Is Olfactory Testing a Useful Diagnostic Tool to Identify SARS-CoV-2 Infections Early? A Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Genesis and the prognostic value of olfactory dysfunction (OD) in COVID-19 remain partially described. The objective of our study was to characterize OD during SARS-CoV-2 infection and to examine whether testing of OD may be a useful tool in clinical practice in order to early identify patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Olfactory function assessment was objectively carried out using the u-Smell-it® test. In a cross-sectional study part, we evaluated this test in a control cohort of SARS-CoV-2 negative tested patients, who attended the University Hospital Frankfurt between May 2021 and March 2022. In a second longitudinal study part, sensitivity and specificity of OD was evaluated as a diagnostic marker of a SARS-CoV-2 infection in Frankfurt am Main, Germany in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients and their close contacts. RESULTS: Among 494 SARS-CoV-2 negative tested patients, OD was detected in 45.7% and was found to be significantly associated with the male gender (p < 0.001), higher age (p < 0.001), cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities (p < 0.001; p = 0.03). Among 90 COVID-19 positive patients, OD was found in 65.6% and was significantly associated with male gender and positive smoking status (p = 0.04 each). Prevalence and severity of OD were significantly increased in infections with the Delta variant (B.1.617.2) compared to those with the Omicron variant (BA.1.1.529). Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of OD for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection were 69% and 64%, respectively. CONCLUSION: OD is common in COVID-19 negative and positive tested patients with significantly different prevalence rates observed between different variants. Diagnostic accuracy of OD is not high enough to implement olfactory testing as a tool in diagnostic routine to early identify patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The APSANTICO Study: A Prospective Observational Study to Evaluate Antiphospholipid Antibody Profiles in Patients with Thromboembolic Antiphospholipid Syndrome (APS) after COVID-19 Infection and/or Vaccination.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a new virus discovered in December 2019 that causes coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) and various vaccinations have been developed. The extent to which COVID-19 infections and/or COVID-19 vaccinations alter antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) in patients with thromboembolic antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) remains unclear. Eighty-two patients with confirmed thromboembolic APS were included in this prospective non-interventional trial. Blood parameters including lupus anticoagulants, anticardiolipin IgG- and IgM-antibodies, and anti-ß2-glycoprotein I IgG- and IgM-antibodies were assessed prior to and after COVID-19 vaccination and/or COVID-19 infection. No increases in aPL in the total study population were detected. In fact, low but significant decreases were observed for anticardiolipin IgG- and anti-ß2-glycoprotein I IgG-antibodies, while anticardiolipin IgM- and anti-b2-glycoprotein I IgM-antibodies slightly increased only in patients with COVID-19 infection and vaccination. Although the investigated patient group is known to have a high risk of recurrent thrombosis, only one arterial thrombotic event was diagnosed (1.2%, 1/82). This low recurrence rate was probably due to the high vaccination rates prior to infections and a high rate of effective anticoagulation. Our data show that COVID-19 infections and/or vaccinations do not deteriorate the clinical course of anticoagulated thromboembolic APS patients.

