Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 60
Filter
1.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 8: CD014962, 2021 08 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1813444

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is an antiviral medicine with properties to inhibit viral replication of SARS-CoV-2. Positive results from early studies attracted media attention and led to emergency use authorisation of remdesivir in COVID-19.  A thorough understanding of the current evidence regarding the effects of remdesivir as a treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection based on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is required. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of remdesivir compared to placebo or standard care alone on clinical outcomes in hospitalised patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and to maintain the currency of the evidence using a living systematic review approach. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (which comprises the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and medRxiv) as well as Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded and Emerging Sources Citation Index) and WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies without language restrictions. We conducted the searches on 16 April 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We included RCTs evaluating remdesivir for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalised adults compared to placebo or standard care alone irrespective of disease severity, gender, ethnicity, or setting.  We excluded studies that evaluated remdesivir for the treatment of other coronavirus diseases. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess risk of bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane RoB 2 tool for RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for outcomes that were reported according to our prioritised categories: all-cause mortality at up to day 28, duration to liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation, duration to liberation from supplemental oxygen, new need for mechanical ventilation (high-flow oxygen or non-invasive or invasive mechanical ventilation), new need for invasive mechanical ventilation, new need for non-invasive mechanical ventilation or high-flow oxygen, new need for oxygen by mask or nasal prongs, quality of life, adverse events (any grade), and serious adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs with 7452 participants diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection and a mean age of 59 years, of whom 3886 participants were randomised to receive remdesivir. Most participants required low-flow oxygen (n=4409) or mechanical ventilation (n=1025) at baseline. We identified two ongoing studies, one was suspended due to a lack of COVID-19 patients to recruit. Risk of bias was considered to be of some concerns or high risk for clinical status and safety outcomes because participants who had died did not contribute information to these outcomes. Without adjustment, this leads to an uncertain amount of missing values and the potential for bias due to missing data. Effects of remdesivir in hospitalised individuals  Remdesivir probably makes little or no difference to all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.06; risk difference (RD) 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 21 fewer to 7 more; 4 studies, 7142 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Considering the initial severity of condition, only one study showed a beneficial effect of remdesivir in patients who received low-flow oxygen at baseline (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.66, 435 participants), but conflicting results exists from another study, and we were unable to validly assess this observations due to limited availability of comparable data. Remdesivir may have little or no effect on the duration to liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation (2 studies, 1298 participants, data not pooled, low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether remdesivir increases or decreases the chance of clinical improvement in terms of duration to liberation from supplemental oxygen at up to day 28 (3 studies, 1691 participants, data not pooled, very low-certainty evidence).   We are very uncertain whether remdesivir decreases or increases the risk of clinical worsening in terms of new need for mechanical ventilation at up to day 28 (high-flow oxygen or non-invasive ventilation or invasive mechanical ventilation) (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.24; RD 29 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 68 fewer to 32 more; 3 studies, 6696 participants; very low-certainty evidence); new need for non-invasive mechanical ventilation or high-flow oxygen (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.98; RD 72 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 118 fewer to 5 fewer; 1 study, 573 participants; very low-certainty evidence); and new need for oxygen by mask or nasal prongs (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.22; RD 84 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 204 fewer to 98 more; 1 study, 138 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that remdesivir may decrease the risk of clinical worsening in terms of new need for invasive mechanical ventilation (67 fewer participants amongst 1000 participants; RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.77; 2 studies, 1159 participants; low-certainty evidence).  None of the included studies reported quality of life. Remdesivir probably decreases the serious adverse events rate at up to 28 days (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.90; RD 63 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 94 fewer to 25 fewer; 3 studies, 1674 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether remdesivir increases or decreases adverse events rate (any grade) (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.27; RD 29 more per 1000, 95% CI 82 fewer to 158 more; 3 studies, 1674 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the currently available evidence, we are moderately certain that remdesivir probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality at up to day 28 in hospitalised adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection. We are uncertain about the effects of remdesivir on clinical improvement and worsening. There were insufficient data available to validly examine the effect of remdesivir on mortality in subgroups depending on the extent of respiratory support at baseline.  Future studies should provide additional data on efficacy and safety of remdesivir for defined core outcomes in COVID-19 research, especially for different population subgroups. This could allow us to draw more reliable conclusions on the potential benefits and harms of remdesivir in future updates of this review. Due to the living approach of this work, we will update the review periodically.


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Alanine/therapeutic use , Bias , COVID-19/mortality , Cause of Death , Confidence Intervals , Disease Progression , Humans , Middle Aged , Oxygen/administration & dosage , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2 , Ventilator Weaning
2.
Front Public Health ; 9: 726647, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1775849

ABSTRACT

Cardiothoracic intensive care unit (CICU) nurses have shared the role and responsibility for ventilator-weaning to expedite decision-making in patient care. However, the actions taken are based on individual's unstructured training experience as there is no clinical practice guideline (CPG) for nurses in Malaysia. Hence, this study aims to design a CPG for the process of weaning from mechanical ventilation (MV) for a structured nursing training in a CICU at the National Heart Institute (Institut Jantung Negara, IJN) Malaysia. The Fuzzy Delphi Method (FDM) was employed to seek consensus among a panel of 30 experts in cardiac clinical practice on the guidelines. First, five experts were interviewed and their responses were transcribed and analyzed to develop the items for a FDM questionnaire. The questionnaire, comprising of 73 items, was distributed to the panel and their responses were analyzed for consensus on the design of the CPG. The findings suggested that the requirements expected for the nurses include: (a) the ability to interpret arterial blood gases, (b) knowledge and skills on the basics of mechanical ventilation, and (c) having a minimum 1-year working experience in the ICU. On the other hand, the CPG should mainly focus on developing an ability to identify criteria of patient eligible for weaning from MV. The learning content should focus on: (a) developing the understanding and reasoning for weaning and extubating and (b) technique/algorithm for extubating and weaning. Also, the experts agreed that the log book/competency book should be used for evaluation of the program. The CPG for structured nursing training at IJN in the context of the study is important for developing the professionalism of CICU nurses in IJN and could be used for training nurses in other CICUs, so that decision for ventilator-weaning from postcardiac surgery could be expedited.


Subject(s)
Nurse's Role , Ventilator Weaning , Humans , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Ventilator Weaning/nursing
3.
Crit Care Nurse ; 42(2): 56-61, 2022 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1776399

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In patients receiving mechanical ventilation, spontaneous awakening trials reduce morbidity and mortality when paired with spontaneous breathing trials. However, spontaneous awakening trials are not performed every day they are indicated and little is known about spontaneous awakening trial protocol use in cardiac intensive care units. LOCAL PROBLEM: Spontaneous awakening trial completion rate at the study institution was low and no trial protocol was regularly used. METHODS: A preintervention-postintervention retrospective cohort study was performed in adult patients with at least 24 hours of invasive mechanical ventilation in Michigan Medicine's cardiac intensive care unit. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were excluded. Data included demographics, sedation, mechanical ventilation duration, and in-hospital mortality. A nurse-driven spontaneous awakening trial protocol modified for the cardiac intensive care unit was implemented in October 2020. RESULTS: Compared with the preintervention cohort (n = 29, May through July 2020), the postintervention cohort (n = 27, October 2020 through February 2021) had a higher ratio of number of trials performed to number of days eligible for trial (0.91 vs 0.52; P < .01). Median continuous sedative infusion duration was shorter after intervention (2.3 vs 3.6 days; P = .02). Median mechanical ventilation duration (3.8 vs 4.7 days; P = .18) and mortality (41% vs 41%; P = .95) were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Spontaneous awakening trial protocol implementation led to a higher trial completion rate and a shorter duration of continuous sedative infusion. Larger studies are needed to assess the impact of protocolized spontaneous awakening trials on cardiac intensive care unit patient outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Ventilator Weaning
4.
Respir Care ; 67(3): 375-376, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1744784
5.
Crit Care Med ; 50(2): 256-263, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1691786

