Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Añadir filtros

Base de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año
1.
JTCVS Tech ; 16: 109-116, 2022 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2147955

RESUMEN

Objectives: Proning patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has been associated with increased survival, although few data exist evaluating the safety and feasibility of proning patients with ARDS on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Methods: A single-institution retrospective review of all patients with ARDS placed on ECMO between March 1 and May 31, 2020, was performed. All proning events were evaluated for complications, as well as change in compliance, sweep, oxygenation, and flow. The primary outcome of this study was the rate major morbidity associated with proning while on ECMO. Results: In total, 30 patients were placed on ECMO for ARDS, with 12 patients (40%) proned while on ECMO. A total of 83 proning episodes occurred, with a median of 7 per patient (interquartile range, 3-9). No ECMO cannula-associated bleeding, cannula displacement, or endotracheal tune dislodgements occurred (0%). Oropharyngeal bleeding occurred twice (50%). Four patients were proned with chest tubes in place, and none had complications (0%). Lung compliance improved after proning in 70 events (84%), from a mean of 15.4 mL/mm Hg preproning to 20.6 mL/mm Hg postproning (P < .0001). Sweep requirement decreased in 36 events (43%). Oxygenation improved in 63 events (76%), from a mean partial pressure of oxygen of 86 preproning to 103 postproning (P < .0001). Mean ECMO flow was unchanged. Conclusions: Proning in patients with ARDS on ECMO is safe with an associated improvement in lung mechanics. With careful planning and coordination, these data support the practice of appropriately proning patients with severe ARDS, even if they are on ECMO.

2.
Crit Care Med ; 49(7): 1058-1067, 2021 07 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1494030

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of percutaneous dilational tracheostomy in coronavirus disease 2019 patients requiring mechanical ventilation and the risk for healthcare providers. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study; patients were enrolled between March 11, and April 29, 2020. The date of final follow-up was July 30, 2020. We used a propensity score matching approach to compare outcomes. Study outcomes were formulated before data collection and analysis. SETTING: Critical care units at two large metropolitan hospitals in New York City. PATIENTS: Five-hundred forty-one patients with confirmed severe coronavirus disease 2019 respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: Bedside percutaneous dilational tracheostomy with modified visualization and ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Required time for discontinuation off mechanical ventilation, total length of hospitalization, and overall patient survival. Of the 541 patients, 394 patients were eligible for a tracheostomy. One-hundred sixteen were early percutaneous dilational tracheostomies with median time of 9 days after initiation of mechanical ventilation (interquartile range, 7-12 d), whereas 89 were late percutaneous dilational tracheostomies with a median time of 19 days after initiation of mechanical ventilation (interquartile range, 16-24 d). Compared with patients with no tracheostomy, patients with an early percutaneous dilational tracheostomy had a higher probability of discontinuation from mechanical ventilation (absolute difference, 30%; p < 0.001; hazard ratio for successful discontinuation, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.34-5.84; p = 0.006) and a lower mortality (absolute difference, 34%, p < 0.001; hazard ratio for death, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.06-0.22; p < 0.001). Compared with patients with late percutaneous dilational tracheostomy, patients with early percutaneous dilational tracheostomy had higher discontinuation rates from mechanical ventilation (absolute difference 7%; p < 0.35; hazard ratio for successful discontinuation, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.3; p = 0.04) and had a shorter median duration of mechanical ventilation in survivors (absolute difference, -15 d; p < 0.001). None of the healthcare providers who performed all the percutaneous dilational tracheostomies procedures had clinical symptoms or any positive laboratory test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: In coronavirus disease 2019 patients on mechanical ventilation, an early modified percutaneous dilational tracheostomy was safe for patients and healthcare providers and associated with improved clinical outcomes.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/terapia , Respiración Artificial , Traqueostomía/métodos , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Cuidados Críticos , Dilatación/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ciudad de Nueva York/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2 , Factores de Tiempo
3.
AJP Rep ; 10(2): e169-e175, 2020 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-620868

RESUMEN

There is a current paucity of information about the obstetric and perinatal outcomes of pregnant novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in North America. Data from China suggest that pregnant women with COVID-19 have favorable maternal and neonatal outcomes, with rare cases of critical illness or respiratory compromise. However, we report two cases of pregnant women diagnosed with COVID-19 in the late preterm period admitted to tertiary care hospitals in New York City for respiratory indications. After presenting with mild symptoms, both quickly developed worsening respiratory distress requiring intubation, and both delivered preterm via caesarean delivery. These cases highlight the potential for rapid respiratory decompensation in pregnant COVID-19 patients and the maternal-fetal considerations in managing these cases.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA