the role of pre-existing CHF on clinical outcomes of critically ill old (≥70 years) intensive care patients with COVID-19. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with pre-existing CHF were subclassified as having ischaemic or non-ischaemic cardiac disease; patients with a documented ejection fraction (EF) were subclassified according to heart failure EF: reduced (HFrEF, n = 132), mild (HFmrEF, n = 91), or preserved (HFpEF, n = 103). Associations of heart failure characteristics with the 30 day mortality were analysed in univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Pre-existing CHF was reported in 566 of 3917 patients (14%). Patients with CHF were older, frailer, and had significantly higher SOFA scores on admission. CHF patients showed significantly higher crude 30 day mortality [60% vs. 48%, P < 0.001; odds ratio 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5-2.3] and 3 month mortality (69% vs. 56%, P < 0.001). After multivariate adjustment for confounders (SOFA, age, sex, and frailty), no independent association of CHF with mortality remained [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.2, 95% CI 0.5-1.5; P = 0.137]. More patients suffered from pre-existing ischaemic than from non-ischaemic disease [233 vs. 328 patients (n = 5 unknown aetiology)]. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between ischaemic and non-ischaemic disease or between HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF. Crude 30 day mortality was significantly higher in HFrEF compared with HFpEF (64% vs. 48%, P = 0.042). EF as a continuous variable was not independently associated with 30 day mortality (aOR 0.98, 95% CI 0.9-1.0; P = 0.128). CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill older COVID-19 patients, pre-existing CHF was not independently associated with 30 day mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04321265.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heart Failure , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Chronic Disease , Critical Care , Critical Illness , Heart Failure/complications , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Humans , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Stroke Volume
7.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-313582

ABSTRACT

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led highly developed healthcare systems to the brink of collapse due to the large numbers of patients being admitted into hospitals. One of the potential prognostic indicators in patients with COVID-19 is frailty. The degree of frailty could be used to assist both the triage into intensive care, and decisions regarding treatment limitations. Our study sought to determine the interaction of frailty and age in elderly COVID-19 ICU patients. Methods: A prospective multi-centre study of COVID-19 patients ≥ 70 years admitted to intensive care in 138 ICUs from 28 countries was conducted. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Frailty was assessed using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Additionally, comorbidities, management strategies and treatment limitations were recorded. Results: The study included 1346 patients (28% female) with a median age of 75 years (IQR 72-78, range 70-96), 16.3% were older than 80 years and 21% of the patients were frail. The overall survival at 30 days was 59% (95%CI 56-62), with 66% (63-69) in fit, 53% (47-61) in vulnerable and 41% (35-47) in frail patients (p<0.001). In frail patients, there was no difference in 30 day survival between different age categories. Frailty was linked to an increased use of treatment limitations and less use of mechanical ventilation. In a model controlling for age, disease severity, sex, treatment limitations and comorbidities, frailty was independently associated with lower survival. Conclusion: Frailty provides relevant prognostic information in elderly COVID-19 patients in addition to age and comorbidities.

8.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-313581

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to assess the outcome of elderly ICU patients treated during the spring and autumn COVID-19 surges in Europe.Methods: A prospective European observation study (The COVIP study) in ICU patients aged 70 years and older admitted with COVID-19 disease from March to December 2020. An electronic Case Record Form was used to register a number of parameters including: SOFA score, Clinical Frailty Scale, comorbidities, usual ICU procedures including pharmacotherapy, limitation of care, ICU length of stay and survival at 30 days. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04321265).Results: In total 2711 patients were included, 1325 from the first and 1291 from the second surge and 94 in between. Median age was 74 and 75 years in surge 1 and surge 2 respectively. SOFA score was higher in the first surge (median 6 versus 5, p<0.0001). The PaO2/FiO2 ratio at admission was higher during surge 1 and more patients received mechanical ventilation (78% versus 68%, p<0.0001). More patients were given corticosteroids in surge 2 (93 vs 38%, p<0.0001). 30 days survival was lower in the second surge (57.4% vs 49.3%) with adjusted HR of 1.43 (1.18-1.74).Conclusion: An unexpected, but significant, increase in 30-day mortality was observed during the second surge in our cohort of elderly ICU patients. The reason for this is unknown, however, practice changed and this might not be supported by sufficient evidence in this elderly population with COVID-19.Trial Registration: NCT04321265Funding Statement: The support of the study in France by a grant from Fondation Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris pour la recherche is greatly appreciated. In Norway, the study was supported by a grant from the Health Region West. In addition, the study was supported by a grant from the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC). EOSCsecretariat.eu has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Programme call H2020-INFRAEOSC-05-2018-2019, grant agreement number 831644.Declaration of Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. JCS reports grants (full departmental disclosure) from Orion Pharma, Abbott Nutrition International, B. Braun Medical AG, CSEM AG, Edwards Lifesciences Services GmbH, Kenta Biotech Ltd, Maquet Critical Care AB, Omnicare Clinical Research AG, Nestle, Pierre Fabre Pharma AG, Pfizer , Bard Medica S.A., Abbott AG, Anandic Medical Systems, Pan Gas AG Healthcare, Bracco, Hamilton Medical AG, Fresenius Kabi, Getinge Group Maquet AG, Dräger AG, Teleflex Medical GmbH, Glaxo Smith Kline, Merck Sharp and Dohme AG, Eli Lilly and Company, Baxter, Astellas, Astra Zeneca, CSL Behring, Novartis, Covidien, Philips Medical, Phagenesis Ltd, Prolong Pharmaceuticals and Nycomed outside the submitted work. The money went into departmental funds. No personal financial gain applied.Ethics Approval Statement: The study was organised by the Very old Intensive care Patients (VIP) project 10,11 within the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) who also endorsed the study (www.vipstudy.org). Due to variations in requirement for ethical consent, some countries could recruit patients without upfront informed consent while others had to obtain it. The study deliberately allowed for coenrolment of study patients to other COVID-19 studies. The study adhered to the European Union General Data Privacy Regulation (GDPR) directive.

9.
Age Ageing ; 51(2)2022 02 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1684499

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is an important patient-centred outcome in patients surviving ICU admission for COVID-19. It is currently not clear which domains of the HRQoL are most affected. OBJECTIVE: to quantify HRQoL in order to identify areas of interventions. DESIGN: prospective observation study. SETTING: admissions to European ICUs between March 2020 and February 2021. SUBJECTS: patients aged 70 years or older admitted with COVID-19 disease. METHODS: collected determinants include SOFA-score, Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), number and timing of ICU procedures and limitation of care, Katz Activities of Daily Living (ADL) dependence score. HRQoL was assessed at 3 months after ICU admission with the Euro-QoL-5D-5L questionnaire. An outcome of ≥4 on any of Euro-QoL-5D-5L domains was considered unfavourable. RESULTS: in total 3,140 patients from 14 European countries were included in this study. Three months after inclusion, 1,224 patients (39.0%) were alive and the EQ-5D-5L from was obtained. The CFS was associated with an increased odds ratio for an unfavourable HRQoL outcome after 3 months; OR 1.15 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71-1.87) for CFS 2 to OR 4.33 (95% CI: 1.57-11.9) for CFS ≧ 7. The Katz ADL was not statistically significantly associated with HRQoL after 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: in critically ill old intensive care patients suffering from COVID-19, the CFS is associated with the subjectively perceived quality of life. The CFS on admission can be used to inform patients and relatives on the risk of an unfavourable qualitative outcome if such patients survive.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Quality of Life , Activities of Daily Living , Aged , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
10.
Br J Anaesth ; 128(3): 482-490, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1536454

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Tracheostomy is performed in patients expected to require prolonged mechanical ventilation, but to date optimal timing of tracheostomy has not been established. The evidence concerning tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients is particularly scarce. We aimed to describe the relationship between early tracheostomy (≤10 days since intubation) and outcomes for patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study performed in 152 centres across 16 European countries from February to December 2020. We included patients aged ≥70 yr with confirmed COVID-19 infection admitted to an intensive care unit, requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. Multivariable analyses were performed to evaluate the association between early tracheostomy and clinical outcomes including 3-month mortality, intensive care length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: The final analysis included 1740 patients with a mean age of 74 yr. Tracheostomy was performed in 461 (26.5%) patients. The tracheostomy rate varied across countries, from 8.3% to 52.9%. Early tracheostomy was performed in 135 (29.3%) patients. There was no difference in 3-month mortality between early and late tracheostomy in either our primary analysis (hazard ratio [HR]=0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-1.33) or a secondary landmark analysis (HR=0.78; 95% CI, 0.57-1.06). CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide variation across Europe in the timing of tracheostomy for critically ill patients with COVID-19. However, we found no evidence that early tracheostomy is associated with any effect on survival amongst older critically ill patients with COVID-19. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04321265.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/methods , Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Critical Illness/mortality , Tracheostomy/mortality , Tracheostomy/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Correlation of Data , Europe , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Length of Stay , Male , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , Survival Rate/trends , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
11.
Clin Hemorheol Microcirc ; 79(1): 109-120, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1477773

ABSTRACT

PURPOSECritically ill elderly patients who suffer from Sars-CoV-2 disease are at high risk for organ failure. The modified MELD-XI score has not been evaluated for outcome prediction in these most vulnerable patients.METHODSThe Corona Virus disease (COVID19) in Very Elderly Intensive Care Patients study (COVIP, NCT04321265) prospectively recruited patients on intensive care units (ICU), who were = 70 years. Data were collected from March 2020 to February 2021. The MELD-XI score was calculated using the highest serum bilirubin and creatinine on ICU admission. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess associations between the MELD-XI score and mortality. The primary outcome was 30-day-mortality, the secondary outcomes were ICU- and 3-month-mortality.RESULTSIn total, data from 2,993 patients were analyzed. Most patients had a MELD-XI <12 on admission (76%). The patients with MELD-XI = 12 had a significantly higher 30-day-, ICU- and 3-month-mortality (44%vs 64%, and 42%vs. 59%, and 57%vs. 76%, p < 0.001). After adjustment for multiple confounders, MELD-XI = 12 remained significantly associated with 30-day- (aOR 1.572, CI 1.268-1.949, p < 0.001), ICU-, and 3-month-mortality.CONCLUSIONIn critically ill elderly intensive care patients with COVID-19, the MELD-XI score constitutes a valuable tool for an early outcome prediction.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Critical Illness , Aged , Humans , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index
12.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 344, 2021 09 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1438302

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this study was to assess the outcome of elderly intensive care unit (ICU) patients treated during the spring and autumn COVID-19 surges in Europe. METHODS: This was a prospective European observational study (the COVIP study) in ICU patients aged 70 years and older admitted with COVID-19 disease from March to December 2020 to 159 ICUs in 14 European countries. An electronic database was used to register a number of parameters including: SOFA score, Clinical Frailty Scale, co-morbidities, usual ICU procedures and survival at 90 days. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04321265). RESULTS: In total, 2625 patients were included, 1327 from the first and 1298 from the second surge. Median age was 74 and 75 years in surge 1 and 2, respectively. SOFA score was higher in the first surge (median 6 versus 5, p < 0.0001). The PaO2/FiO2 ratio at admission was higher during surge 1, and more patients received invasive mechanical ventilation (78% versus 68%, p < 0.0001). During the first 15 days of treatment, survival was similar during the first and the second surge. Survival was lower in the second surge after day 15 and differed after 30 days (57% vs 50%) as well as after 90 days (51% vs 40%). CONCLUSION: An unexpected, but significant, decrease in 30-day and 90-day survival was observed during the second surge in our cohort of elderly ICU patients. The reason for this is unclear. Our main concern is whether the widespread changes in practice and treatment of COVID-19 between the two surges have contributed to this increased mortality in elderly patients. Further studies are urgently warranted to provide more evidence for current practice in elderly patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04321265 , registered March 19th, 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Critical Illness/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Comorbidity , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Frail Elderly , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Organ Dysfunction Scores , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Survival Analysis
13.
Respir Care ; 66(5): 814-821, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1395146

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The growing proportion of elderly intensive care patients constitutes a public health challenge. The benefit of critical care in these patients remains unclear. We compared outcomes in elderly versus very elderly subjects receiving mechanical ventilation. METHODS: In total, 5,557 mechanically ventilated subjects were included in our post hoc retrospective analysis, a subgroup of the VENTILA study. We divided the cohort into 2 subgroups on the basis of age: very elderly subjects (age ≥ 80 y; n = 1,430), and elderly subjects (age 65-79 y; n = 4,127). A propensity score on being very elderly was calculated. Evaluation of associations with 28-d mortality was done with logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Very elderly subjects were clinically sicker as expressed by higher SAPS II scores (53 ± 18 vs 50 ± 18, P < .001), and their rates of plateau pressure < 30 cm H2O were higher, whereas other parameters did not differ. The 28-d mortality was higher in very elderly subjects (42% vs 34%, P < .001) and remained unchanged after propensity score adjustment (adjusted odds ratio 1.31 [95% CI 1.16-1.49], P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Age was an independent and unchangeable risk factor for death in mechanically ventilated subjects. However, survival rates of very elderly subjects were > 50%. Denial of critical care based solely on age is not justified. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT02731898.).


Subject(s)
Critical Illness , Respiration, Artificial , Aged , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Simplified Acute Physiology Score
14.
Ann Intensive Care ; 11(1): 128, 2021 Aug 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1367683

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Lactate is an established prognosticator in critical care. However, there still is insufficient evidence about its role in predicting outcome in COVID-19. This is of particular concern in older patients who have been mostly affected during the initial surge in 2020. METHODS: This prospective international observation study (The COVIP study) recruited patients aged 70 years or older (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04321265) admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) with COVID-19 disease from March 2020 to February 2021. In addition to serial lactate values (arterial blood gas analysis), we recorded several parameters, including SOFA score, ICU procedures, limitation of care, ICU- and 3-month mortality. A lactate concentration ≥ 2.0 mmol/L on the day of ICU admission (baseline) was defined as abnormal. The primary outcome was ICU-mortality. The secondary outcomes 30-day and 3-month mortality. RESULTS: In total, data from 2860 patients were analyzed. In most patients (68%), serum lactate was lower than 2 mmol/L. Elevated baseline serum lactate was associated with significantly higher ICU- and 3-month mortality (53% vs. 43%, and 71% vs. 57%, respectively, p < 0.001). In the multivariable analysis, the maximum lactate concentration on day 1 was independently associated with ICU mortality (aOR 1.06 95% CI 1.02-1.11; p = 0.007), 30-day mortality (aOR 1.07 95% CI 1.02-1.13; p = 0.005) and 3-month mortality (aOR 1.15 95% CI 1.08-1.24; p < 0.001) after adjustment for age, gender, SOFA score, and frailty. In 826 patients with baseline lactate ≥ 2 mmol/L sufficient data to calculate the difference between maximal levels on days 1 and 2 (∆ serum lactate) were available. A decreasing lactate concentration over time was inversely associated with ICU mortality after multivariate adjustment for SOFA score, age, Clinical Frailty Scale, and gender (aOR 0.60 95% CI 0.42-0.85; p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: In critically ill old intensive care patients suffering from COVID-19, lactate and its kinetics are valuable tools for outcome prediction. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04321265.

16.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 149, 2021 04 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1191486

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led highly developed healthcare systems to the brink of collapse due to the large numbers of patients being admitted into hospitals. One of the potential prognostic indicators in patients with COVID-19 is frailty. The degree of frailty could be used to assist both the triage into intensive care, and decisions regarding treatment limitations. Our study sought to determine the interaction of frailty and age in elderly COVID-19 ICU patients. METHODS: A prospective multicentre study of COVID-19 patients ≥ 70 years admitted to intensive care in 138 ICUs from 28 countries was conducted. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Frailty was assessed using the clinical frailty scale. Additionally, comorbidities, management strategies and treatment limitations were recorded. RESULTS: The study included 1346 patients (28% female) with a median age of 75 years (IQR 72-78, range 70-96), 16.3% were older than 80 years, and 21% of the patients were frail. The overall survival at 30 days was 59% (95% CI 56-62), with 66% (63-69) in fit, 53% (47-61) in vulnerable and 41% (35-47) in frail patients (p < 0.001). In frail patients, there was no difference in 30-day survival between different age categories. Frailty was linked to an increased use of treatment limitations and less use of mechanical ventilation. In a model controlling for age, disease severity, sex, treatment limitations and comorbidities, frailty was independently associated with lower survival. CONCLUSION: Frailty provides relevant prognostic information in elderly COVID-19 patients in addition to age and comorbidities. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04321265 , registered 19 March 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care , Frail Elderly/statistics & numerical data , Frailty/mortality , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Survival Analysis
17.
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 8: 623076, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1110291

ABSTRACT

Since its first appearance in December 2019, the novel Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) has spread throughout the world at rapid pace causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Originating in the Chinese province Hubei, more than 91.8 million people globally have now been infected with the coronavirus and more than 1.966.000 patients have died thus far from Covid-19 (as of January 13th 2021). The virus spreads primarily by droplet infection as well as via aerosols during close physical contact. Particularly in medical examinations with close physical contact between examiner and patient, like echocardiography, the risk of contracting the virus is increased. Therefore, the use of personal protective equipment is recommended for the protection of patients and medical personnel alike. In this article, the current recommendations of international professional associations on the use of personal protective equipment and their local implementation are presented.

18.
Herz ; 45(8): 715-718, 2020 Dec.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-932491

ABSTRACT

Since its first appearance in December 2019, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread all over the world at a rapid pace causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Originating from the Chinese province Hubei, more than 29.4 million people globally have now been confirmed to have contracted the coronavirus and more than 930,000 patients have died so far from COVID-19 (situation as of 15 September 2020). The virus is mainly spread during close contact by small droplets and aerosols. During the close contact in medical examinations, such as echocardiography, the risk of contracting the virus is increased. Therefore, the use of personal protective equipment is recommended for the protection of patients and medical personnel alike. This article summarizes the current recommendations of international societies and describes the local implementation in Austria.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Coronavirus , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Austria , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Echocardiography , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
19.
Z Gesundh Wiss ; 30(5): 1285-1291, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-898051

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Europe is a destination for many migrants, a group whose proportion of the overall population will increase over the next decades. The cardiovascular (CV) risk distribution and outcomes, as well as health literacy, are likely to differ from the host population. Challenges related to migrant health status, cardiovascular risk distribution and health literacy are compounded by the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) crisis. Methods: We performed a narrative review of available evidence on migrant CV and health literacy in Europe. Results: Health literacy is lower in migrants but can be improved through targeted interventions. In some subgroups of migrants, rates of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors, most importantly hypertension and diabetes, are higher. On the other hand, there is strong evidence for a so-called healthy migrant effect, describing lower rates of CV risk distribution and mortality in a different subset of migrants. During the COVID-19 pandemic, CV risk factors, as well as health literacy, are key elements in optimally managing public health responses in the ongoing pandemic. Conclusions: Migrants are both an opportunity and a challenge for public health in Europe. Research aimed at better understanding the healthy migrant effect is necessary. Implementing the beneficial behaviors of migrants could improve outcomes in the whole population. Specific interventions to screen for risk factors, manage chronic disease and increase health literacy could improve health care for migrants. This pandemic is a challenge for the whole population, but active inclusion of immigrants in established health care systems could help improve the long-term health outcomes of migrants in Europe.

20.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 51(1): 226-231, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-648995

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been linked to a higher risk of mortality compared to influenza, which is mainly due to severe secondary diseases, such as acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In turn, ARDS is characterized by an acute inflammation and an excessive activity of the coagulation cascade, rising the vulnerability for venous thromboembolic events. In order to investigate the relation of inflammation and the influence of coagulation factors on their release, human peripheral mononuclear blood cells (PBMCs) were treated with autologous serum, heparinized plasma and different doses of fibrin. Thereafter, the concentration of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines in the secretome of PBMCs was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Our analyses revealed autologous serum to significantly increase the secretion of cytokines and chemokines after 24 h of incubation time. Furthermore, the addition of fibrin markedly increased the secretion of cytokines and chemokines by PBMCs in a dose-dependent manner. Consequently, in accordance with previous studies, our study outlines that anti-coagulation may constitute a promising tool for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2, reducing both, the cytokine storm, as well as the risk for thrombotic complications.


Subject(s)
Blood Coagulation , COVID-19/therapy , Cytokine Release Syndrome , Fibrin , Inflammation , Blood Coagulation/drug effects , Blood Coagulation/immunology , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/immunology , Cells, Cultured , Chemokines/immunology , Cytokine Release Syndrome/blood , Cytokine Release Syndrome/drug therapy , Cytokine Release Syndrome/etiology , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Fibrin/immunology , Fibrin/pharmacology , Fibrinolytic Agents/pharmacology , Heparin/pharmacology , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Inflammation/blood , Inflammation/therapy , Leukocytes, Mononuclear/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL