Predicting Impact of Prone Position on Oxygenation in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Prone positioning is widely used in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19; however, the specific clinical scenario in which the individual is most poised to benefit is not fully established. In patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, how effective is prone positioning in improving oxygenation and can that response be predicted? DESIGN: This is a retrospective observational study from two tertiary care centers including consecutive patients mechanically ventilated for COVID-19 from 3/1/2020 - 7/1/2021. The primary outcome is improvement in oxygenation as measured by PaO2/FiO2. We describe oxygenation before, during and after prone episodes with a focus on identifying patient, respiratory or ventilator variables that predict prone positioning success. SETTING: 2 Tertiary Care Academic Hospitals. PATIENTS: 125 patients mechanically ventilated for COVID-19 respiratory failure. INTERVENTIONS: Prone positioning. MAIN RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five patients underwent prone positioning a total of 309 times for a median duration of 23 hours IQR (14 - 49). On average, PaO2/FiO2 improved 19%: from 115 mm Hg (80 - 148) immediately before proning to 137 mm Hg (95 - 197) immediately after returning to the supine position. Prone episodes were more successful if the pre-prone PaO2/FiO2 was lower and if the patient was on inhaled epoprostenol (iEpo). For individuals with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (PaO2/FiO2 < 100 prior to prone positioning) and on iEpo, the median improvement in PaO2/FiO2 was 27% in both instances. CONCLUSIONS: Prone positioning in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 is generally associated with sustained improvements in oxygenation, which is made more likely by the concomitant use of iEpo and is more impactful in those who are more severely hypoxemic prior to prone positioning.

Thrombotic and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Hematologic Malignancy and COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in acute COVID-19 and those with hematologic malignancy (HM) may be at an even higher risk. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with history of HM and acute COVID-19 to evaluate thrombotic and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Patients with COVID-19 were identified by positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. Our primary endpoints were rate of VTE and CVA in patients with HM compared to the general population (GP). Secondary outcomes included composite thrombotic events (CVA + VTE), COVID-19 fatality, respiratory support, ICU admission rates, and length of ICU stay RESULTS: A total of 833 patients were evaluated, 709 in the GP cohort, 124 patients in the HM cohort. CVA was more prevalent in the HM cohort (5.4% vs. 1.6%, P = .011). Rates of VTE were numerically higher for the HM cohort (8.0% vs. 3.6%, P = .069). The composite thrombotic rate was increased in the HM cohort (13.4% vs. 5.2%, P = .005). Patients with HM had a higher inpatient fatality rate (35.5% vs. 11.3%, P < .001), required more respiratory support (74.6% vs. 46.5%, P < .001) and had a higher rate of ICU admission (31.9% vs. 12.1%, P = .001). CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrated an increased rate of composite thrombotic (CVA + VTE) outcomes, indicating HM patients with acute COVID-19 are at increased risk of thrombosis. Irrespective of disease status, HM patients also have significantly increased need for intensive care, respiratory support, and have higher fatality rates.

Expectant Management of Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia in Late Preterm Pregnancy and Subsequent Cholecystitis: Lessons Learned.

Introduction Since the emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic in March 2020, research and guidance have been published with regard to the management of infection and considerations in pregnancy, but much is still unknown. Pregnant women with COVID-19 infection are more likely to be hospitalized and are at increased risk for intensive care unit admissions and intubation than nonpregnant women with COVID-19 infection. The optimal timing of delivery among pregnant women with COVID-19 infection has not been established at this time, especially when the infection arises in late preterm and early term gestation. It is suggested that COVID-19 infection should not be considered a sole indication for delivery. The risks and benefits of prolonging pregnancy versus delivery should be taken into consideration at any given gestational age in a patient with COVID-19 infection. Case Report We report a case of a patient in the late third trimester of pregnancy that presented with severe COVID-19 infection and was managed expectantly through her disease course with improvement of respiratory status without necessitating delivery. We also discuss the unique development of cholecystitis in her hospitalization that may represent another clinical association to COVID-19 infection. Conclusion This case illustrates that delaying delivery is an option even in later gestational ages for maternal stabilization. A multidisciplinary approach and teamwork is needed to manage pregnant women with COVID-19 infection for optimal outcomes for both mother and fetus. Key Points Delaying delivery in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection is a reasonable option even in late gestation.A multidisciplinary team is of utmost importance when managing a pregnant woman with COVID-19.Other clinical sequalae such as cholecystitis may arise in the setting of COVID-19 infection.

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.