Maternal transfer of IgA and IgG SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies transplacentally and via breast milk feeding.

BACKGROUND: Although there have been many studies on antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in breast milk, very few have looked at the fate of these in the infant, and whether they are delivered to immunologically relevant sites in infants. METHODS: Mother/infant pairs (mothers who breast milk fed and who were SARS-CoV-2 vaccinated before or after delivery) were recruited for this cross-sectional study. Mother blood, mother breast milk, infant blood, infant nasal specimen, and infant stool was tested for IgA and IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike trimer. RESULTS: Thirty-one mother/infant pairs were recruited. Breast milk fed infants acquired systemic anti-spike IgG antibodies only if their mothers were vaccinated antepartum (100% Antepartum; 0% Postpartum; P<0.0001). Breast milk fed infants acquired mucosal anti-spike IgG antibodies (in the nose) only if their mothers were vaccinated antepartum (89% Antepartum; 0% Postpartum; P<0.0001). None of the infants in either group had anti-spike IgA in the blood. Surprisingly, 33% of the infants whose mothers were vaccinated antepartum had high titer anti-spike IgA in the nose (33% Antepartum; 0% Postpartum; P = 0.03). Half-life of maternally transferred plasma IgG antibodies in the Antepartum infant cohort was ~70 days. CONCLUSION: Vaccination antepartum followed by breast milk feeding appears to be the best way to provide systemic and local anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies for infants. The presence of high titer SARS-CoV-2-specific IgA in the nose of infants points to the potential importance of breast milk feeding early in life for maternal transfer of mucosal IgA antibodies. Expectant mothers should consider becoming vaccinated antepartum and consider breast milk feeding for optimal transfer of systemic and mucosal antibodies to their infants.

Decreased PRESET-Score corresponds with improved survival in COVID-19 veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: The PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy Score (PRESET-Score) predicts mortality while on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) for acute respiratory distress syndrome. The aim of our study was to assess the association between PRESET-Score and survival in a large COVID-19 VV ECMO cohort. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study of COVID-19 VV ECMO patients from 15 March 2020, to 30 November 2021. Univariable and Multivariable analyses were performed to assess patient survival and score differences. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients were included in our analysis with a mean PRESET-Score of 6.74. Overall survival was 65.71%. The mean PRESET-Score was significantly lower in the survivor group (6.03 vs 8.11, p < 0.001). Patients with a PRESET-Score less than or equal to six had improved survival compared to those with a PRESET-Score greater than or equal to 8 (97.7% vs. 32.5%, p < 0.001). In a multivariable logistic regression, a lower PRESET-Score was also predictive of survival (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.75, 4.63, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that lower PRESET scores are associated with improved survival. The utilization of this validated, quantifiable, and objective scoring system to help identify COVID-19 patients with the greatest potential to benefit from VV-ECMO appears feasible. The incorporation of the PRESET-Score into institutional ECMO candidacy guidelines can help insure and improve access of this limited healthcare resource to all critically ill patients.

Body mass index does not impact survival in COVID-19 patients requiring veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: With the increased demand for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) during the COVID-19 pandemic, guidelines for patient candidacy have often limited this modality for patients with a body mass index (BMI) less than 40 kg/m2. We hypothesize that COVID-19 VV ECMO patients with at least class III obesity (BMI ≥ 40) have decreased in-hospital mortality when compared to non-COVID-19 and non-class III obese COVID-19 VV ECMO populations. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study of COVID-19 VV ECMO patients from January 1, 2014, to November 30, 2021. Our institution used BMI ≥ 40 as part of a multi-disciplinary VV ECMO candidate screening process in COVID-19 patients. BMI criteria were not considered for exclusion criteria in non-COVID-19 patients. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to assess in-hospital mortality differences. RESULTS: A total of 380 patients were included in our analysis: The COVID-19 group had a lower survival rate that was not statistically significant (65.7% vs.74.9%, p = .07). The median BMI between BMI ≥ 40 COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients was not different (44.5 vs 45.5, p = .2). There was no difference in survival between the groups (73.3% vs. 78.5%, p = .58), nor was there a difference in survival between the COVID-19 BMI ≥ 40 and BMI < 40 patients (73.3, 62.7, p= .29). Multivariable logistic regression with the outcome of in-hospital mortality was performed and BMI was not found to be significant (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.89, 1.01; p = .92). CONCLUSION: BMI ≥ 40 was not an independent risk factor for decreased in-hospital survival in this cohort of VV ECMO patients at a high-volume center. BMI should not be the sole factor when deciding VV ECMO candidacy in patients with COVID-19.

Mortality Risk Assessment in COVID-19 Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

BACKGROUND: A life-threatening complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) refractory to conventional management. Venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (VV-ECMO) is used to support patients with ARDS in whom conventional management fails. Scoring systems to predict mortality in VV-ECMO remain unvalidated in COVID-19 ARDS. This report describes a large single-center experience with VV-ECMO in COVID-19 and assesses the utility of standard risk calculators. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospective database of all patients with COVID-19 who underwent VV-ECMO cannulation between March 15 and June 27, 2020 at a single academic center was performed. Demographic, clinical, and ECMO characteristics were collected. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; survivor and nonsurvivor cohorts were compared by using univariate and bivariate analyses. RESULTS: Forty patients who had COVID-19 and underwent ECMO were identified. Of the 33 patients (82.5%) in whom ECMO had been discontinued at the time of analysis, 18 patients (54.5%) survived to hospital discharge, and 15 (45.5%) died during ECMO. Nonsurvivors presented with a statistically significant higher Prediction of Survival on ECMO Therapy (PRESET)-Score (mean ± SD, 8.33 ± 0.8 vs 6.17 ± 1.8; P = .001). The PRESET score demonstrated accurate mortality prediction. All patients with a PRESET-Score of 6 or lowers survived, and a score of 7 or higher was associated with a dramatic increase in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that favorable outcomes are possible in patients with COVID-19 who undergo ECMO at high-volume centers. This study demonstrated an association between the PRESET-Score and survival in patients with COVID-19 who underwent VV-ECMO. Standard risk calculators may aid in appropriate selection of patients with COVID-19 ARDS for ECMO.

A Dedicated Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Unit during a Respiratory Pandemic: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Part II: Clinical Management.

(1) Background: COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS) has several distinctions from traditional acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); however, patients with refractory respiratory failure may still benefit from veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) support. We report our challenges caring for CARDS patients on VV-ECMO and alterations to traditional management strategies. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of our institutional strategies for managing patients with COVID-19 who required VV-ECMO in a dedicated airlock biocontainment unit (BCU), from March to June 2020. The data collected included the time course of admission, VV-ECMO run, ventilator length, hospital length of stay, and major events related to bleeding, such as pneumothorax and tracheostomy. The dispensation of sedation agents and trial therapies were obtained from institutional pharmacy tracking. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed. (3) Results: Forty COVID-19 patients on VV-ECMO were managed in the BCU during this period, from which 21 survived to discharge and 19 died. The criteria for ECMO initiation was altered for age, body mass index, and neurologic status/cardiac arrest. All cannulations were performed with a bedside ultrasound-guided percutaneous technique. Ventilator and ECMO management were routed in an ultra-lung protective approach, though varied based on clinical setting and provider experience. There was a high incidence of pneumothorax (n = 19). Thirty patients had bedside percutaneous tracheostomy, with more procedural-related bleeding complications than expected. A higher use of sedation was noted. The timing of decannulation was also altered, given the system constraints. A variety of trial therapies were utilized, and their effectiveness is yet to be determined. (4) Conclusions: Even in a high-volume ECMO center, there are challenges in caring for an expanded capacity of patients during a viral respiratory pandemic. Though institutional resources and expertise may vary, it is paramount to proceed with insightful planning, the recognition of challenges, and the dynamic application of lessons learned when facing a surge of critically ill patients.

A Dedicated Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Unit during a Respiratory Pandemic: Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Part I: System Planning and Care Teams.

BACKGROUND: The most critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may require advanced support modalities, such as veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO). A systematic, methodical approach to a respiratory pandemic on a state and institutional level is critical. METHODS: We conducted retrospective review of our institutional response to the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the creation of a dedicated airlock biocontainment unit (BCU) to treat patients with refractory COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS). Data were collected through conversations with staff on varying levels in the BCU, those leading the effort to make the BCU and hospital incident command system, email communications regarding logistic changes being implemented, and a review of COVID-19 patient census at our institution from March through June 2020. RESULTS: Over 2100 patients were successfully admitted to system hospitals; 29% of these patients required critical care. The response to this respiratory pandemic augmented intensive care physician staffing, created a 70-member nursing team, and increased the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) capability by nearly 200%. During this time period, 40 COVID-19 patients on VV-ECMO were managed in the BCU. Challenges in an airlock unit included communication, scarcity of resources, double-bunking, and maintaining routine care. CONCLUSIONS: Preparing for a surge of critically ill patients during a pandemic can be a daunting task. The implementation of a coordinated, system-level approach can help with the allocation of resources as needed. Focusing on established strengths of hospitals within the system can guide triage based on individual patient needs. The management of ECMO patients is still a specialty care, and a systematic and hospital based approach requiring an ECMO team composed of multiple experienced individuals is paramount during a respiratory viral pandemic.

Extracorporeal Life Support (ECLS): A Review and Focus on Considerations for COVID-19.

ABSTRACT: Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is a support modality for patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who have failed conventional treatments including low tidal volume ventilation, prone positioning, and neuromuscular blockade. In addition, ECLS can be used for hemodynamic support for patients with cardiogenic shock or following cardiac arrest. Injured patients may also require ECLS support for ARDS and other indications. We review the use of ECLS for ARDS patients, trauma patients, cardiogenic shock patients, and post-cardiac arrest patients. We then describe how these principles are applied in the management of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Indications, predictors, procedural considerations, and post-cannulation management strategies are discussed.