Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
Lancet Respir Med ; 11(6): 520-529, 2023 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2221525

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: A key unresolved controversy in severe COVID-19 pneumonitis in pregnancy is the optimum timing of delivery and whether delivery improves or worsens maternal outcomes. We aimed to assess clinical data on every intensive care unit (ICU) day for pregnant and postpartum women admitted to the ICU with COVID-19, with a particular focus on the days preceding and following delivery. METHODS: In this multicentre, nationwide, prospective and retrospective cohort study, we evaluated all pregnant women who were admitted to an ICU in Israel with severe COVID-19 pneumonitis from the 13th week of gestation to the 1st week postpartum. We excluded pregnant patients in which the ICU admission was unrelated to severe COVID-19 pneumonitis. We assessed maternal and neonatal outcomes and longitudinal clinical and laboratory ICU data. The primary overall outcome was maternal outcome (worst of the following: no invasive positive pressure ventilation [IPPV], use of IPPV, use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [ECMO], or death). The primary longitudinal outcome was Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, and the secondary longitudinal outcome was the novel PORCH (positive end-expiratory pressure [PEEP], oxygenation, respiratory support, chest x-ray, haemodynamic support) score. Patients were classified into four groups: no-delivery (pregnant at admission and no delivery during the ICU stay), postpartum (ICU admission ≥1 day after delivery), delivery-critical (pregnant at admission and receiving or at high risk of requiring IPPV at the time of delivery), or delivery-non-critical (pregnant at admission and not critically ill at the time of delivery). FINDINGS: From Feb 1, 2020, to Jan 31, 2022, 84 patients were analysed: 34 patients in the no-delivery group, four in postpartum, 32 in delivery-critical, and 14 in delivery-non-critical. The delivery-critical and postpartum groups had worse outcomes than the other groups: 26 (81%) of 32 patients in the delivery-critical group and four (100%) of four patients in the postpartum group required IPPV; 12 (38%) and three (75%) patients required ECMO, and one (3%) and two (50%) patients died, respectively. The delivery-non-critical and no-delivery groups had far better outcomes than other groups: six (18%) of 34 patients and two (14%) of 14 patients required IPPV, respectively; no patients required ECMO or died. Oxygen saturation (SpO2), SpO2 to fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratio (S/F ratio), partial pressure of arterial oxygen to FiO2 ratio (P/F ratio), ROX index (S/F ratio divided by respiratory rate), and SOFA and PORCH scores were all highly predictive for adverse maternal outcome (p<0·0001). The delivery-critical group deteriorated on the day of delivery, continued to deteriorate throughout the ICU stay, and took longer to recover (ICU duration, Mantel-Cox p<0·0001), whereas the delivery-non-critical group improved rapidly following delivery. The day of delivery was a significant covariate for PORCH (p<0·0001) but not SOFA (p=0·09) scores. INTERPRETATION: In patients who underwent delivery during their ICU stay, maternal outcome deteriorated following delivery among those defined as critical compared with non-critical patients, who improved following delivery. Interventional delivery should be considered for maternal indications before patients deteriorate and require mechanical ventilation. FUNDING: None.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Recién Nacido , Femenino , Humanos , Embarazo , COVID-19/terapia , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Retrospectivos , Israel/epidemiología , Estudios Prospectivos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Periodo Posparto , Oxígeno
2.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 11(1)2023 Jan 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2167042

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In March 2020, COVID-19 was announced as a global pandemic. The first COVID-19 patient was connected to an ECMO device in Israel during that time. Since then, over 200 patients have required ECMO support due to COVID-19 infection. The present study is a multi-institutional analysis of all COVID-19 patients requiring veno-venous (VV) ECMO in Israel. The aim was to characterize and compare the survivors and deceased patients as well as establish risk factors for mortality. METHODS: This retrospective multi-institutional study was conducted from March 2020 to March 2021 in eleven of twelve ECMO centers operating in Israel. All COVID-19 patients on VV ECMO support were included in the cohort. The patients were analyzed based on their comorbidities, procedural data, adverse event on ECMO, and outcomes. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare the deceased and the surviving patients. RESULTS: The study included 197 patients, of which 150 (76%) were males, and the mean age was 50.7 ± 12 years. Overall mortality was 106 (54%). Compared with the deceased subjects, survivors were significantly younger (48 ± 11 vs. 53 ± 12 years), suffered less from ischemic heart disease (IHD) (3% vs. 12%), and were ventilated for a significantly shorter period (≤4 days) prior to cannulation (77% vs. 63%). Patients in the deceased group experienced more kidney failure and sepsis. Rates of other complications were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, we conclude that early cannulation (≤4 days) of younger patients (≤55 years) may improve overall survival and that a history of IHD might indicate a reduced prognosis.

3.
4.
PLoS One ; 17(5): e0267506, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1841151

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In COVID-19 patients, lung ultrasound is superior to chest radiograph and has good agreement with computerized tomography to diagnose lung pathologies. Most lung ultrasound protocols published to date are complex and time-consuming. We describe a new illustrative Point-of-care ultrasound Lung Injury Score (PLIS) to help guide the care of patients with COVID-19 and assess if the PLIS would be able to predict COVID-19 patients' clinical course. METHODS: This retrospective study describing the novel PLIS was conducted in a large tertiary-level hospital. COVID-19 patients were included if they required any form of respiratory support and had at least one PLIS study during hospitalization. Data collected included PLIS on admission, demographics, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores, and patient outcomes. The primary outcome was the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients and 293 PLIS studies were included in our analysis. The mean age was 60.9, and overall mortality was 18.3%. Median PLIS score was 5.0 (3.0-6.0) vs. 2.0 (1.0-3.0) in ICU and non-ICU patients respectively (p<0.001). Total PLIS scores were directly associated with SOFA scores (inter-class correlation 0.63, p<0.001), and multivariate analysis showed that every increase in one PLIS point was associated with a higher risk for ICU admission (O.R 2.09, 95% C.I 1.59-2.75) and in-hospital mortality (O.R 1.54, 95% C.I 1.10-2.16). CONCLUSIONS: The PLIS for COVID-19 patients is simple and associated with SOFA score, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality. Further studies are needed to demonstrate whether the PLIS can improve outcomes and become an integral part of the management of COVID-19 patients.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/diagnóstico por imagen , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Pulmón/diagnóstico por imagen , Persona de Mediana Edad , Puntuaciones en la Disfunción de Órganos , Sistemas de Atención de Punto , Pronóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos
5.
European journal of internal medicine ; 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1678822
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA