Clinical phenotypes and outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron sublineage JN.1 in critically ill COVID-19 patients: a prospective, multicenter cohort study in France, November 2022 to January 2024.

BACKGROUND: A notable increase in severe cases of COVID-19, with significant hospitalizations due to the emergence and spread of JN.1 was observed worldwide in late 2023 and early 2024. However, no clinical data are available regarding critically-ill JN.1 COVID-19 infected patients. METHODS: The current study is a substudy of the SEVARVIR prospective multicenter observational cohort study. Patients admitted to any of the 40 participating ICUs between November 17, 2022, and January 22, 2024, were eligible for inclusion in the SEVARVIR cohort study (NCT05162508) if they met the following inclusion criteria: age ≥ 18 years, SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by a positive reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in nasopharyngeal swab samples, ICU admission for acute respiratory failure. The primary clinical endpoint of the study was day-28 mortality. Evaluation of the association between day-28 mortality and sublineage group was conducted by performing an exploratory multivariable logistic regression model, after systematically adjusting for predefined prognostic factors previously shown to be important confounders (i.e. obesity, immunosuppression, age and SOFA score) computing odds ratios (OR) along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: During the study period (November 2022-January 2024) 56 JN.1- and 126 XBB-infected patients were prospectively enrolled in 40 French intensive care units. JN.1-infected patients were more likely to be obese (35.7% vs 20.8%; p = 0.033) and less frequently immunosuppressed than others (20.4% vs 41.4%; p = 0.010). JN.1-infected patients required invasive mechanical ventilation support in 29.1%, 87.5% of them received dexamethasone, 14.5% tocilizumab and none received monoclonal antibodies. Only one JN-1 infected patient (1.8%) required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support during ICU stay (vs 0/126 in the XBB group; p = 0.30). Day-28 mortality of JN.1-infected patients was 14.6%, not significantly different from that of XBB-infected patients (22.0%; p = 0.28). In univariable logistic regression analysis and in multivariable analysis adjusting for confounders defined a priori, we found no statistically significant association between JN.1 infection and day-28 mortality (adjusted OR 1.06 95% CI (0.17;1.42); p = 0.19). There was no significant between group difference regarding duration of stay in the ICU (6.0 [3.5;11.0] vs 7.0 [4.0;14.0] days; p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: Critically-ill patients with Omicron JN.1 infection showed a different clinical phenotype than patients infected with the earlier XBB sublineage, including more frequent obesity and less immunosuppression. Compared with XBB, JN.1 infection was not associated with higher day-28 mortality.

Protocol for fever control using external cooling in mechanically ventilated patients with septic shock: SEPSISCOOL II randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Fever treatment is commonly applied in patients with sepsis but its impact on survival remains undetermined. Patients with respiratory and haemodynamic failure are at the highest risk for not tolerating the metabolic cost of fever. However, fever can help to control infection. Treating fever with paracetamol has been shown to be less effective than cooling. In the SEPSISCOOL pilot study, active fever control by external cooling improved organ failure recovery and early survival. The main objective of this confirmatory trial is to assess whether fever control at normothermia can improve the evolution of organ failure and mortality at day 60 of febrile patients with septic shock. This study will compare two strategies within the first 48 hours of septic shock: treatment of fever with cooling or no treatment of fever. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: SEPSISCOOL II is a pragmatic, investigator-initiated, adaptive, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled, superiority trial in patients admitted to the intensive care unit with febrile septic shock. After stratification based on the acute respiratory distress syndrome status, patients will be randomised between two arms: (1) cooling and (2) no cooling. The primary endpoint is mortality at day 60 after randomisation. The secondary endpoints include the evolution of organ failure, early mortality and tolerance. The target sample size is 820 patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is funded by the French health ministry and was approved by the ethics committee CPP Nord Ouest II (Amiens, France). The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04494074.

Necrotizing soft tissue infections in critically ill neutropenic patients: a French multicentre retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs) are rare life-threatening bacterial infections. Few data are available regarding neutropenic patients with NSTIs. Our objectives were to describe the characteristics and management of neutropenic patients with NSTIs in intensive care units (ICUs). We conducted a retrospective multicentre cohort study in 18 ICUs between 2011 and 2021. Patients admitted with NSTIs and concomitant neutropenia at diagnosis were included and compared to non-neutropenic patients with NSTIs. The relationship between therapeutic interventions and outcomes was assessed using Cox regression and propensity score matching. RESULTS: 76 neutropenic patients were included and compared to 165 non-neutropenic patients. Neutropenic patients were younger (54 ± 14 vs 60 ± 13 years, p = 0.002) and had less lower limb (44.7% vs 70.9%, p < 0.001) and more abdomino-perineal NSTIs (43.4% vs 18.8%, p < 0.001). Enterobacterales and non-fermenting gram-negative bacteria were the most frequently isolated microorganisms in neutropenic patients. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in neutropenic than in non-neutropenic patients (57.9% vs 28.5%, p < 0.001). Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality in univariable Cox (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.43 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.23-0.82], p = 0.010) and multivariable Cox (adjusted HR = 0.46 95% CI [0.22-0.94], p = 0.033) analyses and after overlap propensity score weighting (odds ratio = 0.25 95% CI [0.09; 0.68], p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Critically ill neutropenic patients with NSTIs present different clinical and microbiological characteristics and are associated with a higher hospital mortality than non-neutropenic patients. G-CSF administration was associated with hospital survival.

Use of almitrine in spontaneously breathing patients with COVID-19 treated with high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy and with persistent hypoxemia.

BACKGROUND: Almitrine, a selective pulmonary vasoconstrictor in hypoxic area, improves oxygenation in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 but its effects in spontaneously breathing patients with COVID-19 remain to be determined. METHODS: We prospectively studied the effects of almitrine (16 µg/kg/min over 30 min followed by continuous administration in responders only) in 62 patients (66% of male, 63 [53-69] years old) with COVID-19 treated with high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (HFNO) and with persistent hypoxemia, defined as a PaO2/FiO2 ratio < 100 with FiO2 > 80% after a single awake prone positioning session. Patients with an increase in PaO2/FiO2 ratio > 20% were considered as responders. RESULTS: Overall, almitrine increased the PaO2/FiO2 ratio by 50% (p < 0.01), decreased the partial arterial pressure of carbon dioxide by 7% (p = 0.01) whereas the respiratory rate remained unchanged and 46 (74%) patients were responders. No patient experienced right ventricular dysfunction or acute cor pulmonale. The proportion of responders was similar regardless of the CT-Scan radiological pattern: 71% for the pattern with predominant ground-glass opacities and 76% for the pattern with predominant consolidations (p = 0.65). Responders had lower intubation rate (33 vs. 88%, p < 0.01), higher ventilator-free days at 28-day (28 [20-28 ] vs. 19 [2-24] days, p < 0.01) and shorter ICU length of stay (5 [3-10] vs.12 [7-30] days, p < 0.01) than non-responders. CONCLUSIONS: Almitrine could be an interesting therapy in spontaneously breathing patients with COVID-19 treated with HFNO and with persistent hypoxemia, given its effects on oxygenation without serious adverse effects regardless of the CT-Scan pattern, and potentially on intubation rate. These preliminary results need to be confirmed by further randomized studies.

Spontaneous-Breathing Trials with Pressure-Support Ventilation or a T-Piece.

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous-breathing trials can be performed with the use of either pressure-support ventilation (PSV) or a T-piece. Whether PSV trials may result in a shorter time to tracheal extubation than T-piece trials, without resulting in a higher risk of reintubation, among patients who have a high risk of extubation failure is unknown. METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients who had a high risk of extubation failure (i.e., were >65 years of age or had an underlying chronic cardiac or respiratory disease) to undergo spontaneous-breathing trials performed with the use of either PSV (with a pressure-support level of 8 cm of water and no positive end-expiratory pressure) or a T-piece. The primary outcome was the total time without exposure to invasive ventilation (reported as the number of ventilator-free days) at day 28 after the initial spontaneous-breathing trial. Secondary outcomes included extubation within 24 hours and extubation within 7 days after the initial spontaneous-breathing trial, as well as reintubation within 7 days after extubation. RESULTS: A total of 969 patients (484 in the PSV group and 485 in the T-piece group) were included in the analysis. At day 28, the median number of ventilator-free days was 27 (interquartile range, 24 to 27) in the PSV group and 27 (interquartile range, 23 to 27) in the T-piece group (difference, 0 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.5 to 1; P = 0.31). Extubation was performed within 24 hours in 376 patients (77.7%) in the PSV group and in 350 patients (72.2%) in the T-piece group (difference, 5.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.01 to 10.9), and extubation was performed within 7 days in 473 patients (97.7%) and 458 patients (94.4%), respectively (difference, 3.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.8 to 5.9). Reintubation was performed in 72 of 481 patients (14.9%) in the PSV group and in 65 of 477 patients (13.6%) in the T-piece group (difference, 1.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.1 to 5.8). Cardiac or respiratory arrest was a reason for reintubation in 9 patients (3 in the PSV group and 6 in the T-piece group). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who had a high risk of extubation failure, spontaneous-breathing trials performed with PSV did not result in significantly more ventilator-free days at day 28 than spontaneous-breathing trials performed with a T-piece. (Supported by the French Ministry of Health; TIP-EX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04227639.).

Impact of Isolation Time of COVID-19 Patients in Intensive Care Unit on Healthcare Workers Contamination and Nursing Care Intensity.

Background: The optimal isolation time of COVID-19 patients in intensive care unit (ICU) is debated. We investigated the impact of two different COVID-19 patient isolation time strategies on healthcare workers (HCW) contamination, intensity of nursing care and potential associated adverse events. Methods: We prospectively included all consecutive COVID-19 patients and HCW in our ICU in the first two pandemic waves (March to May 2020 and August to November 2020). Specific isolation measures for COVID-19 patients were released after two negative RT-PCR assays in the first wave and 14 days after the onset of symptoms in the second wave. Contamination of HCW was assessed at the end of each pandemic wave by combining both a RT-PCR assay and a serological test. Results: Overall, 117 COVID-19 patients and 73 HCW were included. Despite an earlier release from isolation after ICU admission in the second than in the first wave [6 (4-8) vs. 15 (11-19) days, p < 0.01], the proportion of HCW with a positive serological test (16 vs. 17%, p = 0.94) or with a positive RT-PCR assay (3 vs. 5%, p = 0.58) was not different between the two waves. Although a lower nurse-to-bed ratio, the intensity of nursing care was higher in the second than in the first wave. A longer isolation time was associated with accidental extubation (OR = 1.18, 95%CI:1.07-1.35, p = 0.005) but neither with ventilator-associated pneumonia nor with dysglycemia. Conclusion: A shorter isolation time of COVID-19 patients in ICU was not associated with higher HCW contamination, while a longer isolation time seemed to be associated with higher accidental extubation.

Characteristics of Cardiac Injury in Critically Ill Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac injury has been reported in up to 30% of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. However, cardiac injury is defined mainly by troponin elevation without description of associated structural abnormalities and its time course has not been studied. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the ECG and echocardiographic abnormalities as well as their time course in critically ill COVID-19 patients? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The cardiac function of 43 consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to two ICUs was assessed prospectively and repeatedly, combining ECG, cardiac biomarker, and transthoracic echocardiographic analyses from ICU admission to ICU discharge or death or to a maximum follow-up of 14 days. Cardiac injury was defined by troponin elevation and newly diagnosed ECG or echocardiographic abnormalities, or both. RESULTS: At baseline, 49% of patients demonstrated a cardiac injury, and 70% of patients experienced cardiac injury within the first 14 days of ICU stay, with a median time of occurrence of 3 days (range, 0-7 days). The most frequent abnormalities were ECG or echocardiographic signs, or both, of left ventricular (LV) abnormalities (87% of patients with cardiac injury), right ventricular (RV) systolic dysfunction (47%), pericardial effusion (43%), new-onset atrial arrhythmias (33%), LV relaxation impairment (33%), and LV systolic dysfunction (13%). Between baseline and day 14, the incidence of pericardial effusion and of new-onset atrial arrhythmias increased and the incidence of ECG or echocardiographic signs, or both, of LV abnormalities as well as the incidence of LV relaxation impairment remained stable, whereas the incidence of RV and LV systolic dysfunction decreased. INTERPRETATION: Cardiac injury is common and early in critically ill COVID-19 patients. ECG or echocardiographic signs, or both, of LV abnormalities were the most frequent abnormalities, and patients with cardiac injury experienced more RV than LV systolic dysfunction.

ICU-acquired weakness, diaphragm dysfunction and long-term outcomes of critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired weakness and diaphragm dysfunction are frequent conditions, both associated with poor prognosis in critically ill patients. While it is well established that ICU-acquired weakness severely impairs long-term prognosis, the association of diaphragm dysfunction with this outcome has never been reported. This study investigated whether diaphragm dysfunction is associated with negative long-term outcomes and whether the coexistence of diaphragm dysfunction and ICU-acquired weakness has a particular association with 2-year survival and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). METHODS: This study is an ancillary study derived from an observational cohort study. Patients under mechanical ventilation were enrolled at the time of their first spontaneous breathing trial. Diaphragm dysfunction was defined by tracheal pressure generated by phrenic nerve stimulation < 11 cmH2O and ICU-acquired weakness was defined by Medical Research Council (MRC) score < 48. HRQOL was evaluated with the SF-36 questionnaire. RESULTS: Sixty-nine of the 76 patients enrolled in the original study were included in the survival analysis and 40 were interviewed. Overall 2-year survival was 67% (46/69): 64% (29/45) in patients with diaphragm dysfunction, 71% (17/24) in patients without diaphragm dysfunction, 46% (11/24) in patients with ICU-acquired weakness and 76% (34/45) in patients without ICU-acquired weakness. Patients with concomitant diaphragm dysfunction and ICU-acquired weakness had a poorer outcome with a 2-year survival rate of 36% (5/14) compared to patients without diaphragm function and ICU-acquired weakness [79% (11/14) (p < 0.01)]. Health-related quality of life was not influenced by the presence of ICU-acquired weakness, diaphragm dysfunction or their coexistence. CONCLUSIONS: ICU-acquired weakness but not diaphragm dysfunction was associated with a poor 2-year survival of critically ill patients.