Heterologous prime-boost immunization with ChAdOx1-S and BNT162b2: reactogenicity and immunogenicity in a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Regarding reactogenicity and immunogenicity, heterologous COVID-19 vaccination regimens are considered as an alternative to conventional immunization schemes. METHODS: Individuals receiving either heterologous (ChAdOx1-S [AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK]/BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech, Mainz, Germany]; n = 306) or homologous (messenger RNA [mRNA]-1273 [Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA]; n = 139) vaccination were asked to participate when receiving their second dose. Reactogenicity was assessed after 1 month, immunogenicity after 1, 3, and/or 6 months, including a third dose, through SARS-CoV-2 antispike immunoglobulin G, surrogate virus neutralization test, and a plaque reduction neutralization test against the Delta (B.1.167.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529; BA.1) variants of concern. RESULTS: The overall reactogenicity was lower after heterologous vaccination. In both cohorts, SARS-CoV-2 antispike immunoglobulin G concentrations waned over time with the heterologous vaccination demonstrating higher neutralizing activity than homologous mRNA vaccination after 3 months to low neutralizing levels in the Delta plaque reduction neutralization test after 6 months. At this point, 3.2% of the heterologous and 11.4% of the homologous cohort yielded low neutralizing activity against Omicron. After a third dose of an mRNA vaccine, ≥99% of vaccinees demonstrated positive neutralizing activity against Delta. Depending on the vaccination scheme and against Omicron, 60% to 87.5% of vaccinees demonstrated positive neutralizing activity. CONCLUSION: ChAdOx1-S/BNT162b2 vaccination demonstrated an acceptable reactogenicity and immunogenicity profile. A third dose of an mRNA vaccine is necessary to maintain neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2. However, variants of concern-adapted versions of the vaccines would be desirable.

SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody therapies: an early retrospective cohort study of 26 hospitalized patients treated with bamlanivimab or casirivimab/imdevimab.

OBJECTIVES: In this early retrospective cohort study, a total of 26 patients with SARS-CoV-2 were treated with bamlanivimab or casirivimab/imdevimab, and the reduction of the viral load associated with the developed clinical symptoms was analyzed. METHODS: Patients in the intervention groups received bamlanivimab or casirivimab/imdevimab. Patients without treatment served as control. Outcomes were assessed by clinical symptoms and change in log viral load from baseline based on the cycle threshold over a period of 18 days. RESULTS: Median log viral load decline was higher in both intervention groups after 3 and 6 days compared to control. However, at later time points, the decline of the viral load was more distinct in the control group. Mild symptoms of COVID-19 were observed in 6.3% of the intervention groups and in no patient of the control. No patients treated with bamlanivimab, 18.8% treated with casirivimab/imdevimab, and 14.2% in the control group developed moderate symptoms. Severe symptoms were recorded only in the control group (14.2%), including one related death. CONCLUSION: Treatment with monoclonal SARS-CoV-2 antibodies seems to accelerate decline of virus loads, especially in the first 6 days after administration, compared to control. This may be associated with a reduced likeliness of a severe course of COVID-19.

Electroencephalogram-Based Evaluation of Impaired Sedation in Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19 ARDS.

The sedation management of patients with severe COVID-19 is challenging. Processed electroencephalography (pEEG) has already been used for sedation management before COVID-19 in critical care, but its applicability in COVID-19 has not yet been investigated. We performed this prospective observational study to evaluate whether the patient sedation index (PSI) obtained via pEEG may adequately reflect sedation in ventilated COVID-19 patients. Statistical analysis was performed by linear regression analysis with mixed effects. We included data from 49 consecutive patients. None of the patients received neuromuscular blocking agents by the time of the measurement. The mean value of the PSI was 20 (±23). The suppression rate was determined to be 14% (±24%). A deep sedation equivalent to the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale of -3 to -4 (correlation expected PSI 25-50) in bedside examination was noted in 79.4% of the recordings. Linear regression analysis revealed a significant correlation between the sedative dosages of propofol, midazolam, clonidine, and sufentanil (p < 0.01) and the sedation index. Our results showed a distinct discrepancy between the RASS and the determined PSI. However, it remains unclear to what extent any discrepancy is due to the electrophysiological effects of neuroinflammation in terms of pEEG alteration, to the misinterpretation of spinal or vegetative reflexes during bedside evaluation, or to other causes.

Association of mortality and early tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19: a retrospective analysis.

COVID-19 adds to the complexity of optimal timing for tracheostomy. Over the course of this pandemic, and expanded knowledge of the disease, many centers have changed their operating procedures and performed an early tracheostomy. We studied the data on early and delayed tracheostomy regarding patient outcome such as mortality. We performed a retrospective analysis of all tracheostomies at our institution in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from March 2020 to June 2021. Time from intubation to tracheostomy and mortality of early (≤ 10 days) vs. late (> 10 days) tracheostomy were the primary objectives of this study. We used mixed cox-regression models to calculate the effect of distinct variables on events. We studied 117 tracheostomies. Intubation to tracheostomy shortened significantly (Spearman's correlation coefficient; rho = - 0.44, p ≤ 0.001) during the course of this pandemic. Early tracheostomy was associated with a significant increase in mortality in uni- and multivariate analysis (Hazard ratio 1.83, 95% CI 1.07-3.17, p = 0.029). The timing of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients has a potentially critical impact on mortality. The timing of tracheostomy has changed during this pandemic tending to be performed earlier. Future prospective research is necessary to substantiate these results.

Limited neutralisation of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants BA.1 and BA.2 by convalescent and vaccine serum and monoclonal antibodies.

BACKGROUND: In recent months, Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2 have become dominant in many regions of the world, and case numbers with Omicron subvariants BA.1 and BA.2 continue to increase. Due to numerous mutations in the spike protein, the efficacy of currently available vaccines, which are based on Wuhan-Hu 1 isolate of SARS-CoV-2, is reduced, leading to breakthrough infections. Efficacy of monoclonal antibody therapy is also likely impaired. METHODS: In our in vitro study using A549-AT cells constitutively expressing ACE2 and TMPRSS2, we determined and compared the neutralizing capacity of vaccine-elicited sera, convalescent sera and monoclonal antibodies against authentic SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 compared with Delta. FINDINGS: Almost no neutralisation of Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 was observed using sera from individuals vaccinated with two doses 6 months earlier, regardless of the type of vaccine taken. Shortly after the booster dose, most sera from triple BNT162b2-vaccinated individuals were able to neutralise both Omicron variants. In line with waning antibody levels three months after the booster, only weak residual neutralisation was observed for BA.1 (26%, n = 34, 0 median NT50) and BA.2 (44%, n = 34, 0 median NT50). In addition, BA.1 but not BA.2 was resistant to the neutralising monoclonal antibodies casirivimab/imdevimab, while BA.2 exhibited almost a complete evasion from the neutralisation induced by sotrovimab. INTERPRETATION: Both SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants BA.1 and BA.2 escape antibody-mediated neutralisation elicited by vaccination, previous infection with SARS-CoV-2, and monoclonal antibodies. Waning immunity renders the majority of tested sera obtained three months after booster vaccination negative in BA.1 and BA.2 neutralisation. Omicron subvariant specific resistance to the monoclonal antibodies casirivimab/imdevimab and sotrovimab emphasizes the importance of genotype-surveillance and guided application. FUNDING: This study was supported in part by the Goethe-Corona-Fund of the Goethe University Frankfurt (M.W.) and the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (COVIDready; grant 02WRS1621C (M.W.).

Low But Recoverable Markers of Humoral Immune Response to BNT162b2 in Elderly LTCF Residents Five to Seven Months After Two-Dose Vaccination.

The immune response is known to wane after vaccination with BNT162b2, but the role of age, morbidity and body composition is not well understood. We conducted a cross-sectional study in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) for the elderly. All study participants had completed two-dose vaccination with BNT162b2 five to 7 months before sample collection. In 298 residents (median age 86 years, range 75-101), anti-SARS-CoV-2 rector binding IgG antibody (anti-RBD-IgG) concentrations were low and inversely correlated with age (mean 51.60 BAU/ml). We compared the results to Health Care Workers (HCW) aged 18-70 years (n = 114, median age: 53 years), who had a higher mean anti-RBD-IgG concentration of 156.99 BAU/ml. Neutralization against the Delta variant was low in both groups (9.5% in LTCF residents and 31.6% in HCWs). The Charlson Comorbidity Index was inversely correlated with anti-RBD-IgG, but not the body mass index (BMI). A control group of 14 LTCF residents with known breakthrough infection had significant higher antibody concentrations (mean 3,199.65 BAU/ml), and 85.7% had detectable neutralization against the Delta variant. Our results demonstrate low but recoverable markers of immunity in LTCF residents five to 7 months after vaccination.

Electroencephalogram-Based Evaluation of Impaired Sedation in Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19 ARDS

The sedation management of patients with severe COVID-19 is challenging. Processed electroencephalography (pEEG) has already been used for sedation management before COVID-19 in critical care, but its applicability in COVID-19 has not yet been investigated. We performed this prospective observational study to evaluate whether the patient sedation index (PSI) obtained via pEEG may adequately reflect sedation in ventilated COVID-19 patients. Statistical analysis was performed by linear regression analysis with mixed effects. We included data from 49 consecutive patients. None of the patients received neuromuscular blocking agents by the time of the measurement. The mean value of the PSI was 20 (±23). The suppression rate was determined to be 14% (±24%). A deep sedation equivalent to the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale of −3 to −4 (correlation expected PSI 25–50) in bedside examination was noted in 79.4% of the recordings. Linear regression analysis revealed a significant correlation between the sedative dosages of propofol, midazolam, clonidine, and sufentanil (p < 0.01) and the sedation index. Our results showed a distinct discrepancy between the RASS and the determined PSI. However, it remains unclear to what extent any discrepancy is due to the electrophysiological effects of neuroinflammation in terms of pEEG alteration, to the misinterpretation of spinal or vegetative reflexes during bedside evaluation, or to other causes.

Transient hypoalgesia after COVID-19 infection.

Introduction: Loss of smell or taste are often-cited complications during COVID-19 disease, but there is no clear evidence for affection of the peripheral nervous system. Methods: Here, we report a 48-year-old man presenting with persistent dysgeusia and hypoalgesia of the lower legs, hands, and cheeks after COVID-19 infection in Spring 2020. Results: Upon clinical examination 7 months after the infection, the patient could not feel pain after pinprick stimuli. Quantitative sensory testing revealed increased thermal detection thresholds at the face but no changes at the foot. Electrical C-fiber stimulation elicited lower pain ratings at the distal leg compared with the proximal leg, but overall higher pain ratings than in healthy control subjects. The axon flare reaction in response to histamine and acetylcholine was almost absent with no pain sensation. Skin punch biopsy revealed a reduced intraepidermal nerve fiber density at the lower leg, and transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 and calcitonin gene-related peptide immunoreactivity were similar to a healthy control. Symptoms and positive tests improved 5 months later. Conclusion: In summary, we describe a case of hypoalgesia after COVID-19 disease. Studies investigating long-COVID syndrome should test not only for painful neuropathic symptoms but also for hypoalgesia, especially in patients with prolonged dysgeusia.

Evaluation of volatile sedation in the postoperative intensive care of patients recovering from heart valve surgery: protocol for a randomised, controlled, monocentre trial.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing heart valve surgery are predominantly transferred postoperatively to the intensive care unit (ICU) under continuous sedation. Volatile anaesthetics are an increasingly used treatment alternative to intravenous substances in the ICU. As subject to inhalational uptake and elimination, the resulting pharmacological benefits have been repeatedly demonstrated. Therefore, volatile anaesthetics appear suitable to meet the growing demands of fast-track cardiac surgery. However, their use requires special preparation at the bedside and trained medical and nursing staff, which might limit the pharmacological benefits. The aim of our work is to assess whether the temporal advantages of recovery under volatile sedation outweigh the higher effort of special preparation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is designed to evaluate the differences between intravenous sedatives (n=48) and volatile sedatives (n=48) in continued intensive care sedation. This study will be conducted as a prospective, randomised, controlled, single-blinded, monocentre trial at a German university hospital in consenting adult patients undergoing heart valve surgery at a university hospital. This observational study will examine the necessary preparation time, staff consultation and overall feasibility of the chosen sedation method. For this purpose, the continuation of sedation in the ICU with volatile sedatives is considered as one study arm and with intravenous sedatives as the comparison group. Due to rapid elimination and quick awakening after the termination of sedation, closer consultation between the attending physician and the ICU nursing staff is required, in addition to a prolonged setup time. Study analysis will include the required setup time, time from admission to extubation as primary outcome and neurocognitive assessability. In addition, possible operation-specific (blood loss, complications), treatment parameters (catecholamine dosages, lung function) and laboratory results (acute kidney injury, acid base balance (lactataemia), liver failure) as influencing factors will be collected. The study-relevant data will be extracted from the continuous digital records of the patient data management system after the patient has been discharged from the ICU. For statistical evaluation, 95% CIs will be calculated for the median time to extubation and neurocognitive assessability, and the association will be assessed with a Cox regression model. In addition, secondary binary outcome measures will be evaluated using Fisher's exact tests. Further descriptive and exploratory statistical analyses are also planned. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Board of the University of Frankfurt, Germany (#20-1050). Informed consent of all individual patients will be obtained before randomisation. Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinical trials registration (NCT04958668) was completed on 1 July 2021.

Associated Factors of High Sedative Requirements within Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19 ARDS.

The coronavirus pandemic continues to challenge global healthcare. Severely affected patients are often in need of high doses of analgesics and sedatives. The latter was studied in critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in this prospective monocentric analysis. COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients admitted between 1 April and 1 December 2020 were enrolled in the study. A statistical analysis of impeded sedation using mixed-effect linear regression models was performed. Overall, 114 patients were enrolled, requiring unusual high levels of sedatives. During 67.9% of the observation period, a combination of sedatives was required in addition to continuous analgesia. During ARDS therapy, 85.1% (n = 97) underwent prone positioning. Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) was required in 20.2% (n = 23) of all patients. vv-ECMO patients showed significantly higher sedation needs (p < 0.001). Patients with hepatic (p = 0.01) or renal (p = 0.01) dysfunction showed significantly lower sedation requirements. Except for patient age (p = 0.01), we could not find any significant influence of pre-existing conditions. Age, vv-ECMO therapy and additional organ failure could be demonstrated as factors influencing sedation needs. Young patients and those receiving vv-ECMO usually require increased sedation for intensive care therapy. However, further studies are needed to elucidate the causes and mechanisms of impeded sedation.

Self-Collected Samples to Detect SARS-CoV-2: Direct Comparison of Saliva, Tongue Swab, Nasal Swab, Chewed Cotton Pads and Gargle Lavage.

Testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by RT-PCR is a vital public health tool in the pandemic. Self-collected samples are increasingly used as an alternative to nasopharyngeal swabs. Several studies suggested that they are sufficiently sensitive to be a useful alternative. However, there are limited data directly comparing several different types of self-collected materials to determine which material is preferable. A total of 102 predominantly symptomatic adults with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection self-collected native saliva, a tongue swab, a mid-turbinate nasal swab, saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad and gargle lavage, within 48 h of initial diagnosis. Sample collection was unsupervised. Both native saliva and gargling with tap water had high diagnostic sensitivity of 92.8% and 89.1%, respectively. Nasal swabs had a sensitivity of 85.1%, which was not significantly inferior to saliva (p = 0.092), but 16.6% of participants reported they had difficult in self-collection of this sample. A tongue swab and saliva obtained by chewing a cotton pad had a significantly lower sensitivity of 74.2% and 70.2%, respectively. Diagnostic sensitivity was not related to the presence of clinical symptoms or to age. When comparing self-collected specimens from different material, saliva, gargle lavage or mid-turbinate nasal swabs may be considered for most symptomatic patients. However, complementary experiments are required to verify that differences in performance observed among the five sampling modes were not attributed to collection impairment.

Projections of Primary and Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty until 2040: Facing a Massive Rise in Fracture-Related Procedures.

Although the demand for shoulder arthroplasties has reached its highest number worldwide, there remains a lack of epidemiologic data regarding recent and future trends. In this study, data for all shoulder arthroplasties (hemiarthroplasty, reverse/anatomic shoulder arthroplasty) from the nationwide inpatient statistics of Germany (2010-2019) and population forecasts until 2040 were gathered. A Poisson and a negative binomial approach using monotone B-splines were modeled for all types of prostheses to project the annual number and incidence of primary and revision arthroplasty. Additionally, trends in main indicators were also gathered and expected changes were calculated. Overall, the number of primary shoulder replacements is set to increase significantly by 2040, reaching at least 37,000 (95% CI 32,000-44,000) procedures per year. This trend is mainly attributable to an about 10-fold increased use of fracture-related reverse shoulder arthroplasty in patients over 80 years of age, although the number of procedures in younger patients will also rise substantially. In contrast, hemiarthroplasties will significantly decrease. The number of revision procedures is projected to increase subsequently, although the revision burden is forecast to decline. Using these country-specific projection approaches, a massive increase of primary and revision shoulder arthroplasties is expected by 2040, mainly due to a rising number of fracture-related procedures. These growth rates are substantially higher than those from hip or knee arthroplasty. As these trends are similar in most Western countries, this draws attention to the international issue, of: if healthcare systems will be able to allocate human and financial resources adequately, and if future research and fracture-prevention programs may help to temper this rising burden in the upcoming decades.

Longitudinal Testing for Respiratory and Gastrointestinal Shedding of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Day Care Centers in Hesse, Germany.

BACKGROUND: With the pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) ongoing in Europe in June 2020, day care centers were reopened in the state of Hesse, Germany, after the lockdown. The role young children play in the dynamics of the transmission was unknown. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal study over 12 weeks and 2 days (18 June 2020-10 September 2020) to screen attendees and staff from day care centers in the state of Hesse, Germany, for both respiratory and gastrointestinal shedding of SARS-CoV-2. A total of 859 children (age range, 3 months-8 years) and 376 staff members from 50 day care centers, which were chosen representatively from throughout the state, participated in the study. Parents were asked to collect both a buccal mucosa and an anal swab from their children once a week. Staff were asked to self-administer the swabs. Reverse transcriptas polymerase chain reaction for SARS-CoV-2 was performed in a multiple-swab pooling protocol. RESULTS: A total of 7366 buccal mucosa swabs and 5907 anal swabs were analyzed. No respiratory or gastrointestinal shedding of SARS-CoV-2 was detected in any of the children. Shedding of SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 2 staff members from distinct day care centers. One was asymptomatic at the time of testing, and one was symptomatic and did not attend the facility on that day. CONCLUSION: Detection of either respiratory or gastrointestinal shedding of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in children and staff members attending day care centers was rare in the context of limited community activity and with infection prevention measures in the facilities in place.

COVID-19 among children seeking primary paediatric care with signs of an acute infection.

AIM: It can be challenging to distinguish COVID-19 in children from other common infections. We set out to determine the rate at which children consulting a primary care paediatrician with an acute infection are infected with SARS-CoV-2 and to compare distinct findings. METHOD: In seven out-patient clinics, children aged 0-13 years with any new respiratory or gastrointestinal symptoms and presumed infection were invited to be tested for SARS-CoV-2. Factors that were correlated with testing positive were determined. Samples were collected from 25 January 2021 to 01 April 2021. RESULTS: Seven hundred and eighty-three children participated in the study (median age 3 years and 0 months, range 1 month to 12 years and 11 months). Three hundred and fifty-eight were female (45.7%). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 19 (2.4%). The most common symptoms in children with as well as without detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA were rhinitis, fever and cough. Known recent exposure to a case of COVID-19 was significantly correlated with testing positive, but symptoms or clinical findings were not. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 among the children with symptoms of an acute infection was uncommon, and the clinical presentation did not differ significantly between children with and without evidence of an infection with SARS-CoV-2.

High sedation needs of critically ill COVID-19 ARDS patients-A monocentric observational study.

BACKGROUND: Therapy of severely affected coronavirus patient, requiring intubation and sedation is still challenging. Recently, difficulties in sedating these patients have been discussed. This study aims to describe sedation practices in patients with 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS: We performed a retrospective monocentric analysis of sedation regimens in critically ill intubated patients with respiratory failure who required sedation in our mixed 32-bed university intensive care unit. All mechanically ventilated adults with COVID-19-induced ARDS requiring continuously infused sedative therapy admitted between April 4, 2020, and June 30, 2020 were included. We recorded demographic data, sedative dosages, prone positioning, sedation levels and duration. Descriptive data analysis was performed; for additional analysis, a logistic regression with mixed effect was used. RESULTS: In total, 56 patients (mean age 67 (±14) years) were included. The mean observed sedation period was 224 (±139) hours. To achieve the prescribed sedation level, we observed the need for two or three sedatives in 48.7% and 12.8% of the cases, respectively. In cases with a triple sedation regimen, the combination of clonidine, esketamine and midazolam was observed in most cases (75.7%). Analgesia was achieved using sufentanil in 98.6% of the cases. The analysis showed that the majority of COVID-19 patients required an unusually high sedation dose compared to those available in the literature. CONCLUSION: The global pandemic continues to affect patients severely requiring ventilation and sedation, but optimal sedation strategies are still lacking. The findings of our observation suggest unusual high dosages of sedatives in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. Prescribed sedation levels appear to be achievable only with several combinations of sedatives in most critically ill patients suffering from COVID-19-induced ARDS and a potential association to the often required sophisticated critical care including prone positioning and ECMO treatment seems conceivable.

Greater Fibrinolysis Resistance but No Greater Platelet Aggregation in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: The hemostatic balance in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) seems to be shifted toward a hypercoagulable state. The aim of the current study was to assess the associated coagulation alterations by point-of-care-diagnostics, focusing on details of clot formation and lysis in these severely affected patients. METHODS: The authors' prospective monocentric observational study included critically ill patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Demographics and biochemical data were recorded. To assess the comprehensive hemostatic profile of this patient population, aggregometric (Multiplate) and viscoelastometric (CloPro) measures were performed in the intensive care unit of a university hospital at a single occasion. Coagulation analysis and assessment of coagulation factors were performed. Data were compared to healthy controls. RESULTS: In total, 27 patients (21 male; mean age, 60 yr) were included. Impedance aggregometry displayed no greater platelet aggregability in COVID-19 in comparison with healthy controls (area under the curve [AUC] in adenosine diphosphate test, 68 ± 37 U vs. 91 ± 29 U [-27 (Hodges-Lehmann 95% CI, -48 to -1); P = 0.043]; AUC in arachidonic acid test, 102 ± 54 U vs. 115 ± 26 U [-21 (Hodges-Lehmann 95% CI, -51 to 21); P = 0.374]; AUC in thrombin receptor activating peptide 6 test, 114 ± 61 U vs. 144 ± 31 U [-31 (Hodges-Lehmann 95% CI, -69 to -7); P = 0.113]). Comparing the thromboelastometric results of COVID-19 patients to healthy controls, the authors observed significant differences in maximum clot firmness in fibrin contribution to maximum clot firmness assay (37 ± 11 mm vs. 15 ± 4 mm [21 (Hodges-Lehmann 95% CI, 17 to 26); P < 0.001]) and lysis time in extrinsic activation and activation of fibrinolysis by tissue plasminogen activator assay (530 ± 327 s vs. 211 ± 80 s [238 (Hodges-Lehmann 95% CI, 160 to 326); P < 0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: Thromboelastometry in COVID-19 patients revealed greater fibrinolysis resistance. The authors did not find a greater platelet aggregability based on impedance aggregometric tests. These findings may contribute to our understanding of the hypercoagulable state of critically ill patients with COVID-19.