Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 134
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
Am J Case Rep ; 23: e934362, 2022 Jan 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1605676

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND Human parainfluenza viruses (PIVs) belong to the Paramyxoviridae family. PIVs cause lower respiratory tract infections in children and the elderly. In addition, severe pneumonia due to PIVs has been reported in immunocompromised adults. However, no reports have described PIV infections leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in immunocompetent hosts. CASE REPORT A 48-year-old otherwise healthy man was transported to our hospital due to worsening dyspnea. On arrival, strong effortful breathing was observed and results of arterial blood gas analysis revealed severe hypoxia. On the basis of the clinical presentation, we intubated the patient for mechanical ventilation. However, mechanical ventilation provided inadequate oxygenation. Finally, veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was initiated. Pneumonia was considered to be a cause of the ARDS, based on the patient's history and blood examination. Repeated reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction tests for the novel coronavirus were performed, and endotracheal aspirate specimens were cultured for bacteria and fungus; however, the results were all negative. On day 2, the PIV-3-specific antibody titer was elevated. Two weeks later, the PIV-3-specific antibody titer had increased 4-fold. On the basis of these results, we diagnosed pneumonia induced by PIV-3 infection. CONCLUSIONS ARDS can occur because of severe pneumonia induced by PIV-3. In cases of unexplained severe pneumonia or ARDS, PIV infection should be included in the differential diagnosis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Aged , Child , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Parainfluenza Virus 3, Human , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(5): 522-532, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1537199

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. METHODS: We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04327388; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. FINDINGS: Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference -1·7 [-9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [-6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI -7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 11% (17 of 159) were in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 10% (18 of 173) were in the sarilumab 400 mg group. INTERPRETATION: This trial did not show efficacy of sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and receiving supplemental oxygen. Adequately powered trials of targeted immunomodulatory therapies assessing survival as a primary endpoint are suggested in patients with critical COVID-19. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , COVID-19 , Cytokine Release Syndrome , Receptors, Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/methods , Cytokine Release Syndrome/drug therapy , Cytokine Release Syndrome/etiology , Cytokine Release Syndrome/immunology , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Drug Monitoring/methods , Female , Humans , Immunologic Factors/administration & dosage , Immunologic Factors/adverse effects , International Cooperation , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome
4.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(5): 511-521, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1537197

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Global randomised controlled trials of the anti-IL-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 have shown conflicting results but potential decreases in time to discharge and burden on intensive care. Tocilizumab reduced progression to mechanical ventilation and death in a trial population enriched for racial and ethnic minorities. We aimed to investigate whether tocilizumab treatment could prevent COVID-19 progression in the first multicentre randomised controlled trial of tocilizumab done entirely in a lower-middle-income country. METHODS: COVINTOC is an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial done at 12 public and private hospitals across India. Adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with moderate to severe COVID-19 (Indian Ministry of Health grading) confirmed by positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR result were randomly assigned (1:1 block randomisation) to receive tocilizumab 6 mg/kg plus standard care (the tocilizumab group) or standard care alone (the standard care group). The primary endpoint was progression of COVID-19 (from moderate to severe or from severe to death) up to day 14 in the modified intention-to-treat population of all participants who had at least one post-baseline assessment for the primary endpoint. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients. The trial is completed and registered with the Clinical Trials Registry India (CTRI/2020/05/025369). FINDINGS: 180 patients were recruited between May 30, 2020, and Aug 31, 2020, and randomly assigned to the tocilizumab group (n=90) or the standard care group (n=90). One patient randomly assigned to the standard care group inadvertently received tocilizumab at baseline and was included in the tocilizumab group for all analyses. One patient randomly assigned to the standard care group withdrew consent after the baseline visit and did not receive any study medication and was not included in the modified intention-to-treat population but was still included in safety analyses. 75 (82%) of 91 in the tocilizumab group and 68 (76%) of 89 in the standard care group completed 28 days of follow-up. Progression of COVID-19 up to day 14 occurred in eight (9%) of 91 patients in the tocilizumab group and 11 (13%) of 88 in the standard care group (difference -3·71 [95% CI -18·23 to 11·19]; p=0·42). 33 (36%) of 91 patients in the tocilizumab group and 22 (25%) of 89 patients in the standard care group had adverse events; 18 (20%) and 15 (17%) had serious adverse events. The most common adverse event was acute respiratory distress syndrome, reported in seven (8%) patients in each group. Grade 3 adverse events were reported in two (2%) patients in the tocilizumab group and five (6%) patients in the standard care group. There were no grade 4 adverse events. Serious adverse events were reported in 18 (20%) patients in the tocilizumab group and 15 (17%) in the standard care group; 13 (14%) and 15 (17%) patients died during the study. INTERPRETATION: Routine use of tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with moderate to severe COVID-19 is not supported. However, post-hoc evidence from this study suggests tocilizumab might still be effective in patients with severe COVID-19 and so should be investigated further in future studies. FUNDING: Medanta Institute of Education and Research, Roche India, Cipla India, and Action COVID-19 India.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , COVID-19 , Cytokine Release Syndrome , Receptors, Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/methods , Cytokine Release Syndrome/drug therapy , Cytokine Release Syndrome/etiology , Cytokine Release Syndrome/immunology , Drug Monitoring/methods , Female , Humans , Immunologic Factors/administration & dosage , Immunologic Factors/adverse effects , India , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome
6.
Int J Artif Organs ; 44(11): 861-867, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526574

ABSTRACT

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in COVID-19 patients is associated with poor clinical outcomes and high mortality rates, despite the use of mechanical ventilation. Veno-Venous Extracorporeal membrane Oxygenation (VV-ECMO) in these patients is a viable salvage therapy. We describe clinical outcomes and survival rates in 52 COVID-19 patients with ARDS treated with early VV-ECMO at a large, high-volume center ECMO program. Outcomes included arterial blood gases, respiratory parameters, inflammatory markers, adverse events, and survival rates. Patients' mean age was 47.8 ± 12.1 years, 33% were female, and 75% were Hispanic. At the end of study period, 56% (n = 29) of the patients survived and were discharged and 44% (n = 23) of the patients expired. Survival rate was 75.0% (9 out of 12) in patients placed on ECMO prior to mechanical ventilation. Longer duration on mechanical ventilation prior to ECMO intervention was associated with a 31% (aOR = 1.31, 95% CI, 1.00-1.70) increased odds of mortality after adjusting for age, gender, BMI, number of comorbid conditions, and post-ECMO ventilator days. Early and effective ECMO intervention in critical ill COVID-19 patients might be a valuable strategy in critical care settings to increase their odds of survival.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Ventilators, Mechanical
7.
Surg Infect (Larchmt) ; 22(9): 948-954, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1522102

ABSTRACT

Background: In trauma, direct pulmonary injury and innate immune response activation primes the lungs for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The inflammasome-dependent release of interleukin-18 (IL-18) was recently identified as a key mediator in ARDS pathogenesis, leading us to hypothesize that plasma IL-18 is a diagnostic predictor of ARDS in severe blunt trauma. Patients and Methods: Secondary analysis of the Inflammation and Host Response to Injury database was performed on plasma cytokines collected within 12 hours of severe blunt trauma. Trauma-related cytokines, including IL-18, were compared between patients with and without ARDS and were evaluated for association with ARDS using regression analysis. Threshold cytokine concentrations predictive of ARDS were determined using receiver-operating curve (ROC) analysis. Results: Cytokine analysis of patients without ARDS patients (n = 61) compared with patients with ARDS (n = 19) demonstrated elevated plasma IL-18 concentration in ARDS and IL-18 remained correlated with ARDS on logistic regression after confounder adjustment (p = 0.008). Additionally, ROC analysis revealed IL-18 as a strong ARDS predictor (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.83), with a threshold IL-18 value of 170 pg/mL (Youden index, 0.3). Unlike in patients without ARDS, elevated IL-18 persisted in patients with ARDS during the acute injury phase (p ≤ 0.02). Other trauma-related cytokines did not correlate with ARDS. Conclusions: In severe blunt trauma, IL-18 is a robust predictor of ARDS and remains elevated throughout the acute injury phase. These findings support the use of IL-18 as a key ARDS biomarker, promoting early identification of trauma patients at greater risk of developing ARDS. Timely recognition of ARDS and implementation of advantageous supportive care practices may reduce trauma-related ARDS morbidity and costs.


Subject(s)
Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Wounds, Nonpenetrating , Humans , Interleukin-18 , Logistic Models , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Risk Assessment , Wounds, Nonpenetrating/complications , Wounds, Nonpenetrating/diagnosis
8.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 381, 2021 11 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506432

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is primarily a respiratory disease; however, there is also evidence that it causes endothelial damage in the microvasculature of several organs. The aim of the present study is to characterize in vivo the microvascular reactivity in peripheral skeletal muscle of severe COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study carried out in Spain, Mexico and Brazil. Healthy subjects and severe COVID-19 patients admitted to the intermediate respiratory (IRCU) and intensive care units (ICU) due to hypoxemia were studied. Local tissue/blood oxygen saturation (StO2) and local hemoglobin concentration (THC) were non-invasively measured on the forearm by near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). A vascular occlusion test (VOT), a three-minute induced ischemia, was performed in order to obtain dynamic StO2 parameters: deoxygenation rate (DeO2), reoxygenation rate (ReO2), and hyperemic response (HAUC). In COVID-19 patients, the severity of ARDS was evaluated by the ratio between peripheral arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2) and the fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) (SF ratio). RESULTS: Healthy controls (32) and COVID-19 patients (73) were studied. Baseline StO2 and THC did not differ between the two groups. Dynamic VOT-derived parameters were significantly impaired in COVID-19 patients showing lower metabolic rate (DeO2) and diminished endothelial reactivity. At enrollment, most COVID-19 patients were receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) (53%) or high-flow nasal cannula support (32%). Patients on MV were also receiving sedative agents (100%) and vasopressors (29%). Baseline StO2 and DeO2 negatively correlated with SF ratio, while ReO2 showed a positive correlation with SF ratio. There were significant differences in baseline StO2 and ReO2 among the different ARDS groups according to SF ratio, but not among different respiratory support therapies. CONCLUSION: Patients with severe COVID-19 show systemic microcirculatory alterations suggestive of endothelial dysfunction, and these alterations are associated with the severity of ARDS. Further evaluation is needed to determine whether these observations have prognostic implications. These results represent interim findings of the ongoing HEMOCOVID-19 trial. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04689477 . Retrospectively registered 30 December 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/physiopathology , Intensive Care Units/trends , Microvessels/physiopathology , Respiratory Care Units/trends , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/physiopathology , Severity of Illness Index , Adult , Aged , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Mexico/epidemiology , Microcirculation/physiology , Middle Aged , Muscle, Skeletal/blood supply , Muscle, Skeletal/physiopathology , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/epidemiology , Spain/epidemiology
9.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 204(9): 1024-1034, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1495777

ABSTRACT

Rationale: ACE2 (angiotensin-converting enzyme 2), the entry receptor for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is expressed in type 2 alveolar epithelial cells (AT2) that may play key roles in postinjury repair. An imbalance between ACE2 and ACE has also been hypothesized to contribute to lung injury. Objectives: To characterize the expression and distribution of ACE2 and ACE and to compare AT2 with endothelial cell expression in coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-related or -unrelated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and controls. Methods: Lung tissue stainings (using multiplex immunofluorescence) and serum concentrations of ACEs were determined retrospectively in two different cohorts of patients. AT2 and endothelial cells were stained in lung tissue for ProSPC (pro-surfactant protein C) and CD31, respectively. Measurements and Main Results: Pulmonary ACE2 expression was increased in patients with COVID-19-related and -unrelated ARDS (0.06% of tissue area and 0.12% vs. 0.006% for control subjects; P = 0.013 and P < 0.0001, respectively). ACE2 was upregulated in endothelial cells (0.32% and 0.53% vs. 0.01%; P = 0.009 and P < 0.0001) but not in AT2 cells (0.13% and 0.08% vs. 0.03%; P = 0.94 and P = 0.44). Pulmonary expression of ACE was decreased in both COVID-19-related and -unrelated ARDS (P = 0.057 and P = 0.032). Similar increases in ACE2 and decreases in ACE were observed in sera of COVID-19 (P = 0.0054 and P < 0.0001) and non-COVID-19 ARDS (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.016). In addition, AT2 cells were decreased in patients with COVID-19-related ARDS compared with COVID-19-unrelated ARDS (1.395% vs. 2.94%, P = 0.0033). Conclusions: ACE2 is upregulated in lung tissue and serum of both COVID-19-related and -unrelated ARDS, whereas a loss of AT2 cells is selectively observed in COVID-19-related ARDS.


Subject(s)
Alveolar Epithelial Cells/metabolism , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/metabolism , COVID-19/metabolism , Peptidyl-Dipeptidase A/metabolism , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/metabolism , Adult , Aged , Biomarkers/metabolism , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/physiopathology , Case-Control Studies , Female , Humans , Immunohistochemistry , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Proportional Hazards Models , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Up-Regulation
10.
Trials ; 22(1): 692, 2021 Oct 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463262

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a severe complication of COVID-19 pneumonia, with a mortality rate amounting to 34-50% in moderate and severe ARDS, and is associated with prolonged duration of invasive mechanical ventilation. Such as in non-COVID ARDS, harmful mechanical ventilation settings might be associated with worse outcomes. Reducing the tidal volume down to 4 mL kg-1 of predicted body weight (PBW) to provide ultra-low tidal volume ventilation (ULTV) is an appealing technique to minimize ventilator-inducted lung injury. Furthermore, in the context of a worldwide pandemic, it does not require any additional material and consumables and may be applied in low- to middle-income countries. We hypothesized that ULTV without extracorporeal circulation is a credible option to reduce COVID-19-related ARDS mortality and duration of mechanical ventilation. METHODS: The VT4COVID study is a randomized, multi-centric prospective open-labeled, controlled superiority trial. Adult patients admitted in the intensive care unit with COVID-19-related mild to severe ARDS defined by a PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 150 mmHg under invasive mechanical ventilation for less than 48 h, and consent to participate to the study will be eligible. Patients will be randomized into two balanced parallels groups, at a 1:1 ratio. The control group will be ventilated with protective ventilation settings (tidal volume 6 mL kg-1 PBW), and the intervention group will be ventilated with ULTV (tidal volume 4 mL kg-1 PBW). The primary outcome is a composite score based on 90-day all-cause mortality as a prioritized criterion and the number of ventilator-free days at day 60 after inclusion. The randomization list will be stratified by site of recruitment and generated using random blocks of sizes 4 and 6. Data will be analyzed using intention-to-treat principles. DISCUSSION: The purpose of this manuscript is to provide primary publication of study protocol to prevent selective reporting of outcomes, data-driven analysis, and to increase transparency. Enrollment of patients in the study is ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04349618 . Registered on April 16, 2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Extracorporeal Circulation , Humans , Prospective Studies , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Tuberk Toraks ; 69(3): 360-368, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1441339

ABSTRACT

Severe coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) represents viral pneumonia from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, when ARDS occurs as part of COVID-19, it has different features. The strategy of breathing support is very important in treating COVID-19 related ARDS (CARDS). Though it meets the CARDS Berlin definition, COVID-19 pneumonia is a specific disease with different phenotypes. Recently, it has been suggested that CARDS has two phenotypes, type L (Type 1 or non-ARDS) and type H (Type 2, ARDS), and these phenotypes respond differently to respiratory support treatments. In this review, after mentioning the pathophysiology and radiological relationship of CARDS, the definition and treatment approaches of two different forms of CARDS were discussed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pneumonia, Viral , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Humans , Radiography , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Arch Argent Pediatr ; 119(5): e531-e535, 2021 10.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1441337

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is the first pandemic of the 21st century. SARS-CoV-2 infection is mainly transmitted via droplets. Although some cases of perinatal transmission have been reported, it is unclear whether these infections occurred via transplacental or transcervical routes or via environmental exposure. Herein, we present the case of a newborn who died with neonatal acute respiratory distress syndrome exhibiting severe pulmonary involvement. The baby was born to a COVID-19 PCR (+) mother by C-section and was found to be COVID-19 PCR (+) from a nasopharyngeal swab sample tested within 24 hours of birth due to the suspected transplacental transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from the mother to the fetus.


La enfermedad por coronavirus de 2019 (COVID-19), causada por el coronavirus 2 del síndrome respiratorio agudo grave (SARS-CoV-2), se convirtió en la primera pandemia del siglo XXI. La infección por SARS-CoV-2 se transmite principalmente a través de las gotículas. Si bien se han informado algunos casos de transmisión perinatal, no es claro si estas infecciones fueron resultado de la vía de contagio transplacentario o transcervical o de la exposición ambiental. En este artículo, presentamos el caso de un recién nacido que falleció por síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda neonatal con compromiso pulmonar grave. El bebé nació por cesárea de una madre con una PCR positiva para COVID-19 y se detectó que tenía una PCR positiva para COVID-19 mediante un hisopado nasofaríngeo en el transcurso de las 24 horas posteriores al parto debido a una sospecha de transmisión transplacentaria del SARS-CoV-2 de la madre al feto.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , SARS-CoV-2
13.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0257056, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1438346

ABSTRACT

We present an interpretable machine learning algorithm called 'eARDS' for predicting ARDS in an ICU population comprising COVID-19 patients, up to 12-hours before satisfying the Berlin clinical criteria. The analysis was conducted on data collected from the Intensive care units (ICU) at Emory Healthcare, Atlanta, GA and University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN and the Cerner® Health Facts Deidentified Database, a multi-site COVID-19 EMR database. The participants in the analysis consisted of adults over 18 years of age. Clinical data from 35,804 patients who developed ARDS and controls were used to generate predictive models that identify risk for ARDS onset up to 12-hours before satisfying the Berlin criteria. We identified salient features from the electronic medical record that predicted respiratory failure among this population. The machine learning algorithm which provided the best performance exhibited AUROC of 0.89 (95% CI = 0.88-0.90), sensitivity of 0.77 (95% CI = 0.75-0.78), specificity 0.85 (95% CI = 085-0.86). Validation performance across two separate health systems (comprising 899 COVID-19 patients) exhibited AUROC of 0.82 (0.81-0.83) and 0.89 (0.87, 0.90). Important features for prediction of ARDS included minimum oxygen saturation (SpO2), standard deviation of the systolic blood pressure (SBP), O2 flow, and maximum respiratory rate over an observational window of 16-hours. Analyzing the performance of the model across various cohorts indicates that the model performed best among a younger age group (18-40) (AUROC = 0.93 [0.92-0.94]), compared to an older age group (80+) (AUROC = 0.81 [0.81-0.82]). The model performance was comparable on both male and female groups, but performed significantly better on the severe ARDS group compared to the mild and moderate groups. The eARDS system demonstrated robust performance for predicting COVID19 patients who developed ARDS at least 12-hours before the Berlin clinical criteria, across two independent health systems.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Machine Learning , Models, Biological , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/physiopathology , Critical Illness , Female , Humans , Male , Medical Records Systems, Computerized , Middle Aged , Oxygen/blood , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/blood , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/physiopathology , Respiratory Rate , Risk Factors
14.
Trials ; 22(1): 643, 2021 Sep 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1435265

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a complex clinical diagnosis with various possible etiologies. One common feature, however, is pulmonary permeability edema, which leads to an increased alveolar diffusion pathway and, subsequently, impaired oxygenation and decarboxylation. A novel inhaled peptide agent (AP301, solnatide) was shown to markedly reduce pulmonary edema in animal models of ARDS and to be safe to administer to healthy humans in a Phase I clinical trial. Here, we present the protocol for a Phase IIB clinical trial investigating the safety and possible future efficacy endpoints in ARDS patients. METHODS: This is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind intervention study. Patients with moderate to severe ARDS in need of mechanical ventilation will be randomized to parallel groups receiving escalating doses of solnatide or placebo, respectively. Before advancing to a higher dose, a data safety monitoring board will investigate the data from previous patients for any indication of patient safety violations. The intervention (application of the investigational drug) takes places twice daily over the course of 7 days, ensued by a follow-up period of another 21 days. DISCUSSION: The patients to be included in this trial will be severely sick and in need of mechanical ventilation. The amount of data to be collected upon screening and during the course of the intervention phase is substantial and the potential timeframe for inclusion of any given patient is short. However, when prepared properly, adherence to this protocol will make for the acquisition of reliable data. Particular diligence needs to be exercised with respect to informed consent, because eligible patients will most likely be comatose and/or deeply sedated at the time of inclusion. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered with the EU Clinical trials register (clinicaltrialsregister.eu). EudraCT Number: 2017-003855-47 .


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pulmonary Edema , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Double-Blind Method , Edema , Humans , Peptides, Cyclic , Permeability , Pulmonary Edema/diagnosis , Pulmonary Edema/drug therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
15.
Crit Care Clin ; 37(4): 733-748, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1414518

ABSTRACT

Acute respiratory distress syndrome is a common condition among critically ill patients, but remains under-recognized and undertreated. Under-recognition may result from confusion over the clinical inclusion criteria, as well as a misunderstanding of the complex relationship between the clinical syndrome, the variable histopathologic patterns, and the myriad clinical disorders that cause acute respiratory distress syndrome. The identification of the clinical syndrome and determination of the causal diagnosis are both required to optimize patient outcomes. Here we review the definition, discuss pitfalls in recognizing acute respiratory distress syndrome and consider an approach to ascertain specific etiologies of acute respiratory distress syndrome.


Subject(s)
Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Humans , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy
16.
Eur Respir Rev ; 30(161)2021 Sep 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1412449

ABSTRACT

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a serious complication of severe systemic or local pulmonary inflammation, such as caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. ARDS is characterised by diffuse alveolar damage that leads to protein-rich pulmonary oedema, local alveolar hypoventilation and atelectasis. Inadequate perfusion of these areas is the main cause of hypoxaemia in ARDS. High perfusion in relation to ventilation (V/Q<1) and shunting (V/Q=0) is not only caused by impaired hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction but also redistribution of perfusion from obstructed lung vessels. Rebalancing the pulmonary vascular tone is a therapeutic challenge. Previous clinical trials on inhaled vasodilators (nitric oxide and prostacyclin) to enhance perfusion to high V/Q areas showed beneficial effects on hypoxaemia but not on mortality. However, specific patient populations with pulmonary hypertension may profit from treatment with inhaled vasodilators. Novel treatment targets to decrease perfusion in low V/Q areas include epoxyeicosatrienoic acids and specific leukotriene receptors. Still, lung protective ventilation and prone positioning are the best available standard of care. This review focuses on disturbed perfusion in ARDS and aims to provide basic scientists and clinicians with an overview of the vascular alterations and mechanisms of V/Q mismatch, current therapeutic strategies, and experimental approaches.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , COVID-19/complications , Humans , Hypoxia , Lung/physiopathology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Vasoconstriction
19.
Rev Med Virol ; 31(6): e2288, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384306

ABSTRACT

SARS Coronavirus-2 is one of the most widespread viruses globally during the 21st century, whose severity and ability to cause severe pneumonia and death vary. We performed a comprehensive systematic review of all studies that met our standardised criteria and then extracted data on the age, symptoms, and different treatments of Covid-19 patients and the prognosis of this disease during follow-up. Cases in this study were divided according to severity and death status and meta-analysed separately using raw mean and single proportion methods. We included 171 complete studies including 62,909 confirmed cases of Covid-19, of which 148 studies were meta-analysed. Symptoms clearly emerged in an escalating manner from mild-moderate symptoms, pneumonia, severe-critical to the group of non-survivors. Hypertension (Pooled proportion (PP): 0.48 [95% Confident interval (CI): 0.35-0.61]), diabetes (PP: 0.23 [95% CI: 0.16-0.33]) and smoking (PP: 0.12 [95% CI: 0.03-0.38]) were highest regarding pre-infection comorbidities in the non-survivor group. While acute respiratory distress syndrome (PP: 0.49 [95% CI: 0.29-0.78]), (PP: 0.63 [95% CI: 0.34-0.97]) remained one of the most common complications in the severe and death group respectively. Bilateral ground-glass opacification (PP: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.59-0.75]) was the most visible radiological image. The mortality rates estimated (PP: 0.11 [95% CI: 0.06-0.19]), (PP: 0.03 [95% CI: 0.01-0.05]), and (PP: 0.01 [95% CI: 0-0.3]) in severe-critical, pneumonia and mild-moderate groups respectively. This study can serve as a high evidence guideline for different clinical presentations of Covid-19, graded from mild to severe, and for special forms like pneumonia and death groups.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/pathology , Cough/pathology , Dyspnea/pathology , Fatigue/pathology , Fever/pathology , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/virology , Comorbidity , Cough/drug therapy , Cough/mortality , Cough/virology , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus/physiopathology , Dyspnea/drug therapy , Dyspnea/mortality , Dyspnea/virology , Fatigue/drug therapy , Fatigue/mortality , Fatigue/virology , Fever/drug therapy , Fever/mortality , Fever/virology , Humans , Hypertension/diagnosis , Hypertension/physiopathology , Immunologic Factors/therapeutic use , Prognosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/physiopathology , Severity of Illness Index , Smoking/physiopathology , Survival Analysis
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...