Non‐severe immunosuppression might be associated with a lower risk of moderate–severe acute respiratory distress syndrome in COVID‐19: A pilot study

Abstract BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an emerging infectious disease that has spread rapidly worldwide. The role of immunosuppression among COVID-19 patients has not been elucidated and management may be challenging. OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in severe outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 according to immune system state. DESIGN: Retrospective single-center observational study with confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal from March 18, 2020 to April 04, 2020. The final date of follow-up was April 09, 2020.PARTICIPANTS: Confirmed COVID-19 patients. MAIN MEASURES: The primary endpoint was development of moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Time to moderate-severe ARDS, the need for mechanical or non-invasive ventilation (MV/NIV), death, and a composite of death or MV/NIV were secondary endpoints. KEY RESULTS: Of 138 patients included, 27 (19.6%) were immunosuppressed (IS), with 95 (68.8%) male patients and a median (Q1, Q3) age of 68 (54–78) years. Among the baseline characteristics, no relevant or significant differences were observed between IS and non-immunosuppressed (non-IS) patients, detecting a non-severe immunosupression among IS. A significantly lower proportion of IS patients (22.2% [95%CI, 9.8–43.0%]) compared to non-IS patients (49.5% [95%CI, 40.2–58.9%]) developed moderate-severe ARDS, in both unadjusted (OR 0.29 [95%CI, 0.11–0.76], p=0.014) and adjusted (aOR 0.16 [95%CI, 0.05–0.55], p=0.004) analyses. After stratifying by pathologies, only IS autoimmune diseases remained significant (aOR 0.12 [95%CI, 0.03–0.57], p=0.007). Non-significant trends toward a longer time to moderate or severe ARDS, a lower need for MV/NIV, and a lower risk of death or MV/NIV were detected in IS. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort of COVID-19 patients, non-severe immunosuppression was associated with a lower risk of moderate-severe ARDS, especially among AD. This suggests a potential protective effect from a hypothesized host hyper-inflammatory response and warrants reconsideration of management of IS patients.

Download Full-text

Ultraprotective ventilation allowed by extracorporeal CO2 removal improves the right ventricular function in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients: a quasi-experimental pilot study

Annals of Intensive Care ◽

10.1186/s13613-020-00784-3 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Suzanne Goursaud ◽

Xavier Valette ◽

Julien Dupeyrat ◽

Cédric Daubin ◽

Damien du Cheyron

Keyword(s):

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽

Pilot Study ◽

Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽

Respiratory Distress ◽

Distress Syndrome ◽

Low Flow ◽

Ventilation Strategy ◽

Quasi Experimental ◽

Rv Function ◽

Ultraprotective Ventilation

Abstract Background Right ventricular (RV) failure is a common complication in moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). RV failure is exacerbated by hypercapnic acidosis and overdistension induced by mechanical ventilation. Veno-venous extracorporeal CO2 removal (ECCO2R) might allow ultraprotective ventilation with lower tidal volume (VT) and plateau pressure (Pplat). This study investigated whether ECCO2R therapy could affect RV function. Methods This was a quasi-experimental prospective observational pilot study performed in a French medical ICU. Patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS with PaO2/FiO2 ratio between 80 and 150 mmHg were enrolled. An ultraprotective ventilation strategy was used with VT at 4 mL/kg of predicted body weight during the 24 h following the start of a low-flow ECCO2R device. RV function was assessed by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) during the study protocol. Results The efficacy of ECCO2R facilitated an ultraprotective strategy in all 18 patients included. We observed a significant improvement in RV systolic function parameters. Tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) increased significantly under ultraprotective ventilation compared to baseline (from 22.8 to 25.4 mm; p < 0.05). Systolic excursion velocity (S’ wave) also increased after the 1-day protocol (from 13.8 m/s to 15.1 m/s; p < 0.05). A significant improvement in the aortic velocity time integral (VTIAo) under ultraprotective ventilation settings was observed (p = 0.05). There were no significant differences in the values of systolic pulmonary arterial pressure (sPAP) and RV preload. Conclusion Low-flow ECCO2R facilitates an ultraprotective ventilation strategy thatwould improve RV function in moderate-to-severe ARDS patients. Improvement in RV contractility appears to be mainly due to a decrease in intrathoracic pressure allowed by ultraprotective ventilation, rather than a reduction of PaCO2.

Download Full-text

Exogenous Surfactant Therapy for Pediatric Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Canadian Respiratory Journal ◽

10.1155/1997/903459 ◽

1997 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 21-26 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

James F Lewis ◽

Jasvinder S Dhillon ◽

Ram N Singh ◽

Craig C Johnson ◽

Timothy C Frewen

Keyword(s):

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽

Pilot Study ◽

Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽

Respiratory Distress ◽

Pediatric Patients ◽

Distress Syndrome ◽

Exogenous Surfactant ◽

Lung Dysfunction ◽

Surfactant Administration ◽

Severe Lung

Exogenous surfactant administration is currently being tested in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The results of the studies have varied because several factors may influence the host’s response to this therapy. This clinical pilot study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of exogenous surfactant administration in pediatric patients with ARDS. Surfactant was administered to 13 patients with severe lung dysfunction, and eight of these patients experienced a significant improvement in oxygenation after the first dose of surfactant. In these patients the exogenous surfactant was administered within 48 h of the diagnosis of ARDS, whereas in the five patients who did not respond, surfactant was administered several days after the onset of ARDS. Responders also spent fewer days on a mechanical ventilator and less time in intensive care compared with nonresponders. Based on the results of this pilot study, a more appropriate multicentre clinical trial should be designed to evaluate this treatment strategy.

Download Full-text