Nitric oxide versus epoprostenol for refractory hypoxemia in Covid-19.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and outcomes with inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) and inhaled epoprostenol (iEPO) in patients with refractory hypoxemia due to COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study. SETTING: Single health system multicenter academic teaching hospitals. PATIENTS OR SUBJECTS: Age group of 18-80 years admitted to the medical ICU. INTERVENTIONS: Mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 infection, who received either iNO or iEPO between March 1st, 2020, and June 30th, 2020. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the change in the PaO2/FiO2 (P/F) ratio 1 hour after initiation of pulmonary vasodilator therapy. Secondary outcomes include P/F ratios on days 1-3 after initiation, positive response in P/F ratio (increase of at least 20% in PaO2), total days of treatment, rebound hypoxemia (if there was a drop in oxygen saturation after treatment was stopped), ventilator free days (if any patient was extubated), days in ICU, days to extubation, days to tracheostomy, mortality days after intubation, 30-day survival and mortality. 183 patients were excluded, as they received both iNO and iEPO. Of the remaining 103 patients, 62 received iEPO and 41 received iNO. The severity of ARDS was similar in both groups. Change in P/F ratio at one hour was 116 (70.3) with iNO and 107 (57.6) with iEPO (Mean/SD). Twenty-two (53.7%) patients in the iNO group and 25 (40.3%) in the iEPO group were responders to pulmonary vasodilators n(%)(p = 0.152) (more than 20% increase in partial pressure of oxygen, Pao2), and 18 (43.9%) and 31 (50%) patients in the iNO and iEPO group (p = 0.685), respectively, had rebound hypoxemia. Only 7 patients in the cohort achieved ventilator free days (3 in the iEPO group and 4 in iNO group). CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant difference between iNO and iEPO in terms of change in P/F ratio, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU, in-hospital mortality in this cohort of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. Larger, prospective studies are necessary to validate these results.

Letter to the Editor: "Use of inhaled epoprostenol with high flow nasal oxygen in non-intubated patients with severe COVID-19".

PURPOSE: Acute lung injury associated with COVID-19 contributes significantly to its morbidity and mortality. Though invasive mechanical ventilation is sometimes necessary, the use of high flow nasal oxygen may avoid the need for mechanical ventilation in some patients. For patients approaching the limits of high flow nasal oxygen support, addition of inhaled pulmonary vasodilators is becoming more common but little is known about its effects. This is the first descriptive study of a cohort of patients receiving inhaled epoprostenol with high flow nasal oxygen for COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected clinical data from the first fifty patients to receive inhaled epoprostenol while on high flow nasal oxygen at our institution. We compared the characteristics of patients who did and did not respond to epoprostenol addition. RESULTS: The 18 patients that did not stabilize or improve following initiation of inhaled epoprostenol had similar rates of invasive mechanical ventilation as those who improved or stabilized (50% vs 56%). Rates of mortality were not significantly different between the two groups (17% and 31%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19 induced hypoxemic respiratory failure, the use of inhaled epoprostenol with high flow nasal oxygen is feasible, but physiologic signs of response were not related to clinical outcomes.

Oral treprostinil improves pulmonary vascular compliance in pulmonary arterial hypertension.

Oral treprostinil has been shown to improve exercise capacity and delay disease progression in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), but its effects on hemodynamics are not well-characterized. The FREEDOM-EV trial was a Phase III, international, placebo-controlled, double-blind, event-driven study in 690 participants with PAH who were taking a single oral PAH therapy. FREEDOM-EV demonstrated a significantly reduced risk for clinical worsening with oral treprostinil taken three times daily and did not uncover new safety signals in PAH patients. Sixty-one participants in the FREEDOM-EV trial volunteered for a hemodynamics sub-study. Pulmonary artery compliance (PAC), a ratio of stroke volume to pulmonary pulse pressure, significantly increased from Baseline to Week 24 in the oral treprostinil group compared with the placebo group (geometric mean 26.4% active vs. -6.0% placebo; ANCOVA p=0.007). There was a significant increase in cardiac output in the oral treprostinil group compared to the placebo group (geometric mean 11.3% active vs. -6.4% placebo; ANCOVA p=0.005) and a corresponding significant reduction in pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) (geometric mean -21.5 active vs. -1.8% placebo; ANCOVA p=0.02) from Baseline to Week 24. These data suggest that increased compliance contributes to the physiological mechanism by which oral treprostinil improves exercise capacity and delays clinical worsening for patients with PAH.

Evaluation of aerosolized epoprostenol for hypoxemia in non-intubated patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

OBJECTIVES: Patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) frequently present with a febrile illness that may progress to pneumonia and hypoxic respiratory failure. Aerosolized epoprostenol (aEPO) has been evaluated in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and refractory hypoxemia. A paucity of literature has assessed the impact of aEPO in patients with SARS-CoV-2 receiving oxygen support with high flow nasal cannula (HFNC). The objective of this study was to evaluate whether aEPO added to HFNC prevents intubation and/or prolong time to intubation compared to controls only treated with HFNC, guided by oxygen saturation goals. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective study of adult patients infected with coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) and admitted to the medical intensive care unit. A total of 60 patients were included. Thirty patients were included in the treatment, and 30 in the control group, respectively. Among patients included in the treatment group, response to therapy was assessed. The need for mechanical ventilation and hospital mortality between responders vs. non-responders was evaluated. RESULTS: The primary outcome of mechanical ventilation was not statistically different between groups. Time from HFNC initiation to intubation was significantly prolonged in the treatment group compared to the control group (5.7 days vs. 2.3 days, P = 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between groups in mortality or length of stay. Patients deemed responders to aEPO had a lower rate of mechanical ventilation (50% vs 88%, P = 0.025) and mortality (21% vs 63%, P = 0.024), compared with non-responders. CONCLUSION: The utilization of aEPO in COVID-19 patients treated with HFNC is not associated with a reduction in the rate of mechanical ventilation. Nevertheless, the application of this strategy may prolong the time to invasive mechanical ventilation, without affecting other clinical outcomes.

The effect of prostacyclin infusion on markers of endothelial activation and damage in mechanically ventilated patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: In a pilot study, we found a significant reduction in mean daily sequential organ failure assessment score in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 who received prostacyclin, compared to placebo. We here investigate the effect on biomarkers of endothelial activation and damage. METHODS: Post-hoc study of a randomized controlled trial in adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, mechanically ventilated, with soluble thrombomodulin (sTM) plasma levels >4 ng/mL. Patients received prostacyclin infusion (1 ng/kg/min) or placebo. Blood samples were collected at baseline and 24 h. RESULTS: Eighty patients were randomized (41 prostacyclin, 39 placebo). The median changes in syndecan-1 plasma levels at 24 h were -3.95 (IQR: -21.1 to 2.71) ng/mL in the prostacyclin group vs. 3.06 (IQR: -8.73 to 20.5) ng/mL in the placebo group (difference of the medians: -7.01 [95% CI: -22.3 to -0.231] ng/mL, corresponding to -3% [95% CI: -11% to 0%], p = 0.04). Changes in plasma levels of sTM, PECAM-1, p-selectin, and CD40L did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prostacyclin infusion, compared to placebo, resulted in a measurable decrease in endothelial glycocalyx shedding (syndecan-1) at 24 h, suggesting a protective effect on the endothelium, which may be related to the observed reduction in organ failure.

Pulmonary Hypertension and COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a primary respiratory infectious disease, which can result in pulmonary and cardiovascular complications. From its first appearance in the city of Wuhan (China), the infection spread worldwide, leading to its declaration as a pandemic on March 11, 2020. Clinical research on SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) suggests that the virus may determine changes in the pulmonary hemodynamics through mechanisms of endothelial dysfunction, vascular leak, thrombotic microangiopathy, and venous thromboembolism that are similar to those leading to pulmonary hypertension (PH). Current available studies report echocardiographic signs of PH in approximately 12 to 13% of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Those with chronic pulmonary obstructive disease, congestive heart failure, pulmonary embolism, and prior PH are at increased risk to develop or worsen PH. Evidence of PH seems to be associated with increased disease severity and poor outcome. Because of the importance of the pulmonary hemodynamics in the pathophysiology of COVID-19, there is growing interest in exploring the potential therapeutical benefits of inhaled vasodilators in patients with COVID-19. Treatment with inhaled nitric oxide and prostacyclin has shown encouraging results through improvement of systemic oxygenation, reduction of systolic pulmonary arterial pressure, and prevention of right ventricular failure; however, data from randomized control trials are still required.

Responsiveness of Inhaled Epoprostenol in Respiratory Failure due to COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled pulmonary vasodilators are used as adjunctive therapies for the treatment of refractory hypoxemia. Available evidence suggest they improve oxygenation in a subset of patients without changing long-term trajectory. Given the differences in respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and "traditional" ARDS, we sought to identify their physiologic impact. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study of patients mechanically ventilated for COVID-19, from the ICUs of 2 tertiary care centers, who received inhaled epoprostenol (iEpo) for the management of hypoxemia. The primary outcome is change in PaO2/FiO2. Additionally, we measured several patient level features to predict iEpo responsiveness (or lack thereof). RESULTS: Eighty patients with laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV2 received iEpo while mechanically ventilated and had PaO2/FiO2 measured before and after. The median PaO2/FiO2 prior to receiving iEpo was 92 mmHg and interquartile range (74 - 122). The median change in PaO2/FiO2 was 9 mmHg (-9 - 37) corresponding to a 10% improvement (-8 - 41). Fifty-percent (40 / 80) met our a priori definition of a clinically significant improvement in PaO2/FiO2 (increase in 10% from the baseline value). Prone position and lower PaO2/FiO2 when iEpo was started predicted a more robust response, which held after multivariate adjustment. For proned individuals, improvement in PaO2/FiO2 was 14 mmHg (-6 to 45) vs. 3 mmHg (-11 - 20), p = 0.04 for supine individuals; for those with severe ARDS (PaO2/FiO2 < 100, n = 49) the median improvement was 16 mmHg (-2 - 46). CONCLUSION: Fifty percent of patients have a clinically significant improvement in PaO2/FiO2 after the initiation of iEpo. This suggests it is worth trying as a rescue therapy; although generally the benefit was modest with a wide variability. Those who were prone and had lower PaO2/FiO2 were more likely to respond.

Thrombocytopathy and endotheliopathy: crucial contributors to COVID-19 thromboinflammation.

The core pathology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is infection of airway cells by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that results in excessive inflammation and respiratory disease, with cytokine storm and acute respiratory distress syndrome implicated in the most severe cases. Thrombotic complications are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with COVID-19. Patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease and/or traditional cardiovascular risk factors, including obesity, diabetes mellitus, hypertension and advanced age, are at the highest risk of death from COVID-19. In this Review, we summarize new lines of evidence that point to both platelet and endothelial dysfunction as essential components of COVID-19 pathology and describe the mechanisms that might account for the contribution of cardiovascular risk factors to the most severe outcomes in COVID-19. We highlight the distinct contributions of coagulopathy, thrombocytopathy and endotheliopathy to the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and discuss potential therapeutic strategies in the management of patients with COVD-19. Harnessing the expertise of the biomedical and clinical communities is imperative to expand the available therapeutics beyond anticoagulants and to target both thrombocytopathy and endotheliopathy. Only with such collaborative efforts can we better prepare for further waves and for future coronavirus-related pandemics.

Superiority of cilostazol among antiplatelet FDA-approved drugs against COVID 19 Mpro and spike protein: Drug repurposing approach.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 19) was first identified in Wuhan, China near the end of 2019. To date, COVID-19 had spread to almost 235 countries and territories due to its highly infectious nature. Moreover, there is no vaccine or Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug. More time is needed to establish one of them. Consequently, the drug repurposing approach seems to be the most attractive and quick solution to accommodate this crisis. In this regard, we performed molecular docking-based virtual screening of antiplatelet FDA-approved drugs on the key two viral target proteins: main protease (Mpro ) and spike glycoprotein (S) as potential inhibitor candidates for COVID-19. In the present study, 15 antiplatelet FDA-approved drugs were investigated against the concerned targets using the Molecular Docking Server. Our study revealed that only cilostazol has the most favorable binding interaction on Mpro (PDB ID: 6LU7) and cilostazol, iloprost, epoprostenol, prasugrel, and icosapent ethyl have a higher binding affinity on spike glycoprotein (S) (PDB ID: 6VYB) compared with recent anti-CoVID-19. Therefore, cilostazol is a promising FDA drug against COVID-19 by inhibiting both Mpro and S protein. The insights gained in this study may be useful for quick approach against COVID-19 in the future.