Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 847
Filter
Add filters

Year range
1.
Eur J Med Res ; 27(1): 226, 2022 Nov 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2108965

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Evidence regarding the timing of the application of mechanical ventilation among patients with severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is insufficient. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of early intubation compared to late intubation in patients with severe and critical COVID-19. METHODS: For this study, we searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases as well as one Korean domestic database on July 15, 2021. We updated the search monthly from September 10, 2021 to February 10, 2022. Studies that compared early intubation with late intubation in patients with severe COVID-19 were eligible for inclusion. Relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) were calculated as measures of effect using the random-effects model for the pooled estimates of in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), hospital LOS, ICU-free days, and ventilator-free days. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the definition of early intubation and the index time. To assess the risk of bias in the included studies, we used the Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Non-randomized studies 2.0. RESULTS: Of the 1523 records identified, 12 cohort studies, involving 2843 patients with severe COVID-19 were eligible. There were no differences in in-hospital mortality (8 studies, n = 795; RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.75-1.10, P = 0.32, I2 = 33%), LOS in the ICU (9 studies, n = 978; MD -1.77 days, 95% CI -4.61 to 1.07 days, P = 0.22, I2 = 78%), MV duration (9 studies, n = 1,066; MD -0.03 day, 95% CI -1.79 to 1.72 days, P = 0.97, I2 = 49%), ICU-free days (1 study, n = 32; 0 day vs. 0 day; P = 0.39), and ventilator-free days (4 studies, n = 344; MD 0.94 day, 95% CI -4.56 to 6.43 days, P = 0.74, I2 = 54%) between the early and late intubation groups. However, the early intubation group had significant advantage in terms of hospital LOS (6 studies, n = 738; MD -4.32 days, 95% CI -7.20 to -1.44 days, P = 0.003, I2 = 45%). CONCLUSION: This study showed no significant difference in both primary and secondary outcomes between the early intubation and late intubation groups. Trial registration This study was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews on 16 February, 2022 (registration number CRD42022311122).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Intensive Care Units , Length of Stay , Intubation, Intratracheal
2.
Expert Rev Med Devices ; 19(10): 779-789, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2107124

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to summarize the effect of the aerosol box on tracheal intubation in patients with COVID-19. AREAS COVERED: According to the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was performed to identify relevant literature on the 'impact of the aerosol box on tracheal intubation during the COVID-19 pandemic' in different electronic databases up to March 2021. Based on a set of predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 447 articles were screened. Finally, 20 articles were included in the current systematic review. The findings showed that the use of aerosol box during intubation could reduce droplet contamination on the healthcare workers but not necessarily aerosols. An increase in the time of intubation with the aerosol box was also observed in 9 out of 12 studies (75%); however, three studies reported no significant difference in the time of intubation with and without the aerosol box. Most studies (8 out of 9, 89%) were also shown that intubation with the aerosol box may lead to more difficulty. EXPERT OPINION: The proceduralist and other healthcare workers involved in airway management of COVID-19 infected patients should decide whether to apply the aerosol box with caution, balancing between benefits and risks, especially in difficult airway circumstances.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Respiratory Aerosols and Droplets , Intubation, Intratracheal , Airway Management
4.
Ann Med Surg (Lond) ; 84: 104827, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2104330

ABSTRACT

Background: BackgroundThe effectiveness of non-invasive respiratory strategies, namely CPAP and HFNO, in reducing the risk of mortality and tracheal intubation in patients with severe COVID-19 is not well established. Methods: A thorough literature search was conducted across 3 electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Central) from inception through July 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies assessing the impact of CPAP or HFNO on clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19 were considered for inclusion. End-points included all-cause mortality and risk of tracheal intubation. Evaluations were reported as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and analysis was performed using a random effects model. I2 index was used to assess heterogeneity. Results: From the 1041 articles retrieved from initial search, 7 potentially relevant studies (n = 2831 patients) were included in the final analysis. Compared to conventional oxygen therapy, non-invasive respiratory strategies reduced the risk of tracheal intubation (RR = 0.84, [95% CI 0.72, 0.98]; p = 0.02, I2 = 43%) and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.83, [95% CI 0.71-0.97]; p = 0.02, I2 = 0%) in patients infected with COVID-19 However, reduction in length of hospital stay was not significant between the non-invasive respiratory group and conventional oxygen therapy (MD = -0.60, [95% CI -2.17 - 0.98]; p = 0.46, I2 = 26%). Conclusion: This meta-analysis supports the application of non-invasive respiratory strategy is feasible as it can delay the start of tracheal intubation and reduce mortality rates among patients infected with COVID-19.

5.
Acta Med Acad ; 51(2): 99-107, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2100260

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Airway management has undergone a dramatic transformation since the arrival of video laryngoscope (VL). VL has higher intubation success rate on first try and lower complications in comparison to direct laryngoscope (DL). The use of VL is recommended in intubating COVID-19 patients to speed up intubation time and reduce failure rate. A team from Airlangga University developed Wycope Video Laryngoscope (Wycope VL), a VL with Wi-Fi connection to smartphones for an easier VL with low cost. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Wycope VL, C-MAC Video Laryngoscope (C-MAC VL), and DL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was an analytic observational study with a cross sectional design, involving 63 patients who were divided into 3 groups based on the type of laryngoscope, namely Wycope VL, C-MAC VL, and DL. Intubation is carried out by 4th year anaesthesiology resident. Research subjects were patients who will undergo elective surgery at Dr. Soetomo General Hospital under general anaesthesia using orotracheal tube. Inclusion age of 19-64 years, PS ASA 1-2, no anatomical abnormalities of the airway, did not have difficult airway, and was willing to participate in the study. RESULTS: All patients were successfully intubated without complications. C-MAC VL (5.33±1.42 seconds) and Wycope VL (5.95±0.74 seconds) was significantly faster in seeing vocal folds and glottis compared to DL (7.14±0.72 seconds) with P=0.000. DL was significantly faster in average time of intubation (15.52±5.90 seconds) compared to C-MAC VL (16.95±1.11 seconds) and Wycope VL (20.29±2.81 seconds) with P=0.000. CONCLUSION: DL was faster compared to VL in speed of intubation while C-MAC VL and Wycope VL was faster in viewing the vocal folds and glottis compared to DL.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Laryngoscopes , Humans , Young Adult , Adult , Middle Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Intubation, Intratracheal , Laryngoscopy
6.
Future Cardiol ; 2022 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2099009

ABSTRACT

Aim: 2D speckle-tracking echocardiography (2D-STE) has been used to assess cardiac recovery during the COVID-19 patient follow-ups within the pandemic. The novel role of STE in predicting adverse outcomes of COVID-19 has received attention due to its high sensitivity in identifying subclinical myocardial dysfunction. We reviewed the studies on using 2D-STE to assess COVID-19 prognosis. Methods: a literature search was conducted on PubMed and Scopus for eligible articles, 24 of which discussed using prognostic 2D-STE for COVID-19 patients. Results: 2D-STE predicts cardiovascular impairments more rapidly and precisely than conventional echocardiography. The 2D-STE technique presents an independent prognostic factor in COVID-19 infection. Conclusion: 2D-STE could be considered a time-efficient and accurate risk predictor of all-cause mortality in COVID-19 patients.


In this review, we have gathered every article that discusses the association between COVID-19 prognosis and speckle-tracking echocardiography, which is a novel, fast and accurate method and does not need expert operators to perform. We have shown that according to the current literature, we can use this imaging technique on the right and left heart ventricles to estimate the prognosis of the patients infected with COVID-19.

7.
Ann Intensive Care ; 12(1): 102, 2022 Oct 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2098453

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Dexamethasone is recommended for COVID-19 patients who require oxygen therapy. However, its effectiveness in reducing mortality and intubation, and its safety, remain debated. We aimed to investigate whether dexamethasone reduces day-28 mortality in unselected patients with critical COVID-19. METHODS: We performed an observational cohort study in consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to any of 13 French intensive care units (ICUs) in 2020. The primary objective was to determine whether early dexamethasone therapy was associated with day-28 mortality and the secondary objectives were to assess whether early dexamethasone decreased intubation requirements and to collect adverse events. RESULTS: Of 1058 included patients, 611 (57.75%) received early dexamethasone (early dexamethasone group), 358 (33.83%) did not receive any steroids (no steroids group), and 89 (8.41%) received late dexamethasone or other steroids. Day-28 mortality was similar between the early dexamethasone and the no steroids groups (15.06% and 14.25%, respectively; P = 0.59). Factors associated with day-28 mortality were older age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.06; 1.04-1.09; P < 0.001), worse SOFA score (aHR, 1.13; 1.06-1.20; P < 0.001), and immunocompromised status (aHR, 1.59; 1.01-2.50; P = 0.043). Early dexamethasone was associated with fewer intubations (48.55% vs. 61.49%, P < 0.001) and more ventilator-free days by day 28 (22 [2-28] vs. 17 [1-28] days, P = 0.003), compared to no steroids. Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) was more common with early dexamethasone (HR, 1.29 [1.01-1.63], P = 0.04) than with no steroids, whereas no differences were noted for bloodstream infection, fungal infection, or gastrointestinal bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Early dexamethasone in critically ill COVID-19 patients was not associated with lower day-28 mortality. However, early dexamethasone was associated with lower intubation needs and more ventilator-free days by day 28. In patients treated with invasive mechanical ventilation, early dexamethasone was associated with a higher risk of VAP.

8.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 813, 2022 Oct 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2098322

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Mexican Institute of Social Security (IMSS) is the largest health care provider in Mexico, covering about 48% of the Mexican population. In this report, we describe the epidemiological patterns related to confirmed cases, hospitalizations, intubations, and in-hospital mortality due to COVID-19 and associated factors, during five epidemic waves recorded in the IMSS surveillance system. METHODS: We analyzed COVID-19 laboratory-confirmed cases from the Online Epidemiological Surveillance System (SINOLAVE) from March 29th, 2020, to August 27th, 2022. We constructed weekly epidemic curves describing temporal patterns of confirmed cases and hospitalizations by age, gender, and wave. We also estimated hospitalization, intubation, and hospital case fatality rates. The mean days of in-hospital stay and hospital admission delay were calculated across five pandemic waves. Logistic regression models were employed to assess the association between demographic factors, comorbidities, wave, and vaccination and the risk of severe disease and in-hospital death. RESULTS: A total of 3,396,375 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases were recorded across the five waves. The introduction of rapid antigen testing at the end of 2020 increased detection and modified epidemiological estimates. Overall, 11% (95% CI 10.9, 11.1) of confirmed cases were hospitalized, 20.6% (95% CI 20.5, 20.7) of the hospitalized cases were intubated, and the hospital case fatality rate was 45.1% (95% CI 44.9, 45.3). The mean in-hospital stay was 9.11 days, and patients were admitted on average 5.07 days after symptoms onset. The most recent waves dominated by the Omicron variant had the highest incidence. Hospitalization, intubation, and mean hospitalization days decreased during subsequent waves. The in-hospital case fatality rate fluctuated across waves, reaching its highest value during the second wave in winter 2020. A notable decrease in hospitalization was observed primarily among individuals ≥ 60 years. The risk of severe disease and death was positively associated with comorbidities, age, and male gender; and declined with later waves and vaccination status. CONCLUSION: During the five pandemic waves, we observed an increase in the number of cases and a reduction in severity metrics. During the first three waves, the high in-hospital fatality rate was associated with hospitalization practices for critical patients with comorbidities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Male , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospital Mortality , Mexico/epidemiology , Hospitalization
9.
J Int Med Res ; 50(11): 3000605221135446, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2098199

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence and significance of ventilator avoidance in patients with critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This prospective observational cohort study evaluated hospital mortality and 1-year functional outcome among critically ill patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The explanatory variable was ventilator avoidance, modeled as 'initial refusal' of intubation (yes/no). Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores were obtained from surviving patients (or their surrogates) via phone or email questionnaire. RESULTS: Among patients for whom intubation was recommended (n = 102), 40 (39%) initially refused (95% confidence interval [CI] 30%, 49%). The risk of death was 79.3% (49/62) in those who did not initially refuse intubation compared with 77.5% (31/40) in those who initially refused, with an adjusted odds ratio for death of 1.27 (95% CI 0.47, 3.48). The distribution of 1-year mRS scores was not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: Among critically ill patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS, ventilator avoidance was common, but was not associated with increased in-hospital mortality or 1-year functional outcome.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Critical Illness , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Ventilators, Mechanical
10.
Am J Health Syst Pharm ; 2022 Oct 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097309

ABSTRACT

DISCLAIMER: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. PURPOSE: The dosing, potential adverse effects, and clinical outcomes of the most commonly utilized pharmacologic agents for rapid sequence intubation (RSI) are reviewed for the practicing emergency medicine pharmacist (EMP). SUMMARY: RSI is the process of establishing a safe, functional respiratory system in patients unable to effectively breathe on their own. Various medications are chosen to sedate and even paralyze the patient to facilitate an efficient endotracheal intubation. The mechanism of action and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles of these agents were described in a 2011 review. Since then, the role of the EMP as well as the published evidence regarding RSI agents, including dosing, adverse effects, and clinical outcomes, has grown. It is necessary for the practicing EMP to update previous practice patterns in order to continue to provide optimal patient care. CONCLUSION: While the agents used in RSI have changed little, knowledge regarding optimal dosing, appropriate patient selection, and possible adverse effects continues to be gained. The EMP is a key member of the bedside care team and uniquely positioned to communicate this evolving data.

12.
Can J Respir Ther ; 58: 151-154, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2091556

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The use of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is a simple method that can reduce intubation in patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure (ARF). Early and prolonged prone position has demonstrated benefits on mortality in mechanically ventilated patients and on intubation in awake patients with ARF. However, strategies to achieve adherence to awake prone positioning (APP) have not been previously described. Case and outcomes: We present six patients with ARF due to COVID-19 treated with HFNO and APP. The median (p25-75) of PaFiO2 upon admission was 121 (112-175). The average duration of APP on the first day was 16 h (SD 5 h). Duration (median p25-75) in APP for the following 20 days was 13 (10-18) h/day. Several strategies such as the presence of a health care team, recreational activities, adaptation of the circadian rhythm, oral nutritional support, and analgesics were used to improve prone tolerance. None of the patients suffered from delirium, all were ambulating on discharge from the ICU and none require intubation. Conclusion: The case series presented show the feasibility of prolonged use of HFNO and APP in patients with COVID-19 and severe persistent hypoxemia and described strategies to enhance adherence.

13.
J Pers Med ; 12(10)2022 Oct 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2084790

ABSTRACT

This study sought to determine whether the C-MAC video laryngoscope (VL) performed better than a direct laryngoscope (DL) when attempting endotracheal intubation (ETI) in the emergency department (ED) while wearing personal protective equipment (PPE). This was a retrospective single-center observational study conducted in an academic ED between February 2020 and March 2022. All emergency medical personnel who participated in any ETI procedure were required to wear PPE. The patients were divided into the C-MAC VL group and the DL group based on the device used during the first ETI attempt. The primary outcome measure was the first-pass success (FPS) rate. A multiple logistic regression was used to determine the factors associated with FPS. Of the 756 eligible patients, 650 were assigned to the C-MAC group and 106 to the DL group. The overall FPS rate was 83.5% (n = 631/756). The C-MAC group had a significantly higher FPS rate than the DL group (85.7% vs. 69.8%, p < 0.001). In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, C-MAC use was significantly associated with an increased FPS rate (adjusted odds ratio, 2.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.69-4.08; p < 0.001). In this study, we found that the FPS rate of ETI was significantly higher when the C-MAC VL was used than when a DL was used by emergency physicians constrained by cumbersome PPE.

14.
Front Pediatr ; 10: 998294, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2058891

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of changing head position on the endotracheal tube (ETT) depth and to assess the risk of inadvertent extubation and bronchial intubation in pediatric patients. Methods: Subjects aged 4-12 years old with orotracheal intubation undergoing elective surgeries were enrolled. After induction, the distances between "the ETT tip and the trachea carina" (T-C) were measured using a Disposcope flexible endoscope in head neutral position, 45° extension and flexion, 60° right and left rotation. The distance of the ETT tip movement relative to the neutral position (ΔT-C) was calculated after changing the head positions. The direction of the ETT tip displacement and the adverse events including endobronchial intubation, accidental tracheal extubation, hoarseness and sore throat were recorded. Results: The ETT tip moved toward the carina by 0.5 ± 0.4 cm (P < 0.001) when the head was flexed. After extending the head, the ETT tip moved toward the vocal cord by 0.9 ± 0.4 cm (P < 0.001). Right rotation resulted that the ETT tip moved toward the vocal cord direction by 0.6 ± 0.4 cm (P < 0.001). Moreover, there was no displacement with the head on left rotation (P = 0.126). Subjects with the reinforced ETT had less ETT displacement after changing head position than the taper guard ETT. Conclusion: The changes of head position can influence the depth of the ETT especially in head extension. We recommend using the reinforced ETT to reduce the ETT displacement in pediatrics to avoid intubation complications. Clinical trial registration: [www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier, [ChiCTR2100042648].

15.
Ann Thorac Med ; 17(4): 214-219, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2080627

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: Early use of a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) provides positive outcomes for preventing the risk of intubation. However, the efficiency and usage of HFNC in the case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among adult patients with multiple risk factors remain debatable and require more investigation. AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine the efficiency of HFNC in preventing the possible risk of intubation. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This study was an observational cross-sectional study that was conducted at a selected hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, from July 2020 to August 2021. METHODS: The data were collected from patients' medical records through the hospital health information system. Adult COVID-19 patients who used HFNC were included, while those who used bilevel positive airway pressure or continuous positive airway pressure without any trials of HFNC and neonatal or pediatric patients were excluded. The exposure of HFNC setting which included variables such as percentages of the fraction of inspired oxygen and the duration of using HFNC were measured to find the relation with respiratory rate oxygenation (ROX) index as a measurement of patient outcome. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The data were analyzed by using the online calculator socscistatistics. com for prevalence statistics, and correlation tests of significance. Prevalence statistics were presented in mean, median, frequencies, and percentages. Statistical tests were used to measure correlations of key variables. P < 0.05 of ANOVA and t-tests was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 159 adult COVID-19 patients using HFNC were included, and most of these patients were male. The median age was 64 years. Most of patients were reported to have hypertension and diabetes mellitus. The majority (94.34%) of patients were successfully weaned from HFNC and shows effective intervention with a mean of 7.53 of ROX score. Appropriate implementation of HFNC might be a successful intervention for preventing the risk of intubation. CONCLUSIONS: According to the success rate of HFNC, which was considered a positive outcome, there might be a promising intervention for HFNC to prevent the risk of intubation and decrease the mortality rate.

16.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 9: 1023229, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2080188

ABSTRACT

Background: Effective strategies for managing coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) patients suffering from acute respiratory distress are constantly evolving. The timeline and threshold for transitioning from non-invasive ventilation to intermittent mandatory ventilation in critical cases who develop COVID-19-related respiratory distress are undetermined. The present research intends to investigate if emergency room intubations in COVID-19 patients affect mortality. Methods: Between January 1, 2021 and June 30, 2021, we retrospectively reviewed chart analysis on all patients with confirmed positive COVID-19 screening and who underwent endotracheal intubation. Depending on when the intubation was performed; early in the emergency room or delayed outside the emergency room, patients were separated into two cohorts. In addition to comorbid clinical manifestations, the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score, and in-hospital mortality were all recorded as demographic and clinical information. Results: Fifty-eight of the 224 corona-positive patients who underwent intubation had their intubations performed in the emergency room. Age, sex, alcohol use, and smoking status did not significantly differ between the two categories at the baseline. The mean qSOFA score was higher in the early intubation cohort (3.5; p < 0.000) along with more underlying comorbidities (3.0; p < 0.000). When compared to the late intubation cohort (45.78%), patients treated with early intubation had a significantly greater death rate (67.24%). Conclusion: In summary, we discovered that patients who underwent intubation in the emergency units exhibited a high quick SOFA score as well as maximum co-morbid conditions than patients intubated somewhere else in the hospital. The findings of our investigation imply that intubating patients too early might be risky.

17.
Anaesthesia Pain & Intensive Care ; 26(4):554-558, 2022.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-2072498

ABSTRACT

At the beginning of COVID-19 pandemic the use of NSAIDS was avoided. This was because the previous studies suggesting that NSAIDs may be linked to an increased risk of lower respiratory tract infection consequences. Later on studies involved the patients who used NSAIDs for some chronic conditions and showed no additional harm among these patients. Then many studied assessed the benefit of using NSAIDs in COVID-19 patients for management of pain and fever and showed no additional risk among these patients.

18.
Exp Ther Med ; 24(5): 693, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2066710

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a significant global concern that has had major implications for the healthcare system. Patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) undergoing elective or emergency surgical procedures have a substantial risk of mortality and peri-operative complications. The present study aimed to describe the characteristics of patients who underwent elective surgery and developed nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 infection post-surgery. Patients who underwent thoracic, upper and lower abdominal or peripheral elective surgery with a polymerase chain reaction diagnosis of COVID-19, at 3-7 days after the surgery, were enrolled in the present retrospective study. Demographics, vaccination status against SARS-CoV-2, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and laboratory data were recorded upon admission to the hospital unit. In total, 116 subjects (80 males, 36 females; mean age, 67.31±16.83 years) fulfilling the inclusion criteria were identified. Among the 116 participants, 14 (12.1%) were intubated. From the 116 individuals analyzed, 84 were alive after 30 days (survivors), and 32 had succumbed to the disease (non-survivors). The mortality rate was 27.6% (32/116). The non-survivors had an older age and a higher CCI score. At the evaluation upon admission to the hospital unit, the survivors presented with higher serum albumin levels and a higher number of blood lymphocytes. In addition, the survivors exhibited lower levels of lactate dehydrogenase, aspartate aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and C-reactive protein (CRP), as well as a higher neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and CRP to albumin ratio (CAR) (P<0.05). The patients that were intubated had higher levels of gamma glutamyl-transferase (GGT), ALP and ferritin, as well as a higher NLR and platelet to lymphocyte ratio upon admission to the hospital unit (P<0.05). According to the Cox proportional hazards multivariate regression analysis, the only independent predictors of mortality and intubation were ALP and GGT upon admission, respectively (P<0.05). On the whole, the findings of the present study suggest that more stringent guidelines are required in order to prevent infection during the post-operative period.

19.
NeuroQuantology ; 20(11):4117-4125, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2067342

ABSTRACT

Cardiac arrest is a condition where heart suddenly stops, and the person just dies. About 10% of the deaths in India is due to sudden cardiac arrest which is also the most common factor of death in the world. In this unusual time of the Covid-19 pandemic, there is concern about the risk of a public responder contracting Covid-19 from a person when providing CPR. The vast majority of cardiac arrests (over 80%) will be in the home setting and responders are likely to be friends or family. Knowing how to perform "hands-only CPR" can save a life. A cardiac patient's chance of becoming a long-term survivor are more than doubled if someone on the scene administers prompt CPR. Healthcare workers already are at the highest risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2, According to the AHA, and administering CPR creates additional risks, CPR can involve a number of aerosol-generating procedures that include performing chest compressions, providing positive-pressure ventilation, and establishing an advanced airway through intubation. Resuscitation can require providers to work in close proximity to one another and the patient;and the urgency to resuscitate a patient in cardiac arrest can result in lapses in infection-controlprotocols. Copyright © 2022, Anka Publishers. All rights reserved.

20.
Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine ; 26(10):1120-1125, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2067000

ABSTRACT

Aims and objectives: In coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia, guidelines on timing and method of tracheostomy are evolving. The aim of the study was to analyze the outcomes of moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia patients who required tracheostomy and the safety with regard to the risk of transmission to the healthcare workers. Material(s) and Method(s): We retrospectively analyzed 30-day survival outcome of a total of 70 moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia patients on a ventilator, wherein tracheostomy was performed only in 28 (tracheostomy group), and the remaining were with endotracheal intubation beyond 7 days (non-tracheostomy group). Besides demographics, comorbidities, and clinical data including 30-day survival, and complications of tracheostomy were analyzed in both groups with respect to the timing of tracheostomy from the day of intubation. Healthcare workers were monitored for COVID-19 symptoms by carrying out periodical COVID tests. Result(s): The 30-day survival of the tracheostomy group was 75% as compared to 26.2% of the non-tracheostomy group. The majority of the patients (71.4%) had severe disease with PaO2/FiO2 (P/F ratio) <100. The first wave showed an 80% (4/5) whiles the second wave 100% (8/8) thirty days survival in the tracheostomy group performed before 13 days. All patients during the second wave underwent tracheostomy before 13 days with a median of 12th day from the day of intubation. These tracheostomies were performed percutaneous at the bedside, without any major complications and no transmission of disease to healthcare workers. Conclusion(s): Early percutaneous tracheostomy within 13 days of intubation demonstrated a good 30-day survival rate in severe COVID-19 pneumonia patients. Copyright © The Author(s). 2022.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL