COVID-19 pneumonia - increased incidence of pneumothorax/mediastinal emphysema after invasive mechanical and non-invasive ventilation.

Introduction: COVID pneumonia can lead to pneumomediastinum or pneumothorax during non-invasive or invasive mechanical ventilation. This affects the prognosis. Methodology: During the study period, 121 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections and invasive or non-invasive ventilation therapy were recorded in our hospital. All patients with a pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum were analyzed in more detail. Result(s): Pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum occurred in 12 patients and resulted in 7 deaths. Discussion(s): The incidence of pneumothorax with COVID infection ranges from 0.56 to 1%, reaching 3.5% in our own studies and 4.2% under invasive mechanical ventilation. The incidence of pneumomediastinum was 10% and 9.2% in our own patients. Overall mortality was 58.3% and similar to that reported in the literature, up to 60%.Copyright © 2023 Dustri-Verlag Dr. K. Feistle.

Utility of High Flow Nasal Oxygen versus Non-Invasive Ventilation in Severe Covid-19 Pneumonia: Retrospective Comparative Analysis and Assessment in Present Scenario Patients

Background: The pandemic of COVID-19 since its beginning has created havoc all-round the globe. The role of oxygen therapy remains constant. Various modalities have been studied for oxygen delivery to hypoxic patients but high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) has lately gained importance in terms of non-invasive oxygen delivery, easy administration and great improvement in patient's recovery. We conducted this retrospective analysis with the primary objective of looking for the proportion of patients who were successfully weaned off of HFNO or non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and the secondary aim was to look for duration of hospital stay and its effect on clinical recovery based on laboratory parameters. Methods: All patients, positive for COVID-19 infection by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RTPCR) were admitted to covid ICU or ward with oxygen requirement and were treated with either NIV or HFNO were enrolled for the study. Patients were grouped under H group (HFNO) or N group (NIV). Daily ABG readings, chest x-ray, respiratory rate, hemodynamic parameters and urine output were noted on 12 hourly intervals. Any changes in above parameters along with need for intubation were assessed. Results: Patients from both the groups showed significant improvement in their oxygen saturation by the fifth day of their treatment. Fourteen patients from the NIV group and 10 from the HFNO group had saturation >90% by Day 5. Of those who presented with saturation of <85%, 2 out of 5 in the NIV group (40%) and 1 of the 2 patients in the HFNO group (50%) showed improvement in their oxygen saturation. The P/F was statistically comparable (p 0.928) in both groups. The levels of bio markers, and the improvement was comparable and correlated with clinical improvement as well. Conclusion: We conclude that though HFNO is accepted better than NIV, the improvement in the respiratory status of the patient was comparable with both the treatment modalities and hence we do not recommend use of HFNO, especially in a situation of gross deficit of oxygen availability as compared to the exponential rise in the demand. © 2023 Tehran University of Medical Sciences.

Clinical characteristics and risk factors of patients with COVID-19 developing barotrauma

Background: At our hospital, people with COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) had a high rate of pulmonary barotrauma. Therefore, the current study looked at barotrauma in COVID-19 patients getting invasive and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation to assess its prevalence, clinical results, and features. Methodology: Our retrospective cohort study comprised of adult COVID-19 pneumonia patients who visited our tertiary care hospital between April 2020 and September 2021 and developed barotrauma. Result(s): Sixty-eight patients were included in this study. Subcutaneous emphysema was the most frequent type of barotrauma, reported at 67.6%;pneumomediastinum, reported at 61.8%;pneumothorax, reported at 47.1%. The most frequent device associated with barotrauma was CPAP (51.5%). Among the 68 patients, 27.9% were discharged without supplemental oxygen, while 4.4% were discharged on oxygen. 76.5% of the patients expired because of COVID pneumonia and its complications. In addition, 38.2% of the patients required invasive mechanical breathing, and 77.9% of the patients were admitted to the ICU. Conclusion(s): Barotrauma in COVID-19 can pose a serious risk factor leading to mortality. Also, using CPAP was linked to a higher risk of barotrauma.Copyright © 2021 Muslim OT et al.

Performance of helmet CPAP using different configurations: Turbine-driven ventilators vs Venturi devices.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, Venturi-based flow generators have been preferred over mechanical ventilators to provide continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) through the helmet (h-CPAP). Recently, modern turbine-driven ventilators (TDVs) showed to be safe and effective in delivering h-CPAP. We aimed to compare the pressure stability during h-CPAP delivered by Venturi devices and TDVs and assess the impact of High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filters on their performance. METHODS: We performed a bench study using an artificial lung simulator set in a restrictive respiratory condition, simulating two different levels of patient effort (high and low) with and without the interposition of the HEPA filter. We calculated the average of minimal (Pmin), maximal (Pmax) and mean (Pmean) airway pressure and the time product measured on the airway pressure curve (PTPinsp). We defined the pressure swing (Pswing) as Pmax - Pmin and pressure drop (Pdrop) as End Expiratory Pressure - Pmin. RESULTS: Pswing across CPAP levels varied widely among all the tested devices. During "low effort", no difference in Pswing and Pdrop was found between Venturi devices and TDVs; during high effort, Pswing (p<0.001) and Pdrop (p<0.001) were significantly higher in TDVs compared to Venturi devices, but the PTPinsp was lower (1.50 SD 0.54 vs 1.67 SD 0.55, p<0.001). HEPA filter addition almost doubled Pswing and PTPinsp (p<0.001) but left unaltered the differences among Venturi and TDVs systems in favor of the latter (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TDVs performed better than Venturi systems in delivering a stable positive pressure level during h-CPAP in a bench setting.

Corrigendum: Comfort during non-invasive ventilation.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.874250.].

Risk of air and surface contamination during application of different noninvasive respiratory support for patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the risk of environmental contamination among patients with COVID-19 who received high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), noninvasive ventilation (NIV), and conventional oxygen therapy (COT) via nasal cannula for respiratory failure. METHODS: Air was sampled from the hospital isolation rooms with 12 air changes/hr where 26 patients with COVID-19 received HFNC (up to 60 l/min, n = 6), NIV (n = 6), or COT (up to 5 l/min of oxygen, n = 14). Surface samples were collected from 16 patients during air sampling. RESULTS: Viral RNA was detected at comparable frequency in air samples collected from patients receiving HFNC (3/54, 5.6%), NIV (1/54, 1.9%), and COT (4/117, 3.4%) (P = 0.579). Similarly, the risk of surface contamination was comparable among patients receiving HFNC (3/46, 6.5%), NIV (14/72, 19.4%), and COT (8/59, 13.6%) (P = 0.143). An increment in the cyclic thresholds of the upper respiratory specimen prior to air sampling was associated with a reduced SARS-CoV-2 detection risk in air (odds ratio 0.83 [95% confidence interval 0.69-0.96], P = 0.027) by univariate logistic regression. CONCLUSION: No increased risk of environmental contamination in the isolation rooms was observed in the use of HFNC and NIV vs COT among patients with COVID-19 with respiratory failure. Higher viral load in the respiratory samples was associated with positive air samples.

High flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) in the treatment of COVID-19 infection of adult patients from - An emergency perspective: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, which was first discovered in Wuhan, China. The disease has grown into a global pandemic causing mild to moderate symptoms in most people. The disease can also exhibit serious illnesses, especially for patients with other chronic diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease, or cancer. In such cases of severe illness, high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) has been used to provide oxygenation to COVID-19 patients. However, the efficiency of HFNO remains uncertain, prompting the conduction of this systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of the therapy. A thorough search for relevant and original articles was carried out on five electronic databases, including ScienceDirect, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholar. No time limitation was placed during the search as it included all the articles related to COVID-19 from 2019 to 2022. The search strategy utilized in this systematic review yielded 504 articles, of which only 10 met the eligibility criteria and were included. Our meta-analysis reveals that HFNO success rate was higher than HFNO failure rates (0.52 (95% CI;0.47, 0.56) and 0.48 (95% CI;0.44, 0.53), respectively), however, the difference was statistically insignificant. HFNO was associated with a significant decrease in mortality and intubation rates (0.28 (95% CI;0.19, 0.39) and 0.28 (95% CI;0.18, 0.41), respectively). Our statistical analysis has shown that significantly lower ROX index (5.07 +/- 1.66, p = 0.028) and PaO2/FiO2 (100 +/- 27.51, p = 0.031) are associated with HFNO failure, while a significantly lower respiratory rate (RR) (23.17 +/- 4.167, p = 0.006) is associated with HFNO success. No statistically significant difference was observed in SpO2/FiO2 ratio between the HFNO success and failure groups (154.23 +/- 42.74 vs. 124.025 +/- 28.50, p = 0.62, respectively). Based on the results from our meta-analysis, the success or failure of HFNO in treating COVID-19 adult patients remains uncertain. However, HFNO has been shown to be an effective treatment in reducing mortality and intubation rates. Therefore, HFNO can be recommended for COVID-19 patients but with close monitoring and should be carried out by experienced healthcare workers.Copyright © 2023 The Authors

Safety and Effectiveness of SeptimebTM in Patients with COVID-19 Referred to a Teaching and Referral Hospital: An Uncontrolled Clinical Trial Study (Phase II)

Background: We conducted this study to determine the safety and evidence of effectiveness of SeptimebTM among patients with COVID-19. Methods: An uncontrolled phase II clinical trial with SeptimebTM was implemented in Imam Khomeini Hospital as a before-and-after trial during May to October 2020. Considering the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 33 patients with COVID-19 were treated using SeptimebTM. The patients received the anti-inflammatory drug 150 mg /10 ml /IV infusion SeptimebTM on the first day and then 300 mg /20 ml / IV infusion from the second day onwards for at least 2 days and up to 13 days based on the improvement of clinical symptoms and laboratory findings in addition to treatment which were selected according to the national protocol. The patients were then evaluated for the treatment efficacy and side effects. Adherence to treatment, clinical observations, and side effects were recorded before and after the treatment. Results: The herbal drug SeptimebTM was injected in phase two of an uncontrolled clinical trial on 33 patients with COVID-19 in Imam Khomeini Hospital in Tehran as a before-and-after trial. The number of new cases admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and the new need to Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) ecreased compared to before the treatment. Also, blood oxygen saturation and platelet count increased. Conversely, CRP, ESR, and ferritin levels decreased (p<0.05). Besides, SeptimebTM did not show any serious side effects except recurrent thrombophlebitis during the treatment. Conclusion: We found some evidence regarding the efficacy of this drug and its low amount of short term side effects. The investigators recommend conducting the third phase of the clinical trial. Copyright 2023, Journal of Iranian Medical Council.

Prolonged use of noninvasive ventilation in the management of COVID-19-induced ARDS: a case report.

The severity of coronavirus disease 2019 and its manifestations varies considerably from person to person. Acute respiratory distress syndrome is the more feared and severe complication usually managed with early intubation and invasive ventilation. We report a case from a tertiary hospital in Nepal admitted with coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome and managed primarily on noninvasive ventilation. Considering the scarcity of invasive ventilation and the rising number of cases during the pandemic and its complications, early use of noninvasive ventilation in appropriate patients can decrease the need for invasive ventilation.

Comfort During Non-invasive Ventilation.

Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has been shown to be effective in avoiding intubation and improving survival in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (ARF) when compared to conventional oxygen therapy. However, NIV is associated with high failure rates due, in most cases, to patient discomfort. Therefore, increasing attention has been paid to all those interventions aimed at enhancing patient's tolerance to NIV. Several practical aspects have been considered to improve patient adaptation. In particular, the choice of the interface and the ventilatory setting adopted for NIV play a key role in the success of respiratory assistance. Among the different NIV interfaces, tolerance is poorest for the nasal and oronasal masks, while helmet appears to be better tolerated, resulting in longer use and lower NIV failure rates. The choice of fixing system also significantly affects patient comfort due to pain and possible pressure ulcers related to the device. The ventilatory setting adopted for NIV is associated with varying degrees of patient comfort: patients are more comfortable with pressure-support ventilation (PSV) than controlled ventilation. Furthermore, the use of electrical activity of the diaphragm (EADi)-driven ventilation has been demonstrated to improve patient comfort when compared to PSV, while reducing neural drive and effort. If non-pharmacological remedies fail, sedation can be employed to improve patient's tolerance to NIV. Sedation facilitates ventilation, reduces anxiety, promotes sleep, and modulates physiological responses to stress. Judicious use of sedation may be an option to increase the chances of success in some patients at risk for intubation because of NIV intolerance consequent to pain, discomfort, claustrophobia, or agitation. During the Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, NIV has been extensively employed to face off the massive request for ventilatory assistance. Prone positioning in non-intubated awake COVID-19 patients may improve oxygenation, reduce work of breathing, and, possibly, prevent intubation. Despite these advantages, maintaining prone position can be particularly challenging because poor comfort has been described as the main cause of prone position discontinuation. In conclusion, comfort is one of the major determinants of NIV success. All the strategies aimed to increase comfort during NIV should be pursued.

Burden of primary influenza and respiratory syncytial virus pneumonia in hospitalised adults: insights from a 2-year multi-centre cohort study (2017-2018).

BACKGROUND: Viral community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a potentially serious illness, particularly in adult patients with underlying chronic conditions. In addition to the most recent SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) are considered the most relevant causes of viral CAP. AIMS: To describe the clinical features of hospitalised adults admitted for influenza-A/B and RSV pneumonia and analyse, according to aetiology, factors associated with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) failure and in-hospital death (IHD). METHODS: This was a retrospective and multi-centre study of all adults who were admitted for laboratory-confirmed influenza-A/B or RSV pneumonia, during two consecutive winter seasons (October-April 2017-2018 and 2018-2019) in three tertiary hospitals in Portugal, Italy and Cyprus. RESULTS: A total of 356 adults were included in the study. Influenza-A, influenza-B and RSV were deemed to cause pneumonia in 197 (55.3%), 85 (23.9%) and 74 (20.8%) patients, respectively. Patients with both obstructive sleep apnoea or obesity hypoventilation syndrome and influenza-A virus pneumonia showed a higher risk for NIV failure (odds ratio (OR) 4.66; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42-15.30). Patients submitted to NIV showed a higher risk for IHD, regardless of comorbidities (influenza-A OR 3.00; 95% CI 1.35-6.65, influenza-B OR 4.52; 95% CI 1.13-18.01, RSV OR 5.61; 95% CI 1.26-24.93). CONCLUSION: The increased knowledge of influenza-A/B and RSV pneumonia burden may contribute to a better management of patients with viral CAP.

A Retrospective Analysis of Ventilatory Strategy Comparing Non-invasive Ventilation (NIV) With Invasive Ventilation in Patients Admitted With Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia.

Background The second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in India saw a sudden upsurge of critically ill patients getting admitted to the ICU. The guidance for respiratory support was unclear in the early phase. But later reports showed lower mortality with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) than with intubation. The aim of this study was to assess the end result of initial methods of ventilation in COVID-19 patients. Methodology Patients admitted to ICU with COVID-19 were categorized as group 1 (IPPV-intubated within 24 hrs of admission), group 2 (NIV -NIV only), group 3 (NIV+ IPPV-intubated after 24 hrs), and group 4 (NRBM - Non-Rebreathing Mask only). All causes in the hospital or 30-day mortality, length of stay in ICU, and incidence of pneumothorax were compared between groups. Logistic regression analysis was done to determine the odds of mortality. Results The overall mortality rate among patients admitted to tertiary care centers was 15% and the rate among patients in ICU was 54.07%. Patients in group 1 and group 3 had significantly high mortality rates of 90.47% and 93.75%, respectively, as compared to 51.28% in group 2 patients. The odds of mortality were high in group 3 (OR 29.57, 95% CI 4.51 and 193.52) and group 1 (OR 8.01, 95% CI 1.35 and 47.48). Conclusion In a resource-limited setting, the use of NIV is associated with higher survival in COVID-19 patients. The prognosis of patients who are intubated early or after a trial of NIV is the same with increased odds of mortality.

Dexmedetomidine as Conduit for Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) Compliance in COVID-19 and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Patients in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Setting: Case Series.

Non-compliance to the non-invasive ventilation (NIV) mask in a distressed hypoxemic patient is not an unusual finding, especially in desaturated coronavirus disease (COVID-19) or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with respiratory distress who require ventilatory support to improve oxygenation. Failure to achieve success with the non-invasive ventilatory support with the tight-fitting mask led to emergent endotracheal intubation. This was in view to avert consequences such as severe hypoxemia and subsequent cardiac arrest.  Sedation is an important component of ICU management for noninvasive mechanical ventilation to improve NIV compliance/tolerance. Including the various sedatives used, such as fentanyl, propofol, or midazolam, the most suitable agent to be used as a primary/sole sedative still remains unclear. Dexmedetomidine providing analgosedation without significant respiratory depression facilitates better tolerance of NIV mask application. This case series is a retrospective analysis of patients in whom dexmedetomidine bolus followed by infusion was observed to facilitate compliance to NIV with the tight-fitting mask. Herein, a case summary of six patients with acute respiratory distress who were dyspnoic, agitated have severe hypoxemia were put on NIV with dexmedetomidine infusion is being reported. They were extremely uncooperative as their RASS score (Richmond Agitation-Sedation score) was + 1 to +3, not allowing the application of the NIV mask. Due to their poor compliance with to use of the NIV mask, proper ventilation could not be achieved. Dexmedetomidine infusion (0.3 to 0.4 mcg/kg/hr) was used after a bolus dose (0.2-0.3 mcg/kg). The RASS Score of our patients was +2 or +3 before this intervention which became -1 or -2 after including dexmedetomidine in the treatment protocol. The low dose dexmedetomidine bolus and infusion thereafter showed to improve the patient's acceptance of the device. Oxygen therapy with this was shown to improve patient oxygenation by allowing the acceptance of the tight-fitting NIV face mask. In conclusion, this case series serves as evidence of the use of dexmedetomidine as an effective therapy to calm the agitated desaturated patient, thereby facilitating non-invasive ventilation in COVID-19 and COPD patients and promoting better oxygenation. This may, in turn, avoid endotracheal intubation for invasive ventilation and the associated complications.

Airways management in SARS-COV-2 acute respiratory failure: A prospective observational multi-center study.

Objective: Few studies have reported the implications and adverse events of performing endotracheal intubation for critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units. The aim of the present study was to determine the adverse events related to tracheal intubation in COVID-19 patients, defined as the onset of hemodynamic instability, severe hypoxemia, and cardiac arrest. Setting: Tertiary care medical hospitals, dual-centre study performed in Northern Italy from November 2020 to May 2021. Patients: Adult patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test, admitted for respiratory failure and need of advanced invasive airways management. Interventions: Endotracheal Intubation Adverse Events. Main variables of interests: The primary endpoint was to determine the occurrence of at least 1 of the following events within 30 minutes from the start of the intubation procedure and to describe the types of major adverse peri-intubation events: severe hypoxemia defined as an oxygen saturation as measured by pulse-oximetry <80%; hemodynamic instability defined as a SBP 65 mmHg recoded at least once or SBP < 90 mmHg for 30 minutes, a new requirement or increase of vasopressors, fluid bolus >15 mL/kg to maintain the target blood pressure; cardiac arrest. Results: Among 142 patients, 73.94% experienced at least one major adverse peri-intubation event. The predominant event was cardiovascular instability, observed in 65.49% of all patients undergoing emergency intubation, followed by severe hypoxemia (43.54%). 2.82% of the patients had a cardiac arrest. Conclusion: In this study of intubation practices in critically ill patients with COVID-19, major adverse peri-intubation events were frequent. Clinical Trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04909476.

Objetivo: Pocos estudios han informado las implicaciones y los eventos adversos de realizar una intubación endotraqueal para pacientes críticos con COVID-19 ingresados ​​en unidades de cuidados intensivos. El objetivo del presente estudio fue determinar los eventos adversos relacionados con la intubación traqueal en pacientes con COVID-19, definidos como la aparición de inestabilidad hemodinámica, hipoxemia severa y paro cardíaco. Ámbito: Hospitales médicos de atención terciaria, estudio de doble centro realizado en el norte de Italia desde noviembre de 2020 hasta mayo de 2021. Pacientes: Pacientes adultos con prueba PCR SARS-CoV-2 positiva, ingresados por insuficiencia respiratoria y necesidad de manejo avanzado de vías aéreas invasivas. Intervenciones: Eventos adversos de la intubación endotraqueal. Principales variables de interés: El punto final primario fue determinar la ocurrencia de al menos 1 de los siguientes eventos dentro de los 30 minutos posteriores al inicio del procedimiento de intubación y describir los tipos de eventos adversos periintubación mayores. : hipoxemia severa definida como una saturación de oxígeno medida por pulsioximetría <80%; inestabilidad hemodinámica definida como PAS 65 mmHg registrada al menos una vez o PAS < 90 mmHg durante 30 minutos, nuevo requerimiento o aumento de vasopresores, bolo de líquidos > 15 mL/kg para mantener la presión arterial objetivo; paro cardiaco. Resultados: Entre 142 pacientes, el 73,94% experimentó al menos un evento periintubación adverso importante. El evento predominante fue la inestabilidad cardiovascular, observada en el 65,49% de todos los pacientes sometidos a intubación de urgencia, seguido de la hipoxemia severa (43,54%). El 2,82% de los pacientes tuvo un paro cardíaco. Conclusión: En este estudio de prácticas de intubación en pacientes críticos con COVID-19, los eventos adversos periintubación mayores fueron frecuentes. Registro de ensayos clínicos: www.clinicaltrials.gov identificador: NCT04909476.

Helmet CPAP in the emergency department: A narrative review.

BACKGROUND: The choice of correct interface for the right patient is crucial for the success of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) therapy. Helmet CPAP is a type of interface used to deliver NIV. Helmet CPAP improves oxygenation by keeping the airway open throughout the breathing cycle with positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). OBJECTIVE: This narrative review describes the technical aspects and clinical indications of helmet continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). In addition, we explore the advantages and challenges faced using this device at the Emergency Department (ED). DISCUSSION: Helmet CPAP is tolerable than other NIV interfaces, provides a good seal and has good airway stability. During Covid-19 pandemic, there are evidences it reduced the risk of aerosolization. The potential clinical benefit of helmet CPAP is demonstrated in acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema (ACPO), Covid-19 pneumonia, immunocompromised patient, acute chest trauma and palliative patient. Compare to conventional oxygen therapy, helmet CPAP had been shown to reduce intubation rate and decrease mortality. CONCLUSION: Helmet CPAP is one of the potential NIV interface in patients with acute respiratory failure presenting to the emergency department. It is better tolerated for prolonged usage, reduced intubation rate, improved respiratory parameters, and offers protection against aerosolization in infectious diseases.

Production and characterization of lentivirus vector-based SARS-CoV-2 pseudoviruses with dual reporters: Evaluation of anti-SARS-CoV-2 viral effect of Korean red ginseng.

Background: Pseudotyped virus systems that incorporate viral proteins have been widely employed for the rapid determination of the effectiveness and neutralizing activity of drug and vaccine candidates in biosafety level 2 facilities. We report an efficient method for producing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pseudovirus with dual luciferase and fluorescent protein reporters. Moreover, using the established method, we also aimed to investigate whether Korean red ginseng (KRG), a valuable Korean herbal medicine, can attenuate infectivity of the pseudotyped virus. Methods: A pseudovirus of SARS-CoV-2 (SARS-2pv) was constructed and efficiently produced using lentivirus vector systems available in the public domain by the introduction of critical mutations in the cytoplasmic tail of the spike protein. KRG extract was dose-dependently treated to Calu-3 cells during SARS2-pv treatment to evaluate the protective activity against SARS-CoV-2. Results: The use of Calu-3 cells or the expression of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) in HEK293T cells enabled SARS-2pv infection of host cells. Coexpression of transmembrane protease serine subtype 2 (TMPRSS2), which is the activator of spike protein, with ACE2 dramatically elevated luciferase activity, confirming the importance of the TMPRSS2-mediated pathway during SARS-CoV-2 entry. Our pseudovirus assay also revealed that KRG elicited resistance to SARS-CoV-2 infection in lung cells, suggesting its beneficial health effect. Conclusion: The method demonstrated the production of SARS-2pv for the analysis of vaccine or drug candidates. When KRG was assessed by the method, it protected host cells from coronavirus infection. Further studies will be followed for demonstrating this potential benefit.

Clinical Outcomes of COVID-19-Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Patients With Three Different Respiratory Support Modalities: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Introduction Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-induced acute respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) had a considerable impact on intensive care utilization and resource optimization. Multiple modalities for respiratory support were implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic with the main concern of being able to identify those patients at high risk of rapidly progressive respiratory failure, whom the early initiation of invasive respiratory support would, in particular, affect the outcome in comparison to the noninvasive management strategy. Objectives In our cohort study, we describe demographic characteristics, respiratory support modalities, and their relation to patient outcomes. Method Patients 18 years of age and older who were admitted to a tertiary center COVID-19-dedicated medical intensive care unit (MICU) in Qatar between March 2020 and May 2020 with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia were included in this study. Patients were divided into invasive or noninvasive, and those who required invasive strategy were subdivided into the early intubation group (patients who were intubated within 72 hours of intensive care unit (ICU) admission) and the late intubation group (patients who were intubated after 72 hours from ICU admission). The primary outcome was ICU and hospital mortality, and the secondary effects were the length of stay and mortality determinants. Results A total of 686 patients were admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) during the study period. There were 222 (32.4%), 131 (19.1%), and 333 (48.5%) patients in the early, late, and not intubated groups, respectively. Compared to the late intubated group, the early intubated group had a higher proportion of males. Diabetes (39.8%) was the most common comorbidity, followed by hypertension (HTN) (36%) and heart disease (9.8%). The 30-day ICU and hospital mortality were significantly higher in the late intubated group compared to the early intubated group (30.5% versus 15.8%, and 30% versus 16.2%). The median ICU and hospital stay days in the total sample were 8 (interquartile range (IQR): 5-14) and 19 (IQR: 14-25), respectively. The mean estimates of 30-day ICU survival times for early intubated, late intubated, and not intubated groups were 25.14 (95% confidence interval (CI): 23.71, 26.57), 23.35 (95% CI: 21.63, 25.07), and 29.91 (95% CI: 29.74, 30.09) respectively. Conclusions In our study, the COVID-19 ARDS patients who required early invasive ventilatory support and in whom the physiological parameter was more severe (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores) had a better outcome than the late intubation group. Age more than 60 years old, diabetes, hypertension, chronic kidney disease (CKD), and chronic liver disease (CLD) were the main predictor of mortality in total.

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Pregnancy.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a clinical syndrome characterized by several clinical features and pathological responses involving the respiratory system primarily. Infections (viral), sepsis, and massive transfusion are the commonest causes of ARDS during pregnancy. The majority of them recover with noninvasive ventilatory (NIV) support. NIV is safe in pregnancy provided the center is experienced and has a protocolized patient care pathway. Parturients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation are best managed in experienced centers. PaO2/FiO2 targets are higher in parturients compared to nonpregnant patients. Permissive hypercapnia is not a safe option in pregnancy. In severe ARDS with refractory hypoxemia, prone ventilation is a safe option. However, it has to be done in experienced centers. Venovenous ECMO is a safe alternative option in pregnant women with refractory hypoxemia, and delivery has been prolonged to a safe viable age on ECMO. The decision to deliver and the mode of delivery have to be a multidisciplinary decision; primary criterion is maternal survival. Postdelivery, establishing maternal bonding while in ventilatory support facilitates early weaning and minimizes lactation failure. How to cite this article: Pandya ST, Krishna SJ. Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Pregnancy. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021; 25(Suppl 3):S241-S247.

Respiratory support for pneumonia patients in the COVID- 19 pandemic

The COVID-19 respiratory disease pandemic caused by a type of Coronavirus, SARS-CoV 2, not previously known to infect humans, began in late 2019 and continues to this day. The clinical picture of the disease in adults is already well understood;risk factors for infection, disease severity, and mortality have been identified;diagnostic methods have been developed and successfully applied;virus spread control procedures are in place. However, despite such impressive advances, there is still no standard antiviral drug therapy nor recommendations for respiratory support for COVID-19 with proven effectiveness in pneumonia. There are currently several non-invasive respiratory support options for COVID-19 patients with mild to moderate respiratory disorders. These may significantly reduce the number of patients needing intubation and mechanical ventilation due to severe acute respiratory failure. That is why for patients with COVID-19 when choosing respiratory support, a balance must be struck between the clinical benefit of the intervention and the risk of intra-hospital spread of infection. It is important to note that during the treatment of COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure, the full range of invasive and non-invasive lung ventilation options should be considered.