Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 13 de 13
Filtrar
1.
Lancet Respir Med ; 2022 Nov 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2232716

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) has been widely used in patients with COVID-19, but uncertainty remains about the determinants of in-hospital mortality and data on post-discharge outcomes are scarce. The aims of this study were to investigate the variables associated with in-hospital outcomes in patients who received ECMO during the first wave of COVID-19 and to describe the status of patients 6 months after ECMO initiation. METHODS: EuroECMO-COVID is a prospective, multicentre, observational study developed by the European Extracorporeal Life Support Organization. This study was based on data from patients aged 16 years or older who received ECMO support for refractory COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic-from March 1 to Sept 13, 2020-at 133 centres in 21 countries. In-hospital mortality and mortality 6 months after ECMO initiation were the primary outcomes. Mixed-Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate associations between patient and management-related variables (eg, patient demographics, comorbidities, pre-ECMO status, and ECMO characteristics and complications) and in-hospital deaths. Survival status at 6 months was established through patient contact or institutional charts review. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04366921, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between March 1 and Sept 13, 2020, 1215 patients (942 [78%] men and 267 [22%] women; median age 53 years [IQR 46-60]) were included in the study. Median ECMO duration was 15 days (IQR 8-27). 602 (50%) of 1215 patients died in hospital, and 852 (74%) patients had at least one complication. Multiorgan failure was the leading cause of death (192 [36%] of 528 patients who died with available data). In mixed-Cox analyses, age of 60 years or older, use of inotropes and vasopressors before ECMO initiation, chronic renal failure, and time from intubation to ECMO initiation of 4 days or more were associated with higher in-hospital mortality. 613 patients did not die in hospital, and 547 (95%) of 577 patients for whom data were available were alive at 6 months. 102 (24%) of 431 patients had returned to full-time work at 6 months, and 57 (13%) of 428 patients had returned to part-time work. At 6 months, respiratory rehabilitation was required in 88 (17%) of 522 patients with available data, and the most common residual symptoms included dyspnoea (185 [35%] of 523 patients) and cardiac (52 [10%] of 514 patients) or neurocognitive (66 [13%] of 512 patients) symptoms. INTERPRETATION: Patient's age, timing of cannulation (<4 days vs ≥4 days from intubation), and use of inotropes and vasopressors are essential factors to consider when analysing the outcomes of patients receiving ECMO for COVID-19. Despite post-discharge survival being favourable, persisting long-term symptoms suggest that dedicated post-ECMO follow-up programmes are required. FUNDING: None.

2.
Perfusion ; 38(1_suppl): 13-23, 2023 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2194903

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: An analysis on the ECLS use for patients with respiratory or cardiac support in COVID-19 based on an international response to EuroELSO survey, aims to generate a more comprehensive understanding of ECLS role during the recent viral pandemic. METHODS: EuroELSO announced the survey at the 10th annual congress in London, May 2022. The survey covered 26 multiple-choice questions. RESULTS: The survey returned 69 questionnaires from 62 centers across 22 European countries and seven centers across five non-European countries. Most of the centers providing ECLS for COVID-19 patients had more than 30 runs for respiratory support since December 2019. In the same period, at least 31 runs in adult COVID-19 patients have been performed in 48 of 69 centers (69.6%). The reported pediatric data from 18 centers is limited to less than the patients per center. CONCLUSION: Majority of the COVID-19 patients received respiratory ECLS support and adult patients dominated. The indications and contraindications are broadly aligned with available guidelines. Most of the centers considered age >65 or biological age as a relative or absolute contraindication for ECLS in COVID-19. ECLS withdrawal criteria in COVID-19 are controversial because the long-term outcomes after ECLS in COVID-19 and the impact of critical illness and the impact of long-COVID are still not known.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Adulto , Humanos , Niño , COVID-19/epidemiología , Síndrome Post Agudo de COVID-19 , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Pandemias
3.
N Engl J Med ; 387(12): 1089-1098, 2022 09 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2036975

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure and cardiovascular death among patients with chronic heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less. Whether SGLT2 inhibitors are effective in patients with a higher left ventricular ejection fraction remains less certain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 6263 patients with heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction of more than 40% to receive dapagliflozin (at a dose of 10 mg once daily) or matching placebo, in addition to usual therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of worsening heart failure (which was defined as either an unplanned hospitalization for heart failure or an urgent visit for heart failure) or cardiovascular death, as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: Over a median of 2.3 years, the primary outcome occurred in 512 of 3131 patients (16.4%) in the dapagliflozin group and in 610 of 3132 patients (19.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.92; P<0.001). Worsening heart failure occurred in 368 patients (11.8%) in the dapagliflozin group and in 455 patients (14.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.91); cardiovascular death occurred in 231 patients (7.4%) and 261 patients (8.3%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.05). Total events and symptom burden were lower in the dapagliflozin group than in the placebo group. Results were similar among patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 60% or more and those with a left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 60%, and results were similar in prespecified subgroups, including patients with or without diabetes. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin reduced the combined risk of worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death among patients with heart failure and a mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. (Funded by AstraZeneca; DELIVER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03619213.).


Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2 , Volumen Sistólico , Función Ventricular Izquierda , Compuestos de Bencidrilo/efectos adversos , Compuestos de Bencidrilo/uso terapéutico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Glucósidos/efectos adversos , Glucósidos/uso terapéutico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/complicaciones , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/tratamiento farmacológico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/mortalidad , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Humanos , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2/efectos adversos , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2/farmacología , Inhibidores del Cotransportador de Sodio-Glucosa 2/uso terapéutico , Volumen Sistólico/efectos de los fármacos , Función Ventricular Izquierda/efectos de los fármacos
4.
Intensive Care Med ; 48(1): 1-15, 2022 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1800370

RESUMEN

Rates of survival with functional recovery for both in-hospital and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest are notably low. Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is emerging as a modality to improve prognosis by augmenting perfusion to vital end-organs by utilizing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) during conventional CPR and stabilizing the patient for interventions aimed at reversing the aetiology of the arrest. Implementing this emergent procedure requires a substantial investment in resources, and even the most successful ECPR programs may nonetheless burden healthcare systems, clinicians, patients, and their families with unsalvageable patients supported by extracorporeal devices. Non-randomized and observational studies have repeatedly shown an association between ECPR and improved survival, versus conventional CPR, for in-hospital cardiac arrest in select patient populations. Recently, randomized controlled trials suggest benefit for ECPR over standard resuscitation, as well as the feasibility of performing such trials, in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest within highly coordinated healthcare delivery systems. Application of these data to clinical practice should be done cautiously, with outcomes likely to vary by the setting and system within which ECPR is initiated. ECPR introduces important ethical challenges, including whether it should be considered an extension of CPR, at what point it becomes sustained organ replacement therapy, and how to approach patients unable to recover or be bridged to heart replacement therapy. The economic impact of ECPR varies by health system, and has the potential to outstrip resources if used indiscriminately. Ideally, studies should include economic evaluations to inform health care systems about the cost-benefits of this therapy.


Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario , Adulto , Reanimación Cardiopulmonar/métodos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/métodos , Humanos , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/terapia
7.
N Engl J Med ; 384(24): 2283-2294, 2021 06 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1275997

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Targeted temperature management is recommended for patients after cardiac arrest, but the supporting evidence is of low certainty. METHODS: In an open-label trial with blinded assessment of outcomes, we randomly assigned 1900 adults with coma who had had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac or unknown cause to undergo targeted hypothermia at 33°C, followed by controlled rewarming, or targeted normothermia with early treatment of fever (body temperature, ≥37.8°C). The primary outcome was death from any cause at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included functional outcome at 6 months as assessed with the modified Rankin scale. Prespecified subgroups were defined according to sex, age, initial cardiac rhythm, time to return of spontaneous circulation, and presence or absence of shock on admission. Prespecified adverse events were pneumonia, sepsis, bleeding, arrhythmia resulting in hemodynamic compromise, and skin complications related to the temperature management device. RESULTS: A total of 1850 patients were evaluated for the primary outcome. At 6 months, 465 of 925 patients (50%) in the hypothermia group had died, as compared with 446 of 925 (48%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94 to 1.14; P = 0.37). Of the 1747 patients in whom the functional outcome was assessed, 488 of 881 (55%) in the hypothermia group had moderately severe disability or worse (modified Rankin scale score ≥4), as compared with 479 of 866 (55%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.09). Outcomes were consistent in the prespecified subgroups. Arrhythmia resulting in hemodynamic compromise was more common in the hypothermia group than in the normothermia group (24% vs. 17%, P<0.001). The incidence of other adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with coma after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, targeted hypothermia did not lead to a lower incidence of death by 6 months than targeted normothermia. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; TTM2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02908308.).


Asunto(s)
Fiebre/terapia , Hipotermia Inducida , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/terapia , Anciano , Temperatura Corporal , Reanimación Cardiopulmonar/métodos , Coma/etiología , Coma/terapia , Femenino , Fiebre/etiología , Humanos , Hipotermia Inducida/efectos adversos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/complicaciones , Paro Cardíaco Extrahospitalario/mortalidad , Método Simple Ciego , Resultado del Tratamiento
8.
Artif Organs ; 45(5): 495-505, 2021 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1085292

RESUMEN

Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is a means to support patients with acute respiratory failure. Initially, recommendations to treat severe cases of pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with ECLS have been restrained. In the meantime, ECLS has been shown to produce similar outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 compared to existing data on ARDS mortality. We performed an international email survey to assess how ECLS providers worldwide have previously used ECLS during the treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19. A questionnaire with 45 questions (covering, e.g., indication, technical aspects, benefit, and reasons for treatment discontinuation), mostly multiple choice, was distributed by email to ECLS centers. The survey was approved by the European branch of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO); 276 ECMO professionals from 98 centers in 30 different countries on four continents reported that they employed ECMO for very severe COVID-19 cases, mostly in veno-venous configuration (87%). The most common reason to establish ECLS was isolated hypoxemic respiratory failure (50%), followed by a combination of hypoxemia and hypercapnia (39%). Only a small fraction of patients required veno-arterial cannulation due to heart failure (3%). Time on ECLS varied between less than 2 and more than 4 weeks. The main reason to discontinue ECLS treatment prior to patient's recovery was lack of clinical improvement (53%), followed by major bleeding, mostly intracranially (13%). Only 4% of respondents reported that triage situations, lack of staff or lack of oxygenators, were responsible for discontinuation of ECLS support. Most ECLS physicians (51%, IQR 30%) agreed that patients with COVID-19-induced ARDS (CARDS) benefitted from ECLS. Overall mortality of COVID-19 patients on ECLS was estimated to be about 55%. ECLS has been utilized successfully during the COVID-19 pandemic to stabilize CARDS patients in hypoxemic or hypercapnic lung failure. Age and multimorbidity limited the use of ECLS. Triage situations were rarely a concern. ECLS providers stated that patients with severe COVID-19 benefitted from ECLS.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/terapia , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapia , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapia , Enfermedad Crítica , Humanos , Internacionalidad , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/virología , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/virología , SARS-CoV-2 , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
13.
ESC Heart Fail ; 7(5): 2093-2097, 2020 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-661006

RESUMEN

AIMS: A reduction of habitual physical activity due to prolonged COVID-19 quarantine can have serious consequences for patients with cardiovascular diseases, such as heart failure. This study aimed to explore the effect of COVID-19 nationwide quarantine on accelerometer-assessed physical activity of heart failure patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed the daily number of steps in 26 heart failure patients during a 6-week period that included 3 weeks immediately preceding the onset of the quarantine and the first 3 weeks of the quarantine. The daily number of steps was assessed using a wrist-worn accelerometer worn by the patients as part of an ongoing randomized controlled trial. Multilevel modelling was used to explore the effect of the quarantine on the daily step count adjusted for weather conditions. As compared with the 3 weeks before the onset of the quarantine, the step count was significantly lower during each of the first 3 weeks of the quarantine (P < 0.05). When the daily step count was averaged across the 3 weeks before and during the quarantine, the decrease amounted to 1134 (SE 189) steps per day (P < 0.001), which translated to a 16.2% decrease. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of the nationwide quarantine due to COVID-19 had a detrimental effect on the level of habitual physical activity in heart failure patients, leading to an abrupt decrease of daily step count that lasted for at least the 3-week study period. Staying active and maintaining sufficient levels of physical activity during the COVID-19 pandemic are essential despite the unfavourable circumstances of quarantine.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/prevención & control , Ejercicio Físico/fisiología , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/rehabilitación , Pandemias/prevención & control , Aptitud Física/fisiología , Neumonía Viral/prevención & control , Cuarentena , Prueba de Paso/estadística & datos numéricos , Acelerometría/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , COVID-19 , Estudios de Cohortes , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Femenino , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/fisiopatología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pandemias/estadística & datos numéricos , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Pronóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA