Death following pulmonary complications of surgery before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the impact of pulmonary complications on death after surgery both before and during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. METHODS: This was a patient-level, comparative analysis of two, international prospective cohort studies: one before the pandemic (January-October 2019) and the second during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (local emergence of COVID-19 up to 19 April 2020). Both included patients undergoing elective resection of an intra-abdominal cancer with curative intent across five surgical oncology disciplines. Patient selection and rates of 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications were compared. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Mediation analysis using a natural-effects model was used to estimate the proportion of deaths during the pandemic attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: This study included 7402 patients from 50 countries; 3031 (40.9 per cent) underwent surgery before and 4371 (59.1 per cent) during the pandemic. Overall, 4.3 per cent (187 of 4371) developed postoperative SARS-CoV-2 in the pandemic cohort. The pulmonary complication rate was similar (7.1 per cent (216 of 3031) versus 6.3 per cent (274 of 4371); P = 0.158) but the mortality rate was significantly higher (0.7 per cent (20 of 3031) versus 2.0 per cent (87 of 4371); P < 0.001) among patients who had surgery during the pandemic. The adjusted odds of death were higher during than before the pandemic (odds ratio (OR) 2.72, 95 per cent c.i. 1.58 to 4.67; P < 0.001). In mediation analysis, 54.8 per cent of excess postoperative deaths during the pandemic were estimated to be attributable to SARS-CoV-2 (OR 1.73, 1.40 to 2.13; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Although providers may have selected patients with a lower risk profile for surgery during the pandemic, this did not mitigate the likelihood of death through SARS-CoV-2 infection. Care providers must act urgently to protect surgical patients from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

This study compared death rates in patients who developed pulmonary complications of surgery before and during the pandemic in two large, international studies. Patients who underwent surgery during the pandemic tended to be younger and fitter. Overall, 4.3 per cent were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection after surgery in the pandemic cohort. Deaths within 30 days after surgery tripled during the first wave of the pandemic (from 0.7 to 2.0 per cent), whereas the rate of pulmonary complications remained the similar (7.1 to 6.3 per cent). Over half of these excess deaths (54.8 per cent) were estimated to be related to SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Statins in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the efficacy of statins in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). A systematic search was made of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov, without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on treatment of COVID-19 with statins, compared with placebo or standard of care, were reviewed. Seven RCTs (enrolling 1830 participants) met the inclusion criteria. There was no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR]: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75-1.13), length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference: -0.21 days, 95% CI: -1.01 to 0.59 days), intensive care unit (ICU) admission (RR: 1.84, 95% CI: 0.45-7.55), and mechanical ventilation (RR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.70-1.70) between the two groups. Statins failed to reduce mortality, ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and length of stay in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Statins probably should not be used routinely in COVID-19 patients.

Hydrocortisone in Severe Community-Acquired Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Whether the antiinflammatory and immunomodulatory effects of glucocorticoids may decrease mortality among patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia is unclear. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, we assigned adults who had been admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) for severe community-acquired pneumonia to receive intravenous hydrocortisone (200 mg daily for either 4 or 7 days as determined by clinical improvement, followed by tapering for a total of 8 or 14 days) or to receive placebo. All the patients received standard therapy, including antibiotics and supportive care. The primary outcome was death at 28 days. RESULTS: A total of 800 patients had undergone randomization when the trial was stopped after the second planned interim analysis. Data from 795 patients were analyzed. By day 28, death had occurred in 25 of 400 patients (6.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9 to 8.6) in the hydrocortisone group and in 47 of 395 patients (11.9%; 95% CI, 8.7 to 15.1) in the placebo group (absolute difference, -5.6 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.6 to -1.7; P = 0.006). Among the patients who were not undergoing mechanical ventilation at baseline, endotracheal intubation was performed in 40 of 222 (18.0%) in the hydrocortisone group and in 65 of 220 (29.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.86). Among the patients who were not receiving vasopressors at baseline, such therapy was initiated by day 28 in 55 of 359 (15.3%) of the hydrocortisone group and in 86 of 344 (25.0%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.82). The frequencies of hospital-acquired infections and gastrointestinal bleeding were similar in the two groups; patients in the hydrocortisone group received higher daily doses of insulin during the first week of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia being treated in the ICU, those who received hydrocortisone had a lower risk of death by day 28 than those who received placebo. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health; CAPE COD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02517489.).

Comparing nasopharyngeal apnoeic oxygenation at 18 l/min to preoxygenation alone in obese patients - A randomised controlled study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Investigate a low-cost, nasopharyngeal apnoeic oxygenation technique, establish its efficacy, and compare it to preoxygenation only in an obese population. The study's hypothesis was that nasopharyngeal apnoeic oxygenation at 18 l.min-1 would significantly prolong safe apnoea time compared to preoxygenation alone. DESIGN: Randomised controlled study. SETTING: Theatre complex of a resource constrained hospital. PATIENTS: 30 adult, obese (BMI ≥ 35 kg.m-2) patients presenting for elective surgery. Patients with limiting cardio-respiratory disease, suspected difficult airway, risk of aspiration, and that were pregnant, were excluded. Patients were allocated by block randomisation in a 1:2 ratio to a preoxygenation-only (No-AO) and an intervention group (NPA-O2). INTERVENTIONS: All patients were preoxygenated to an Et-O2 > 80%, followed by a standardised induction. The intervention group received oxygen at 18 l.min-1 via the nasopharyngeal catheter intervention. The desaturation process was documented until an SpO2 of 92% or 600 s was reached. MEASUREMENTS: Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were collected. The primary outcome was safe apnoea time, defined as the time taken to desaturate to an SpO2 of 92%. Secondary outcomes were rate of carbon dioxide accumulation and factors affecting the risk of desaturation. MAIN RESULTS: The study was conducted in a morbidly obese population (NoAO = 41,1 kg.m-2; NPA-O2 = 42,5 kg.m-2). The risk of desaturation was signifantly lower in the intervention group (Hazzard Ratio = 0,072, 95% CI[0,019-0,283]) (Log-Rank test, p < 0.001). The median safe apnoea time was significantly longer in the intervention group (NoAO = 262 s [IQR 190-316]; NPA-O2 = 600 s [IQR 600-600]) (Mann-Whitney-U test, p < 0.001). The mean rate of CO2 accumalation was significantly slower in the intervention group (NoAO = 0,47 ± 0,14 kPa.min-1; NPA-O2 = 0,3 ± 0,09 kPa.min-1) (t-test, p = 0.003). There were no statistically significant risk factors associated with an increased risk of desaturation found. CONCLUSIONS: Nasopharyngeal apnoeic oxygenation at 18 l/min prolongs safe apnoea time, compared to preoxygenation alone, and reduces the risk of desaturation in morbidly obese patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: PACTR202202665252087; WC/202004/007.

[The effect of rehabilitation and one year follow-up for a COVID-19 patient on prolonged mechanical ventilation].

We herein report the outcomes of rehabilitation intervention for a patient in his 80s with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on prolonged mechanical ventilation after COVID-19 infection. The patient was forced to be long-term bedridden due to respirator dependence, showing notable muscle weakness and needing full assistance for all of his activities of daily living (ADL). We implemented rehabilitation for the purposes of withdrawal from mechanical ventilation and improvement of his physical function. We provided a combination program of range of motion exercise, resistance training, and gradual mobilization, such as sitting on the edge of the bed, moving between the bed and wheelchair, sitting on the wheelchair, standing and walking. After rehabilitation for 24 days, the patient was withdrawn from mechanical ventilation, his muscle strength recovered to a level of 4 (Good) on manual muscle testing (MMT) and he became able to walk using a walker. A follow-up survey one year later confirmed that he performed ADL without assistance and returned to work.

Mortality in patients with COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19- related acute respiratory distress syndrome: A single center retrospective observational cohort study.

The pathophysiology of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) varies from other pneumonia-related ARDS. We evaluated whether the mortality rates differed for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19-related ARDS in the Asian population in 2021. This single center retrospective observational cohort study included patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19-related ARDS that required invasive mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, ICU length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and ventilator-free days (VFDs) during the first 28 days. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed to correct potential confounders by age, obesity or not, and ARDS severity. One-hundred-and-sixty-four patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. After 1:1 propensity score matching, there were 50 patients in each group. The all-cause in-hospital mortality of all patients was 38 (38%), and no significant differences were found between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19-related ARDS (17 [34%) vs. 21 [42%], p = 0.410). Both groups had length of stay (30.0 [20.0-46.0] vs. 27.0 [13.0-45.0] days, p = 0.312), ICU length of stay (19.0 [13.0-35.0] vs. 16.0 [10.0-32.0] days, p = 0.249), length of mechanical ventilation (19.0 [10.0-36.0] vs. 14.0 [9.0-29.0] days, p = 0.488), and ventilator-free days during the first 28 days (5.5 [0.0-17.0] vs. 0.0 [0.0-14.0] days, p = 0.320). Immunocompromised status (Hazard ratio: 3.63; 95% CI: 1.51-8.74, p = 0.004) and progress to severe ARDS (Hazard ratio: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.18-7.22, p = 0.020) were significant in-hospital mortality-related confounders. There were no significant difference in mortality among both groups. Immunocompromised status and progression to severe ARDS are two possible risk factors for patients with ARDS; COVID-19 is not a mortality-related risk exposure.

The effect of higher protein dosing in critically ill patients with high nutritional risk (EFFORT Protein): an international, multicentre, pragmatic, registry-based randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: On the basis of low-quality evidence, international critical care nutrition guidelines recommend a wide range of protein doses. The effect of delivering high-dose protein during critical illness is unknown. We aimed to test the hypothesis that a higher dose of protein provided to critically ill patients would improve their clinical outcomes. METHODS: This international, investigator-initiated, pragmatic, registry-based, single-blinded, randomised trial was undertaken in 85 intensive care units (ICUs) across 16 countries. We enrolled nutritionally high-risk adults (≥18 years) undergoing mechanical ventilation to compare prescribing high-dose protein (≥2·2 g/kg per day) with usual dose protein (≤1·2 g/kg per day) started within 96 h of ICU admission and continued for up to 28 days or death or transition to oral feeding. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to high-dose protein or usual dose protein, stratified by site. As site personnel were involved in both prescribing and delivering protein dose, it was not possible to blind clinicians, but patients were not made aware of the treatment assignment. The primary efficacy outcome was time-to-discharge-alive from hospital up to 60 days after ICU admission and the secondary outcome was 60-day morality. Patients were analysed in the group to which they were randomly assigned regardless of study compliance, although patients who dropped out of the study before receiving the study intervention were excluded. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03160547. FINDINGS: Between Jan 17, 2018, and Dec 3, 2021, 1329 patients were randomised and 1301 (97·9%) were included in the analysis (645 in the high-dose protein group and 656 in usual dose group). By 60 days after randomisation, the cumulative incidence of alive hospital discharge was 46·1% (95 CI 42·0%-50·1%) in the high-dose compared with 50·2% (46·0%-54·3%) in the usual dose protein group (hazard ratio 0·91, 95% CI 0·77-1·07; p=0·27). The 60-day mortality rate was 34·6% (222 of 642) in the high dose protein group compared with 32·1% (208 of 648) in the usual dose protein group (relative risk 1·08, 95% CI 0·92-1·26). There appeared to be a subgroup effect with higher protein provision being particularly harmful in patients with acute kidney injury and higher organ failure scores at baseline. INTERPRETATION: Delivery of higher doses of protein to mechanically ventilated critically ill patients did not improve the time-to-discharge-alive from hospital and might have worsened outcomes for patients with acute kidney injury and high organ failure scores. FUNDING: None.

Failing categorization of severe COVID-19 ARDS into ventilatory subphenotypes studied via the clinical-histopathologic relationship.

BACKGROUND: Categorization of severe COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS) into subphenotypes does not consider the trajectories of respiratory mechanoelastic features and histopathologic patterns. This study aimed to assess the correlation between mechanoelastic ventilatory features and lung histopathologic findings in critically ill patients who died because of CARDS. METHODS: Mechanically ventilated patients with severe CARDS who had daily ventilatory data were considered. The histopathologic assessment was performed through full autopsy of deceased patients. Patients were categorized into two groups according to the median worst respiratory system compliance during ICU stay (CrsICU). RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients admitted to ICU had daily ventilatory data. Fifty-one (58.6%) died in ICU, 41 (80.4%) underwent full autopsy and were considered for the clinical-histopathological correlation analysis. Respiratory system compliance at ICU admission and its trajectory were not different in survivors and non-survivors. Median CrsICU in the deceased patients was 22.9 ml/cmH2O. An inverse correlation was found between the CrsICU and late-proliferative diffuse alveolar damage (DAD) (r = -0.381, p = 0.026). Late proliferative DAD was more extensive (p = 0.042), and the probability of stay in ICU was higher (p = 0.004) in the "low" compared to the "high" CrsICU group. Cluster analysis further endorsed these findings. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill mechanically ventilated patients, worsening of the respiratory system compliance correlated pathologically with the transition from early damage to late fibroproliferative patterns in non-survivors of CARDS. Categorization of CARDS into ventilatory subphenotypes by mechanoelastic properties at ICU admission does not account for the complexity of the histopathologic features.

Tracheostomy outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Tracheostomy is a standard surgical procedure that is used in critically ill patients who require sustained mechanical ventilation. In this article, we review the outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients who underwent tracheostomy. We searched for relevant articles on PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar, up to April 20, 2021. This meta- analysis examines ventilation liberation, decannulation, and hospital mortality rates in COVID-19 patients who have undergone tracheostomy. Two investigators evaluated the articles, and the differences of opinion were settled by consensus with a third author. A total of 4366 patients were included in 47 related articles for this meta-analysis. After data pooling, the proportions of ventilation liberation, decannulation and mortality were found to be 48% (95% CI: 31-64), 42% (95% CI: 17-69) and 18% (95% CI: 9-28) respectively. The Luis Furuya-Kanamori (LFK) index values for ventilation liberation, decannulation and mortality were 4.28, 1.32 and 0.69. No transmission of the disease attributable to participating in tracheostomy procedures was reported in most of the included articles.

Artificial neural network based prediction of the lung tissue involvement as an independent in-hospital mortality and mechanical ventilation risk factor in COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: During COVID-19 pandemic, artificial neural network (ANN) systems have been providing aid for clinical decisions. However, to achieve optimal results, these models should link multiple clinical data points to simple models. This study aimed to model the in-hospital mortality and mechanical ventilation risk using a two step approach combining clinical variables and ANN-analyzed lung inflammation data. METHODS: A data set of 4317 COVID-19 hospitalized patients, including 266 patients requiring mechanical ventilation, was analyzed. Demographic and clinical data (including the length of hospital stay and mortality) and chest computed tomography (CT) data were collected. Lung involvement was analyzed using a trained ANN. The combined data were then analyzed using unadjusted and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Overall in-hospital mortality associated with ANN-assigned percentage of the lung involvement (hazard ratio [HR]: 5.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.4-7.43, p < 0.001 for the patients with >50% of lung tissue affected by COVID-19 pneumonia), age category (HR: 5.34, 95% CI: 3.32-8.59 for cases >80 years, p < 0.001), procalcitonin (HR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.59-2.76, p < 0.001, C-reactive protein level (CRP) (HR: 2.11, 95% CI: 1.25-3.56, p = 0.004), glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (HR: 1.82, 95% CI: 1.37-2.42, p < 0.001) and troponin (HR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.69-2.72, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the risk of mechanical ventilation is also associated with ANN-based percentage of lung inflammation (HR: 13.2, 95% CI: 8.65-20.4, p < 0.001 for patients with >50% involvement), age, procalcitonin (HR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.14-3.2, p = 0.14, eGFR (HR: 1.82, 95% CI: 1.2-2.74, p = 0.004) and clinical variables, including diabetes (HR: 2.5, 95% CI: 1.91-3.27, p < 0.001), cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease (HR: 3.16, 95% CI: 2.38-4.2, p < 0.001) and chronic pulmonary disease (HR: 2.31, 95% CI: 1.44-3.7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ANN-based lung tissue involvement is the strongest predictor of unfavorable outcomes in COVID-19 and represents a valuable support tool for clinical decisions.

Acute Kidney Injury in Critical Care COVID-19 Patients on Invasive Mechanical Ventilation: The Potential Preventive Role of Dexamethasone.

Background: A high incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) has been reported in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in critical care units and those undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The introduction of dexamethasone (DXM) as treatment for severe COVID-19 has improved mortality, but its effects in other organs remain under study. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between DXM and AKI in COVID-19. Methods: In this prospective observational cohort study, we evaluated the incidence of AKI in critically ill COVID-19 patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, and the association of DXM treatment with the incidence, severity, and outcomes of AKI. The association between DXM treatment and AKI was evaluated by multivariable logistic regression. The association of the combination of DXM treatment and AKI on mortality was evaluated by Cox-regression analysis. Results: We included 552 patients. AKI was diagnosed in 311 (56%), of which 196 (63%) corresponded to severe (stage 2 or 3) AKI, and 46 (14.8%) received kidney replacement therapy. Two hundred and sixty-seven (48%) patients were treated with DXM. This treatment was associated to lower incidence of AKI (Odds Radio 0.34, 95% Confidence intervals [CI] 0.22-0.52, p < 0.001) after adjusting for age, body mass index, laboratory parameters, SOFA score, and vasopressor use. DXM treatment significantly reduced mortality in patients with severe AKI (HR 0.63, 95%CI 0.41-0.96, p = 0.032). Conclusions: The incidence of AKI is high in COVID-19 patients under IMV. DXM treatment is associated with a lower incidence of AKI and a lower mortality in the group with severe AKI.

A Case Series of Spontaneous Pneumomediastinum With/Without Pneumothorax in COVID-19.

With the previous worldwide initial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, a notable rise in spontaneous pneumomediastinum with/without pneumothorax (SPP) has been noted. Most cases were initially reported as complications secondary to barotrauma from mechanical ventilation (MV) with COVID-19. However, with the Delta strain, starting from December 2020, there have been multiple reports of SPP. The SPP is an uncommon complication outside use of assisted ventilation with either noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) or MV. COVID-19 has been linked to higher incidence of SPP without use of NIPPV or MV. We present a series of 5 cases with a polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 diagnostic testing whose hospital course was complicated by SPP unrelated to the use of either NIPPV or MV.

Life Experiences in Neuromuscular Tracheotomized Patients in Times of Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: The management of tracheotomy at home can be very complex, affecting the patient's quality of life. OBJECTIVES: This case series study aimed to explore the experiences of patients affected by neuromuscular diseases (NMD) concerning tracheostomy and Invasive Mechanical Ventilation (IMV) management at home during the COVID-19 health emergency in Italy. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews and the following instruments were used: Connor and Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC-25); Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II); State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI); Langer Mindfulness Scale (LMS). Descriptive analyses, correlations, and qualitative analyses were carried out. RESULTS: 22 patients [50% female, mean age = 50.2 (SD = 21.2)] participated in the study. Participants who showed high levels of dispositional mindfulness in terms of novelty-seeking (r = 0.736, p = 0.013) and novelty production (r = 0.644, p = 0.033) were those with higher resilience. The main emotion that emerged was the fear of contagion (19 patients, 86.36%), due to the previous fragile condition, leading to a significant sense of abandonment. The tracheostomy's perception is seen in extremes as a lifesaver or a condemnation. The relationship with the health professionals moves from satisfaction to a feeling of abandonment with a lack of preparation. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between resilience, flexibility, state anxiety and dispositional mindfulness offers ways to reinforce tracheostomy management at home, even in critical periods when going to the hospital may be difficult.

Hospital-Acquired Pressure Injuries in Adults With Prone Positioning Using Manual Method Versus Specialty Bed: A Retrospective Comparison Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and placed in a prone position manually or using a specialty bed designed to facilitate prone positioning. A secondary aim was to compare mortality rates between these groups. DESIGN: Retrospective review of electronic medical records. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised 160 patients with ARDS managed by prone positioning. Their mean age was 61.08 years (SD = 12.73); 58% (n = 96) were male. The study setting was a 355-bed community hospital in the Western United States (Stockton, California). Data were collected from July 2019 to January 2021. METHODS: Data from electronic medical records were retrospectively searched for the development of pressure injuries, mortality, hospital length of stay, oxygenation status when placed in a prone position, and the presence of a COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: A majority of patients with ARDS were manually placed in a prone position (n = 106; 64.2%), and 54 of these patients (50.1%) were placed using a specialty care bed. Slightly more than half (n = 81; 50.1%) developed HAPIs. Chi-square analyses showed no association with the incidence of HAPIs using manual prone positioning versus the specialty bed (P = .9567). Analysis found no difference in HAPI occurrences between those with COVID-19 and patients without a coronavirus infection (P = .8462). Deep-tissue pressure injuries were the most common type of pressure injury. More patients (n = 85; 80.19%) who were manually placed in a prone position died compared to 58.18% of patients (n = 32) positioned using the specialty bed (P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: No differences in HAPI rates were found when placing patients manually in a prone position versus positioning using a specialty bed designed for this purpose.