Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Circulatory Failure in COVID-19 Patients: Insights from the ECMOSARS Registry.

OBJECTIVES: The clinical profile and outcomes of patients with Covid-19 who require veno-arterial or veno-venous-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO - VAV-ECMO) are poorly understood. We aimed to describe the characteristics and outcomes of these patients and to identify predictors of both favorable and unfavorable outcomes. METHODS: ECMOSARS is a multicenter, prospective, nationwide French registry enrolling patients who require VV/VA-ECMO in the context of Covid-19 infection (652 patients at 41 centers). We focused on 47 patients supported with VA- or VAV-ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock. RESULTS: Median age was 49. 14% of patients had a prior diagnosis of heart failure. The most common etiologies of cardiogenic shock were acute pulmonary embolism (30%), myocarditis (28%), and acute coronary syndrome (4%). E-CPR (Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) occurred in 38%. In-hospital survival was 28% in the whole cohort, and 43% when E-CPR patients were excluded. ECMO cannulation was associated with significant improvements in pH and FiO2 on day one, but non-survivors showed significantly more severe acidosis and higher FiO2 than survivors at this point (p = 0.030 and p = 0.006). Other factors associated with death were greater age (p = 0.02), higher BMI (p = 0.03), E-CPR (p = 0.001), non-myocarditis etiology (p = 0.02), higher serum lactates (p = 0.004), epinephrine (but not noradrenaline) use before initiation of ECMO (p = 0.003), hemorrhagic complications (p = 0.001), greater transfusion requirements (p = 0.001), and more severe SAVE and SAFE scores (p = 0.01 and p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: We report the largest focused analysis of VA- and VAV-ECMO recipients in Covid-19. Although relatively rare, the need for temporary mechanical circulatory support in these patients is associated with poor prognosis. However, VA-ECMO remains a viable solution to rescue carefully selected patients. We identified factors associated with poor prognosis and suggest that E-CPR is not a reasonable indication for VA-ECMO in this population.

Hospital Memories and Six-Month Psychological Outcome: A Prospective Study in Critical Ill Patients with COVID-19 Respiratory Failure.

ICU survivors suffer from various long-term physical and psychological impairments. Memories from the critical illness may influence long-term psychological outcome. In particular, the role of ICU memories in COVID-19 critically ill patients is unknown. In a prospective observational study, we aimed to investigate patients' memories from the experience of critical illness and their association with a six-month psychological outcome involving quality of life evaluation. Patients' memories were investigated with ICU Memory tool, while psychological outcome and quality of life were evaluated by means of a battery of validated questionnaires during an in-person interview at the follow-up clinic. 149 adult patients were enrolled. 60% retained memories from pre-ICU days spent on a general ward, while 70% reported memories from the in-ICU period. Delusional memories (i.e., memories of facts that never happened) were reported by 69% of patients. According to a multivariable analysis, the lack of pre-ICU memories was an independent predictor of worse psychological outcomes in terms of anxiety, depression and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTDS). Factors associated with long-term outcome in ICU survivors are not still fully understood and patients' experience during the day spent before ICU admission may be associated with psychological sequelae.

Inhaled Nitric Oxide in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Subsets: Rationale and Clinical Applications.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening condition, characterized by diffuse inflammatory lung injury. Since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic spread worldwide, the most common cause of ARDS has been the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Both the COVID-19-associated ARDS and the ARDS related to other causes-also defined as classical ARDS-are burdened by high mortality and morbidity. For these reasons, effective therapeutic interventions are urgently needed. Among them, inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) has been studied in patients with ARDS since 1993 and it is currently under investigation. In this review, we aim at describing the biological and pharmacological rationale of iNO treatment in ARDS by elucidating similarities and differences between classical and COVID-19 ARDS. Thereafter, we present the available evidence on the use of iNO in clinical practice in both types of respiratory failure. Overall, iNO seems a promising agent as it could improve the ventilation/perfusion mismatch, gas exchange impairment, and right ventricular failure, which are reported in ARDS. In addition, iNO may act as a viricidal agent and prevent lung hyperinflammation and thrombosis of the pulmonary vasculature in the specific setting of COVID-19 ARDS. However, the current evidence on the effects of iNO on outcomes is limited and clinical studies are yet to demonstrate any survival benefit by administering iNO in ARDS.

Long-term physical impairments in survivors of COVID-19-associated ARDS compared with classic ARDS: A two-center study.

PURPOSE: This work aimed to compare physical impairment in survivors of classic ARDS compared with COVID-19-associated ARDS (CARDS) survivors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a prospective observational cohort study on 248 patients with CARDS and compared them with a historical cohort of 48 patients with classic ARDS. Physical performance was evaluated at 6 and 12 months after ICU discharge, using the Medical Research Council Scale (MRCss), 6-min walk test (6MWT), handgrip dynamometry (HGD), and fatigue severity score (FSS). We also assessed activities of daily living (ADLs) using the Barthel index. RESULTS: At 6 months, patients with classic ARDS had lower HGD (estimated difference [ED]: 11.71 kg, p < 0.001; ED 31.9% of predicted value, p < 0.001), 6MWT distance (ED: 89.11 m, p < 0.001; ED 12.96% of predicted value, p = 0.032), and more frequent significant fatigue (OR 0.35, p = 0.046). At 12 months, patients with classic ARDS had lower HGD (ED: 9.08 kg, p = 0.0014; ED 25.9% of predicted value, p < 0.001) and no difference in terms of 6MWT and fatigue. At 12 months, patients with classic ARDS improved their MRCss (ED 2.50, p = 0.006) and HGD (ED: 4.13 kg, p = 0.002; ED 9.45% of predicted value, p = 0.005), while those with CARDS did not. Most patients in both groups regained independence in ADLs at 6 months. COVID-19 diagnosis was a significant independent predictor of better HGD (p < 0.0001) and 6MWT performance (p = 0.001), and lower prevalence of fatigue (p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Both classic ARDS and CARDS survivors experienced long-term impairments in physical functioning, confirming that post-intensive care syndrome remains a major legacy of critical illness. Surprisingly, however, persisting disability was more common in survivors of classic ARDS than in CARDS survivors. In fact, muscle strength measured with HGD was reduced in survivors of classic ARDS compared to CARDS patients at both 6 and 12 months. The 6MWT was reduced and fatigue was more common in classic ARDS compared to CARDS at 6 months but differences were no longer significant at 12 months. Most patients in both groups regained independent function in ADLs at 6 months.

In-hospital and 6-month outcomes in patients with COVID-19 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (EuroECMO-COVID): a multicentre, prospective observational study.

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.

A multidisciplinary approach to screen the post-COVID-19 conditions.

BACKGROUND: Post-COronaVIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) conditions (PCC) include multiple symptoms afflicting different organs and systems. To evaluate the frequency and type of them, we described our multidisciplinary approach with preliminary results of the first enrolled patients. METHODS: We included patients aged ≥ 18 years with hospital admission for confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Symptoms were grouped in five macro groups hereafter referred to as "Symptoms Category" (SC): respiratory SC (dyspnoea or cough), neurological SC (peripheral neuropathies, headache, impaired mobility, behavioural disorders), psychological SC (sleep disorders, mood disorders), muscular SC (arthromyalgia, asthenia), other SC (fever, alopecia, diarrhoea, weight loss, smell and taste alterations, sexual dysfunctions). SC were evaluated at discharge and at follow-up. Association between patients' characteristics and presence of SC at follow up was estimated by a logistic multivariable regression model. RESULTS: From June 2020 to July 2021, we followed up 361 patients: 128 (35.5%) who were previously admitted to Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and 233 patients to ordinary department. The median length of hospital stay was 20 days (Inter-Quartile-Range 13-32). Most patients (317/361, 87.8%) were still symptomatic at discharge, with one third referring three or more SC. At follow up, 67.3% (243/361) of patients still complained at least one SC. Moreover, 159 patients (44%) developed at least one new involved SC during follow up: 116 (72.9%) one SC, 39 (24.5%) two SC, 4 (2.5%) three or more SC. At follow up visit 130 of 361 (36%) were still with SC developed during follow up. At multivariable analysis presence of any SC at follow-up was associated with male gender (Odds Ratio [OR] 3.23, Confidence Interval [CI] 95% 1.46-7.15), ICU admission (OR 2.78, CI 95% 1.29-5.96) and presence of SC at discharge (OR 14.39, CI 95% 6.41-32.32). CONCLUSIONS: In our sample of patients with severe COVID-19, we found that PCC are highly variable and fluctuating over time; in particular, in about 50% of our patients new SC appear during follow up. Moreover, presence of PCC also in patients without SC at discharge and the variability of symptoms underlining the advisability of our multidisciplinary approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04424992, registered on 28 February 2020 https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/results?recrs=ab&cond=&term=NCT04424992&cntry=&state=&city=&dist The current version of protocol is version 1.0 enrolling since June 2020. The enrollment is still ongoing.

Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for COVID-19-associated acute myocardial injury complicated by refractory cardiogenic shock.

Cardiovascular system involvement and its negative prognostic impact have been increasingly identified in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Optimal medical treatment allows for safe management of most of these cardiovascular presentations while COVID-19-associated refractory cardiogenic shock could be rescued by veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). We present a case of acute myocardial injury related to COVID-19 complicated by refractory cardiogenic shock and treated by VA-ECMO implantation.

Role of Complete Duplex Ultrasound to Diagnose Deep Vein Thrombosis in COVID-19 Critical Patients.

An increased risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) has been reported in critical COVID-19 patients, despite adequate thromboprophylaxis, and most of DVT are probably asymptomatic. As a screening approach has been advocated, the best examination protocol is unknown. The objective of this study is to assess the role of a Complete Duplex Ultrasound (CDUS) examination in detecting DVT in a large population of COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory failure. Single-center retrospective study of 145 COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU. DVT was assessed with a CDUS performed by experienced radiologist after ICU admission. DVT was confirmed in 38 patients (26%). Most DVT were distal to the knee (66%), while only 16% were proximal. At the time of the examination, 55% of the patients received full-dose anticoagulation, while 45% received thromboprophylaxis, and there were no differences in anticoagulation regimen between positive and negative patients. Patients with DVT had higher dimers compared with those with negative CDUS (P < .002). The observed frequency of DVT is high despite adequate anticoagulation. A comprehensive and experienced ultrasound examination protocol can allow to recognize a large number of distal DVT otherwise missed, albeit their clinical significance is unknown.