Analysis of Protein Biomarkers From Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients Reveals Severity-Specific Signatures and Two Distinct Latent Profiles With Differential Responses to Corticosteroids.

OBJECTIVES: To identify and validate novel COVID-19 subphenotypes with potential heterogenous treatment effects (HTEs) using electronic health record (EHR) data and 33 unique biomarkers. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of adults presenting for acute care, with analysis of biomarkers from residual blood collected during routine clinical care. Latent profile analysis (LPA) of biomarker and EHR data identified subphenotypes of COVID-19 inpatients, which were validated using a separate cohort of patients. HTE for glucocorticoid use among subphenotypes was evaluated using both an adjusted logistic regression model and propensity matching analysis for in-hospital mortality. SETTING: Emergency departments from four medical centers. PATIENTS: Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 based on International Classification of Diseases , 10th Revision codes and laboratory test results. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Biomarker levels generally paralleled illness severity, with higher levels among more severely ill patients. LPA of 522 COVID-19 inpatients from three sites identified two profiles: profile 1 ( n = 332), with higher levels of albumin and bicarbonate, and profile 2 ( n = 190), with higher inflammatory markers. Profile 2 patients had higher median length of stay (7.4 vs 4.1 d; p < 0.001) and in-hospital mortality compared with profile 1 patients (25.8% vs 4.8%; p < 0.001). These were validated in a separate, single-site cohort ( n = 192), which demonstrated similar outcome differences. HTE was observed ( p = 0.03), with glucocorticoid treatment associated with increased mortality for profile 1 patients (odds ratio = 4.54). CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter study combining EHR data with research biomarker analysis of patients with COVID-19, we identified novel profiles with divergent clinical outcomes and differential treatment responses.

Using survival analysis to predict septic shock onset in ICU patients.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of survival analysis for predicting septic shock onset in ICU patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis on ICU cases from Mercy Hospital St. Louis from 2012 to 2016. As part of the procedure for inclusion in the Apache Outcomes database, each case is reviewed by critical care clinicians to identify septic shock patients as well as the time of septic shock onset. We used survival analysis to predict septic shock onset in these cases and employed lagging to compensate for uncertainties in septic shock onset time. RESULTS: Survival analysis was highly effective at predicting septic shock onset, producing AUC values of >0.87. The methodology was robust to lag times as well as the specific method of survival analysis used. CONCLUSIONS: This methodology has the potential to be implemented in the ICU for real time prediction and can be used as a building block to expand the approach to other hospital wards or care environments.

Placement of intracranial pressure monitors by neurointensivists: case series and a systematic review.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: Placement of an intracranial pressure (ICP) monitor to guide the management of patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been historically performed by neurosurgeons. It is hypothesized that ICP monitors can be placed by non-surgeon neurointensivists, with placement success and complication rates comparable to neurosurgeons. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective review and systematic review of the literature. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: This study reviewed the medical records of patients with TBI who required insertion of parenchymal ICP monitors performed by four neurointensivists in a large level I trauma centre. Patient data recorded were age, gender, CT findings, ICP monitor placement, location and length of placement, complications related to the ICP monitor and patient outcomes. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Thirty-eight (38) monitors (Camino) were placed. Patients' average age was 43.0 years (SD = 21.6); 76% were males. The location of monitor was right frontal in 89% and left frontal in 11%. Mean ICP was 24 (SD = 15), duration of ICP monitor was 4.9 days (SD = 3.6). All monitors were placed successfully. There were no major technical complications, no episodes of major catheter-induced intracranial haemorrhage and no infectious complications. These findings were comparable to published outcomes from neurosurgeon placements. CONCLUSIONS: It is believed that insertion of ICP monitors by neurointensivists is safe and may aid in providing prompt monitoring of patients with severe TBI.

Telemedicine intervention improves ICU outcomes.

Telemedicine for the intensive care unit (Tele-ICU) was founded as a means of delivering the clinical expertise of intensivists located remotely to hospitals with inadequate access to intensive care specialists. This was a retrospective pre- and postintervention study of adult patients admitted to a community hospital ICU. The patients in the preintervention period (n = 630) and during the Tele-ICU period (n = 2193) were controlled for baseline characteristics, acute physiologic scores (APS), and acute physiologic and health evaluation (APACHE IV) scores. Mean APS scores were 37.1 (SD, 22.8) and 37.7 (SD, 19.4) (P = 0.56), and mean APACHE IV scores were 49.7 (SD, 24.8) and 50.4 (SD, 21.0) (P = 0.53), respectively. ICU mortality was 7.9% during the preintervention period compared with 3.8% during the Tele-ICU period (odds ratio (OR) = 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.32-0.66, P < 0.0001). ICU LOS in days was 2.7 (SD, 4.1) compared with 2.2 (SD, 3.4), respectively (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.16, 95% CI, 1.00-1.40, P = 0.01). Implementation of Tele-ICU intervention was associated with reduced ICU mortality and ICU LOS. This suggests that there are benefits of a closed Tele-ICU intervention beyond what is provided by daytime bedside physicians.

Central venous catheterization.

OBJECTIVE: To provide current information related to central venous catheterization. DESIGN: Review of literature relevant to central venous catheterization and its indications, insertion techniques, and prevention of complications. RESULTS: Central venous catheterization can be lifesaving but is associated with complication rates of approximately 15%. Operator experience, familiarity with the advantages and disadvantages of the various catheterization sites, and strict attention to detail during insertion help in reducing mechanical complications associated with catheterization. Strict aseptic technique and proper catheter maintenance decrease the frequency of catheter-related infections. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate catheter and site selection, sufficient operator experience, careful technique, and proper catheter maintenance with removal as soon as possible are associated with optimal outcome.