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of adult patients with coronavirus disease 2019 requiring weaning from prolonged mechanical ventilation. DESIGN: Observational cohort study of patients admitted to two long-term acute care hospitals from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. SETTING: Two long-term acute care hospitals specialized in weaning from prolonged mechanical ventilation in the Chicagoland area, Illinois, United States. PATIENTS: Adult (≥ 18 yr old) ICU survivors of respiratory failure caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pneumonia receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: During the study period, 158 consecutive patients were transferred to the long-term acute care hospitals for weaning from prolonged ventilation. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected and analyzed. Final date of follow-up was June 1, 2021. Prior to long-term acute care hospital transfer, median length of stay at the acute care hospital was 41.0 days and median number of ventilator days was 35. Median age was 60.0 years, 34.8% of patients were women, 91.8% had a least one comorbidity, most commonly hypertension (65.8%) and diabetes (53.2%). The percentage of weaning success was 70.9%. The median duration of successful weaning was 8 days. Mortality was 9.6%. As of June 1, 2021, 19.0% of patients had been discharged home, 70.3% had been discharged to other facilities, and 1.3% were still in the long-term acute care hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with coronavirus disease 2019 transferred to two Chicago-area long-term acute care hospitals successfully weaned from prolonged mechanical ventilation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Hospitals, Special , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Ventilator Weaning , Aged , COVID-19/complications , Chicago/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge , Patient Transfer , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Treatment Outcome
7.
Am Surg ; 87(11): 1775-1782, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511589

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic overwhelmed New York City hospitals early in the pandemic. Shortages of ventilators and sedatives prompted tracheostomy earlier than recommended by professional societies. This study evaluates the impact of percutaneous dilational tracheostomy (PDT) in COVID+ patients on critical care capacity. METHODS: This is a single-institution prospective case series of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients undergoing PDT from April 1 to June 4, 2020 at a public tertiary care center. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients met PDT criteria and underwent PDT at a median of 13 days (IQR 10, 18) from intubation. Patient characteristics are found in Table 1. Intravenous midazolam, fentanyl, and cisatracurium equivalents were significantly reduced 48 hours post-PDT (Table 2). Thirty-five patients were transferred from the ICU and liberated from the ventilator. Median time from PDT to ventilator liberation and ICU discharge was 10 (IQR 4, 14) and 12 (IQR 8, 17) days, respectively. Decannulation occurred in 45.5% and 52.7% were discharged from acute inpatient care (Figure 1). Median follow-up for the study was 62 days. Four patients had bleeding complications postoperatively and 11 died during the study period. Older age was associated with increased odds of complication (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.04, 1.23) and death (OR=1.15, 95% CI 1.05, 1.30). All operators tested negative for COVID-19 during the study period. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheostomy within the standard time frame can improve critical care capacity in areas strained by the pandemic with low risk to operators. Long-term outcomes after PDT deserve further study.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/surgery , Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Tracheostomy/statistics & numerical data , Age Factors , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , New York City/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Time Factors , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Tracheostomy/methods , Treatment Outcome , Ventilator Weaning/statistics & numerical data
11.
Head Neck ; 42(7): 1392-1396, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384168

ABSTRACT

The severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2 pandemic continues to produce a large number of patients with chronic respiratory failure and ventilator dependence. As such, surgeons will be called upon to perform tracheotomy for a subset of these chronically intubated patients. As seen during the SARS and the SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks, aerosol-generating procedures (AGP) have been associated with higher rates of infection of medical personnel and potential acceleration of viral dissemination throughout the medical center. Therefore, a thoughtful approach to tracheotomy (and other AGPs) is imperative and maintaining traditional management norms may be unsuitable or even potentially harmful. We sought to review the existing evidence informing best practices and then develop straightforward guidelines for tracheotomy during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This communication is the product of those efforts and is based on national and international experience with the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the SARS epidemic of 2002/2003.


Subject(s)
Clinical Decision-Making , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Hospital Mortality/trends , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/therapy , Tracheotomy/methods , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Critical Care/methods , Elective Surgical Procedures/methods , Elective Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Emergencies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Internationality , Intubation, Intratracheal , Male , Occupational Health , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Safety , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Risk Assessment , SARS Virus/pathogenicity , Survival Rate , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology , Ventilator Weaning/methods
13.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 8: CD014962, 2021 08 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1342863

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is an antiviral medicine with properties to inhibit viral replication of SARS-CoV-2. Positive results from early studies attracted media attention and led to emergency use authorisation of remdesivir in COVID-19.  A thorough understanding of the current evidence regarding the effects of remdesivir as a treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection based on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is required. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of remdesivir compared to placebo or standard care alone on clinical outcomes in hospitalised patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and to maintain the currency of the evidence using a living systematic review approach. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (which comprises the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and medRxiv) as well as Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded and Emerging Sources Citation Index) and WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies without language restrictions. We conducted the searches on 16 April 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We included RCTs evaluating remdesivir for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalised adults compared to placebo or standard care alone irrespective of disease severity, gender, ethnicity, or setting.  We excluded studies that evaluated remdesivir for the treatment of other coronavirus diseases. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess risk of bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane RoB 2 tool for RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for outcomes that were reported according to our prioritised categories: all-cause mortality at up to day 28, duration to liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation, duration to liberation from supplemental oxygen, new need for mechanical ventilation (high-flow oxygen or non-invasive or invasive mechanical ventilation), new need for invasive mechanical ventilation, new need for non-invasive mechanical ventilation or high-flow oxygen, new need for oxygen by mask or nasal prongs, quality of life, adverse events (any grade), and serious adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs with 7452 participants diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection and a mean age of 59 years, of whom 3886 participants were randomised to receive remdesivir. Most participants required low-flow oxygen (n=4409) or mechanical ventilation (n=1025) at baseline. We identified two ongoing studies, one was suspended due to a lack of COVID-19 patients to recruit. Risk of bias was considered to be of some concerns or high risk for clinical status and safety outcomes because participants who had died did not contribute information to these outcomes. Without adjustment, this leads to an uncertain amount of missing values and the potential for bias due to missing data. Effects of remdesivir in hospitalised individuals  Remdesivir probably makes little or no difference to all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.06; risk difference (RD) 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 21 fewer to 7 more; 4 studies, 7142 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Considering the initial severity of condition, only one study showed a beneficial effect of remdesivir in patients who received low-flow oxygen at baseline (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.66, 435 participants), but conflicting results exists from another study, and we were unable to validly assess this observations due to limited availability of comparable data. Remdesivir may have little or no effect on the duration to liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation (2 studies, 1298 participants, data not pooled, low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether remdesivir increases or decreases the chance of clinical improvement in terms of duration to liberation from supplemental oxygen at up to day 28 (3 studies, 1691 participants, data not pooled, very low-certainty evidence).   We are very uncertain whether remdesivir decreases or increases the risk of clinical worsening in terms of new need for mechanical ventilation at up to day 28 (high-flow oxygen or non-invasive ventilation or invasive mechanical ventilation) (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.24; RD 29 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 68 fewer to 32 more; 3 studies, 6696 participants; very low-certainty evidence); new need for non-invasive mechanical ventilation or high-flow oxygen (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.98; RD 72 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 118 fewer to 5 fewer; 1 study, 573 participants; very low-certainty evidence); and new need for oxygen by mask or nasal prongs (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.22; RD 84 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 204 fewer to 98 more; 1 study, 138 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that remdesivir may decrease the risk of clinical worsening in terms of new need for invasive mechanical ventilation (67 fewer participants amongst 1000 participants; RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.77; 2 studies, 1159 participants; low-certainty evidence).  None of the included studies reported quality of life. Remdesivir probably decreases the serious adverse events rate at up to 28 days (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.90; RD 63 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 94 fewer to 25 fewer; 3 studies, 1674 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether remdesivir increases or decreases adverse events rate (any grade) (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.27; RD 29 more per 1000, 95% CI 82 fewer to 158 more; 3 studies, 1674 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the currently available evidence, we are moderately certain that remdesivir probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality at up to day 28 in hospitalised adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection. We are uncertain about the effects of remdesivir on clinical improvement and worsening. There were insufficient data available to validly examine the effect of remdesivir on mortality in subgroups depending on the extent of respiratory support at baseline.  Future studies should provide additional data on efficacy and safety of remdesivir for defined core outcomes in COVID-19 research, especially for different population subgroups. This could allow us to draw more reliable conclusions on the potential benefits and harms of remdesivir in future updates of this review. Due to the living approach of this work, we will update the review periodically.


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Alanine/therapeutic use , Bias , COVID-19/mortality , Cause of Death , Confidence Intervals , Disease Progression , Humans , Middle Aged , Oxygen/administration & dosage , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2 , Ventilator Weaning
14.
Am J Phys Med Rehabil ; 100(8): 730-732, 2021 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1310969

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: A 66-yr-old man had been intubated for 21 days for severe COVID-19 infection. He then underwent tracheotomy, retained the tube for 2 mos, and then was discharged home on 10 liters of O2/min breathing via a tracheostomy collar. We were consulted for tracheostomy tube decannulation. Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation was used via the tracheostomy tube to clear secretions, increase vital capacity, and normalize O2 saturation. He practiced nasal and mouthpiece noninvasive ventilatory support once a capped fenestrated cuffless tracheostomy tube was placed, although he did not need noninvasive ventilatory support after decannulation. He was decannulated despite O2 dependence. Although he required antibiotics for almost 3 mos before decannulation and after it, he had no further episodes of lung infection for at least the next 4 mos from the point of decannulation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Tracheostomy , Ventilator Weaning/methods , Aged , Device Removal , Humans , Male , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
15.
Adv Respir Med ; 89(3): 299-310, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1291646

ABSTRACT

Methods for assessing diaphragmatic function can be useful in determining the functional status of the respiratory system and can contribute to determining an individual's prognosis, depending on their pathology. They can also be a useful tool for making objective decisions regarding mechanical ventilation weaning and extubation. Esophageal and transdiaphragmatic pressure measurement, diaphragm ultrasound, diaphragmatic excursion, surface electromyography (sEMG) and some serum biomarkers are of increasing interest and use in clinical and intensive care settings to offer a more objective process for withdrawing mechanical ventilation; especially in the situation that we are experiencing with the increased demand for mechanical ventilation to treat patients with Covid-19-associated viral pneumonia. In this literature review, we updated the clinical and physiological indicators with more evidence to improve ventilator withdrawal techniques. We concluded that, to ensure successful extubation in a way that is useful, cost-effective, practical for health personnel and non-invasive for the patient, further studies of novel techniques such as surface electromyography should be implemented.


Subject(s)
Airway Extubation/methods , COVID-19/therapy , Diaphragm/diagnostic imaging , Diaphragm/physiopathology , Ventilator Weaning/methods , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiratory Function Tests
16.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 13418, 2021 06 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1286475

ABSTRACT

In patients intubated for hypoxemic acute respiratory failure (ARF) related to novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), we retrospectively compared two weaning strategies, early extubation with immediate non-invasive ventilation (NIV) versus standard weaning encompassing spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), with respect to IMV duration (primary endpoint), extubation failures and reintubations, rate of tracheostomy, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay and mortality (additional endpoints). All COVID-19 adult patients, intubated for hypoxemic ARF and subsequently extubated, were enrolled. Patients were included in two groups, early extubation followed by immediate NIV application, and conventionally weaning after passing SBT. 121 patients were enrolled and analyzed, 66 early extubated and 55 conventionally weaned after passing an SBT. IMV duration was 9 [6-11] days in early extubated patients versus 11 [6-15] days in standard weaning group (p = 0.034). Extubation failures [12 (18.2%) vs. 25 (45.5%), p = 0.002] and reintubations [12 (18.2%) vs. 22 (40.0%) p = 0.009] were fewer in early extubation compared to the standard weaning groups, respectively. Rate of tracheostomy, ICU mortality, and ICU length of stay were no different between groups. Compared to standard weaning, early extubation followed by immediate NIV shortened IMV duration and reduced the rate of extubation failure and reintubation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/pathology , Noninvasive Ventilation/methods , Ventilator Weaning/methods , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/virology , Comorbidity , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Time Factors , Tracheostomy
17.
BMC Pulm Med ; 21(1): 202, 2021 Jun 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1274550

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Mechanical power (MP) of artificial ventilation, the energy transferred to the respiratory system, is a chief determinant of adequate oxygenation and decarboxylation. Calculated MP, the product of applied airway pressure and minute ventilation, may serve as an estimate of respiratory muscle workload when switching to spontaneous breathing. The aim of the study was to assess MP's discriminatory performance in predicting successful weaning from prolonged tracheostomy ventilation. METHODS: Prospective, observational study in 130 prolonged mechanically ventilated, tracheotomized patients in a specialized weaning center. Predictive weaning outcome ability of arterial blood gas analyses and indices derived from calculated MP at beginning and end of weaning was determined in terms of area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and measures derived from k-fold cross-validation (likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratio, F1 score, and Matthews correlation coefficient [MCC]). RESULTS: Forty-four (33.8%) patients experienced weaning failure. Absolute MP showed poor discrimination in predicting outcome; whereas specific MP (MP normalized to dynamic lung-thorax compliance, LTCdyn-MP) had moderate diagnostic accuracy (MCC 0.38; AUROC 0.79, 95%CI [0.71‒0.86], p < 0.001), further improved by correction for corresponding mechanical ventilation PaCO2 (termed the power index of the respiratory system [PIrs]: MCC 0.52; AUROC 0.86 [0.79‒0.92], p < 0.001). Diagnostic performance of MP indices increased over the course of weaning, with maximum accuracy immediately before completion (LTCdyn-MP: MCC 0.49; AUROC 0.86 [0.78‒0.91], p < 0.001; PIrs: MCC 0.68; AUROC 0.92 [0.86‒0.96], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: MP normalized to dynamic lung-thorax compliance, a surrogate for applied power per unit of ventilated lung volume, accurately discriminated between low and high risk for weaning failure following prolonged mechanical ventilation.


Subject(s)
Lung Compliance , Lung Volume Measurements , Respiration, Artificial , Ventilator Weaning , Aged , Area Under Curve , Blood Gas Analysis , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , ROC Curve , Respiratory Insufficiency/physiopathology , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy
18.
J Surg Res ; 266: 361-365, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1275539

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Tracheostomy improves outcomes for critically ill patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Data are limited on the use and benefit of tracheostomies for intubated, critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. During the surge in COVID 19 infections in metropolitan New York/New Jersey, our hospital cared for many COVID-19 patients who required prolonged intubation. This study describes the outcomes in COVID-19 patients who underwent tracheostomy. METHODS: We present a case series of patients with COVID-19 who underwent tracheostomy at a single institution. Tracheostomies were performed on patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation beyond 3 wk. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, and ventilator settings prior to tracheostomy were reviewed. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included time on mechanical ventilation, length of ICU and hospital stay, and discharge disposition. RESULTS: Fifteen COVID-19 patients underwent tracheostomy at an average of 31 d post intubation. Two patients (13%) died. Half of our cohort was liberated from the ventilator (8 patients, 53%), with an average time to liberation of 14 ± 6 d after tracheostomy. Among patients off mechanical ventilation, 5 (63%) had their tracheostomies removed prior to discharge. The average intensive care length of stay was 47 ± 13 d (range 29-74 d) and the average hospital stay was 59 ± 16 d (range 34-103 d). CONCLUSIONS: This study reports promising outcomes in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure and need for prolonged ventilation who undergo tracheostomy during their hospitalization. Further research is warranted to establish appropriate indications for tracheostomy in COVID-19 and confirm outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Intubation, Intratracheal/statistics & numerical data , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Tracheostomy/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care/methods , Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Critical Illness , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/mortality , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Tracheostomy/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Ventilator Weaning/statistics & numerical data
20.
J Hosp Palliat Nurs ; 23(4): 360-366, 2021 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1254921

ABSTRACT

Patients often receive burdensome care at the end of life in the form of interventions that may need to be removed. Heated high-flow oxygen delivered through a nasal cannula (HHFNC) is one such intervention that can be delivered in the hospital yet is rarely available outside of this setting. During the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, health care systems continue to face the possibility of rationing critical life-sustaining equipment that may include HHFNC. We present a clinical protocol designed for weaning HHFNC to allow a natural death and ensuring adequate symptom management throughout the process. This was a retrospective chart review of 8 patients seen by an inpatient palliative care service of an academic tertiary referral hospital who underwent terminal weaning of HHFNC using a structured protocol to manage dyspnea. Eight patients with diverse medical diagnoses, including COVID-19 pneumonia, underwent terminal weaning of HHFNC according to the clinical protocol with 4 down-titrations of approximately 25% for both fraction of inspired oxygen and liter flow with preemptive boluses of opioid and benzodiazepine. Clinical documentation supported good symptom control throughout the weaning process. This case series provides preliminary evidence that the clinical protocol proposed has the ability to ensure comfort through terminal weaning of HHFNC.


Subject(s)
Airway Extubation/methods , Terminal Care/organization & administration , Ventilator Weaning/methods , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Airway Extubation/nursing , Airway Extubation/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/nursing , Cannula/adverse effects , Clinical Protocols , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Terminal Care/psychology , Ventilator Weaning/nursing
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL