Silent Hypoxemia in the Emergency Department: A Retrospective Cohort of Two Clinical Phenotypes in Critical COVID-19.

Introduction: Understanding hypoxemia, with and without the clinical signs of acute respiratory failure (ARF) in COVID-19, is key for management. Hence, from a population of critical patients admitted to the emergency department (ED), we aimed to study silent hypoxemia (Phenotype I) in comparison to symptomatic hypoxemia with clinical signs of ARF (Phenotype II). Methods: This multicenter study was conducted between 1 March and 30 April 2020. Adult patients who were presented to the EDs of nine Great-Eastern French hospitals for confirmed severe or critical COVID-19, who were then directly admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), were retrospectively included. Results: A total of 423 critical COVID-19 patients were included, out of whom 56.1% presented symptomatic hypoxemia with clinical signs of ARF, whereas 43.9% presented silent hypoxemia. Patients with clinical phenotype II were primarily intubated, initially, in the ED (46%, p < 0.001), whereas those with silent hypoxemia (56.5%, p < 0.001) were primarily intubated in the ICU. Initial univariate analysis revealed higher ICU mortality (29.2% versus 18.8%, p < 0.014) and in-hospital mortality (32.5% versus 18.8%, p < 0.002) in phenotype II. However, multivariate analysis showed no significant differences between the two phenotypes regarding mortality and hospital or ICU length of stay. Conclusions: Silent hypoxemia is explained by various mechanisms, most physiological and unspecific to COVID-19. Survival was found to be comparable in both phenotypes, with decreased survival in favor of Phenotype II. However, the spectrum of silent to symptomatic hypoxemia appears to include a continuum of disease progression, which can brutally evolve into fatal ARF.

[Bilateral renal infarction after discontinuation of anticoagulant therapy]. / Infarctus rénal bilatéral à l'arrêt d'un traitement anticoagulant.

Acute renal infarction is an uncommon and often under diagnosed condition mostly because of misleading symptoms. Accurate data regarding clinical presentation, laboratory tests, diagnostic and treatment are lacking. Detection is often delayed or missed because of non-specific clinical presentation. The mechanisms of acute renal infarction are various, mainly embolic or thrombotic. Abdominal CT scan remains the most valuable exam to confirm the diagnosis. Therapeutic guidelines for the treatment of renal embolism have not been well established. The standard treatment strategy includes anticoagulation with or without thrombolysis. Despite the uncertainty regarding management, the renal outcome remains favorable. Some patients do develop some degree of renal insufficiency during the acute episode. We report here the case of a 73-year-old woman with bilateral acute renal infarction after discontinuation of anticoagulant therapy.