scholarly journals Clinical characteristics, risk factors and outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 registered in the ISARIC WHO clinical characterisation protocol: a prospective, multinational, multicentre, observational study

2021 ◽  
pp. 00552-2021
Author(s):  
Luis Felipe Reyes ◽  
Srinivas Murthy ◽  
Esteban Garcia-Gallo ◽  
Mike Irvine ◽  
Laura Merson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Additive Model ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Lower Probability ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Generalised Additive Model ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Probability Of Death

Due to the large number of patients with severe COVID-19, many were treated outside of the traditional walls of the ICU, and in many cases, by personnel who were not trained in critical care. The clinical characteristics and the relative impact of caring for severe COVID-19 patients outside of the ICU is unknown. This was a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC WHO COVID-19 platform. Severe COVID-19 patients were identified as those admitted to an ICU and/or those treated with one of the following treatments: invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal cannula, inotropes, and vasopressors. A logistic Generalised Additive Model was used to compare clinical outcomes among patients admitted and not to the ICU. A total of 40 440 patients from 43 countries and six continents were included in this analysis. Severe COVID-19 patients were frequently male (62.9%), older adults (median [IQR], 67 years [55, 78]), and with at least one comorbidity (63.2%). The overall median (IQR) length of hospital stay was 10 days (5–19) and was longer in patients admitted to an ICU than in those that were cared for outside of ICU (12 [6–23] versus 8 [4–15] days, p<0.0001). The 28-day fatality ratio was lower in ICU-admitted patients (30.7% [5797/18831] versus 39.0% [7532/19295], p<0.0001). Patients admitted to an ICU had a significantly lower probability of death than those who were not (adjusted OR:0.70, 95%CI: 0.65-0.75, p<0.0001). Patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to an ICU had significantly lower 28-day fatality ratio than those cared for outside of an ICU.

scholarly journals Clinical characteristics of Chilean patients with rheumatic diseases and COVID-19: data from the Covid-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance physician-reported registry

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oriela Martínez ◽  
Francisca Valenzuela ◽  
Sebastián Ibáñez
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Mortality Rate ◽  
Rheumatic Disease ◽  
Rheumatic Diseases ◽  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
List Type ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Rheumatic Patients

AbstractObjectiveThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2), has registered more than 234 million confirmed cases and more than 4.7 million deaths throughout the world until October 2, 2021. During the last few months, a significant number of reports of COVID-19 in patients with rheumatic diseases have been published. In this study the objective is to report the clinical characteristics of Chilean patients with rheumatic diseases and COVID-19 reported in the “Global Rheumatology Alliance” (GRA) physician registration platform.MethodsChilean patients with rheumatic diseases and COVID-19 were included in the Covid-19 GRA physician-reported registry.Results54 patients were included. The most common primary rheumatic disease was rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with 28 cases (51.9%). 30 patients (55.6%) used corticosteroids, of which 20 (66.7%) used a dose of 10 mg or less. 33 patients (61.1%) only used conventional DMARDs, 4 (7.4%) only biological, and 6 (11.1%) the combination. A total of 35 patients (64.8%) had to be hospitalized. 2 patients (3.7%) died. 26 patients of the 35 hospitalized (74.2%) required some type of ventilatory support, of which 5 (19.2%) required non-invasive and 8 (30.8%) invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).DiscussionMost of included Chilean rheumatic patients were hospitalized, with a low mortality rate but with a high percentage of patients requiring at least non-invasive mechanical ventilation.Key Points-The most common primary rheumatic disease was rheumatoid arthritis (RA) followed by lupus (LES)-Most of the included Chilean rheumatic patients were hospitalized, with a high percentage of patients requiring at least non-invasive mechanical ventilation, but with a low mortality rate.-Worsening of arthralgias or activation of the rheumatic disease was not reported.

scholarly journals Protocolized Post-Extubation Respiratory Support to prevent reintubation: protocol and statistical analysis plan for a clinical trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e030476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Dale Casey ◽  
Erin R Vaughan ◽  
Bradley D Lloyd ◽  
Peter A Bilas ◽  
Eric J Hall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Risk Patients

IntroductionFollowing extubation from invasive mechanical ventilation, nearly one in seven critically ill adults requires reintubation. Reintubation is independently associated with increased mortality. Postextubation respiratory support (non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula applied at the time of extubation) has been reported in small-to-moderate-sized trials to reduce reintubation rates among hypercapnic patients, high-risk patients without hypercapnia and low-risk patients without hypercapnia. It is unknown whether protocolised provision of postextubation respiratory support to every patient undergoing extubation would reduce the overall reintubation rate, compared with usual care.Methods and analysisThe Protocolized Post-Extubation Respiratory Support (PROPER) trial is a pragmatic, cluster cross-over trial being conducted between 1 October 2017 and 31 March 2019 in the medical intensive care unit of Vanderbilt University Medical Center. PROPER compares usual care versus protocolized post-extubation respiratory support (a respiratory therapist-driven protocol that advises the provision of non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula based on patient characteristics). For the duration of the trial, the unit is divided into two clusters. One cluster receives protocolised support and the other receives usual care. Each cluster crosses over between treatment group assignments every 3 months. All adults undergoing extubation from invasive mechanical ventilation are enrolled except those who received less than 12 hours of mechanical ventilation, have ‘Do Not Intubate’ orders, or have been previously reintubated during the hospitalisation. The anticipated enrolment is approximately 630 patients. The primary outcome is reintubation within 96 hours of extubation.Ethics and disseminationThe trial was approved by the Vanderbilt Institutional Review Board. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at one or more scientific conferences.Trial registration numberNCT03288311.

scholarly journals The Role of High Flow Nasal Cannula in COVID-19 Associated Pneumomediastinum and Pneumothorax

Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 620
Author(s):  
Francesca Simioli ◽  
Anna Annunziata ◽  
Giorgio Emanuele Polistina ◽  
Antonietta Coppola ◽  
Valentina Di Spirito ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Subcutaneous Emphysema ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
High Resolution Computed Tomography ◽  
Positive Role ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Critical Patients

Background: Pneumomediastinum, subcutaneous emphysema and pneumothorax are not rarely observed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Such complications can worsen gas exchange and the overall prognosis in critical patients. The aim of this study is to investigate what predisposing factors are related to pneumomediastinum and pneumothorax in SARS-CoV2-Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), what symptoms may predict a severe and potentially fatal complication and what therapeutical approach may provide a better outcome. Methods: In this single center cohort study, we recorded data from 45 critically ill COVID-19 patients who developed one or more complicating events among pneumomediastinum, subcutaneous emphysema and pneumothorax. All patients showed ARDS and underwent non-invasive ventilation (NIV) at baseline. Patients with mild to moderate ARDS and pneumomediastinum/pneumothorax (n = 25) received High Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC), while patients with severe ARDS and pneumomediastinum/pneumothorax underwent HFNC (n = 10) or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) (n = 10). Results: Pneumomediastinum/pneumothorax developed in 10.5% of subjects affected by SARS-coV2-ARDS. Dyspnea affected 40% and cough affected 37% of subjects. High resolution computed tomography of the chest showed bilateral diffuse ground glass opacities (GGO) in 100% of subjects. Traction bronchiolectasis, reticulation, crazy paving and distortion were observed in 64%. Furthermore, 36% showed subcutaneous emphysema. Non-severe ARDS cases received HFNC, and 76% patients recovered from pneumomediastinum/pneumothorax over a median follow up of 5 days. Among severe ARDS cases the recovery rate of pneumomediastinum/pneumothorax was 70% with the HFNC approach, and 10% with IMV. Conclusion: HFNC is a safe and effective ventilatory approach for critical COVID-19 and has a positive role in associated complications such as pneumomediastinum and pneumothorax.

scholarly journals Observational study of changes in utilization and outcomes in mechanical ventilation in COVID-19

PLoS ONE ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. e0262315
Author(s):  
Christian Karagiannidis ◽  
Corinna Hentschker ◽  
Michael Westhoff ◽  
Steffen Weber-Carstens ◽  
Uwe Janssens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Non Invasive Ventilation ◽  
Local Health Care ◽  
Overall Mortality

Background The role of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in severe COVID-19 remains a matter of debate. Therefore, the utilization and outcome of NIV in COVID-19 in an unbiased cohort was determined. Aim The aim was to provide a detailed account of hospitalized COVID-19 patients requiring non-invasive ventilation during their hospital stay. Furthermore, differences of patients treated with NIV between the first and second wave are explored. Methods Confirmed COVID-19 cases of claims data of the Local Health Care Funds with non-invasive and/or invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) in the spring and autumn pandemic period in 2020 were comparable analysed. Results Nationwide cohort of 17.023 cases (median/IQR age 71/61–80 years, 64% male) 7235 (42.5%) patients primarily received IMV without NIV, 4469 (26.3%) patients received NIV without subsequent intubation, and 3472 (20.4%) patients had NIV failure (NIV-F), defined by subsequent endotracheal intubation. The proportion of patients who received invasive MV decreased from 75% to 37% during the second period. Accordingly, the proportion of patients with NIV exclusively increased from 9% to 30%, and those failing NIV increased from 9% to 23%. Median length of hospital stay decreased from 26 to 21 days, and duration of MV decreased from 11.9 to 7.3 days. The NIV failure rate decreased from 49% to 43%. Overall mortality increased from 51% versus 54%. Mortality was 44% with NIV-only, 54% with IMV and 66% with NIV-F with mortality rates steadily increasing from 62% in early NIV-F (day 1) to 72% in late NIV-F (>4 days). Conclusions Utilization of NIV rapidly increased during the autumn period, which was associated with a reduced duration of MV, but not with overall mortality. High NIV-F rates are associated with increased mortality, particularly in late NIV-F.

scholarly journals High flow nasal cannula versus non-invasive ventilation in severe asthma: two years prospective observational study.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolina Solé-Delgado ◽  
Alberto García-Salido ◽  
Ainhoa Gochi-Valdovinos ◽  
Anthony González-Brabin ◽  
Maria García ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Severe Asthma ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
Respiratory Support ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Respiratory Management

Background: in recent years, High Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) has been considered an alternative to non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) in severe asthma respiratory management in children. Objective: to describe the use of HFNC in children with severe asthma admitted to pediatric critical care unit (PICU). To compare its clinical characteristic and evolution with those receiving NIMV or other respiratory support. Methods: prospective observational study done in children admitted to PICU with severe asthma (October 2017 to October 2019). Data collected: epidemiological, clinical, respiratory support, thorax x-ray, pharmacological treatments and days of admission. Patients were divided into groups: 1) Only HFNC 2) HFNC and NIMV, and 3) Only NIMV. Results: Seventy-six patients included, 39 girls. The median age was two years and one month (range 160). The median pulmonary score was 5 (range 7). PICU admission lengths a median of 3 days (range 9), hospital 6 days (range 23). There were no epidemiological or clinical differences between groups. Children with only HNFC showed a shorter time of PICU days (p 0,025) and none of them required NIMV. In the group receiving both modalities, NIMV was used first and then HFNC in all cases. Children with HFNC showed higher SaO2/FiO2 ratio (p=0,025) and lower PCO2 level (p=0,032). There were no deaths. Conclusions: in our study the HFNC did not require escalation to NIMV and did not increase the length of PICU or hospital days. Normal initial blood gases and absence of high oxygen requirements were useful to select responders to HNFC.

scholarly journals Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of discharged patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 on the Qinghai plateau

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aiqi Xi ◽  
Ma Zhuo ◽  
Jingtao Dai ◽  
Yuehe Ding ◽  
Xiuzhen Ma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Tibet Plateau ◽  
Severe Illness ◽  
Qinghai Province ◽  
Protein Levels ◽  
Reactive Protein ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Discharged Patients ◽  
Qinghai Tibet Plateau

AbstractSince the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was first reported in Wuhan, a series of confirmed cases of COVID-19 were found on the Qinghai-Tibet plateau. We aimed to describe the epidemiological, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of all confirmed cases in Qinghai, a province at high altitude. With efficient measures to stop the spread of coronavirus, no new cases were found in Qinghai Province for 60 consecutive days between Feb 6 and April 6, 2020. Of all 18 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, 15 patients comprising 4 transmission clusters were identified. Three patients were infected by direct contact without travel history to Wuhan. Seven patients were asymptomatic on admission. Of 18 patients, 10 patients showed bilateral pneumonia and 2 patients showed no abnormalities. Three patients with comorbidities such as hypertension, liver diseases or diabetes developed severe illness. High C-reactive protein levels and elevations of both ALT and AST were observed in 3 severely ill patients on admission. All 18 patients were eventually discharged, including the 3 severe patients who recovered after treatment with non-invasive mechanical ventilation, convalescent plasma and other therapies. Our findings confirmed human-to-human transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in clusters. The strategies of early diagnosis, early isolation, and early treatment are important to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and improve the cure rate. Patients with comorbidities are more likely to develop severe illness and could benefit from convalescent plasma transfusion.

scholarly journals High Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen in Patients With Haematological Malignancy: A Retrospective Observational Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Tetlow ◽  
Rathai Anandanadesan ◽  
Leila Taheri ◽  
Eirini Pagkalidou ◽  
Hugues De Lavallade ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Haematological Malignancy ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
High Flow ◽  
Nasal Cannula ◽  
High Flow Nasal Cannula ◽  
Limited Evidence ◽  
Icu Admission ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Critical Care Outreach

Abstract BackgroundPatients with haematological malignancies (HM) face high rates of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission and mortality. High flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNCO) is increasingly used to support HM patients in ward settings, but there is limited evidence on the safety and efficacy of HFNCO in this group. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed all HM patients receiving ward-based HFNCO, supervised by a critical care outreach service (CCOS), from January 2014 - January 2019. ResultsWe included 130 consecutive patients. Forty-three (33.1%) were weaned off HFNCO without ICU admission. Eighty-seven (66.9%) were admitted to ICU, 20 (23.3%) required non-invasive and 34 (39.5%) invasive mechanical ventilation. ICU and hospital mortality were 42% and 55% respectively. Initial FiO2 <0.4 (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.81, p=0.019) and HFNCO use on the ward >1 day (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04, 0.59, p=0.006) were associated with reduced likelihood for ICU admission. Invasive ventilation was associated with reduced survival (OR 0.27, 95%CI 0.1-0.7, p=0.007). No significant adverse events were reported.ConclusionHM patients receiving ward-based HFNCO have higher rates of ICU admission, but comparable hospital mortality to those requiring CCOS review without respiratory support. Results should be interpreted cautiously, as the model proposed depends on the existence of CCOS.

scholarly journals Spectrum and Clinical Characteristics of Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) With and Without Pneumonia

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huihui Zeng ◽  
Yiming Ma ◽  
Zhiguo Zhou ◽  
Wenlong Liu ◽  
Peng Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Viral Load ◽  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Limited Information ◽  
Viral Shedding ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Radiologic Findings ◽  
Global Pandemic

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has become a global pandemic. Based on symptoms, COVID-19 cases can be classified as symptomatic or asymptomatic. However, there is limited information about the differences between COVID-19 patients with and without pneumonia. Our study aimed to further discuss the spectrum and clinical characteristics of symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 patients with and without pneumonia.Methods: In China, all COVID-19 cases are hospitalized in designated hospitals until two continuous negative oropharyngeal swabs obtained, which allows the professional monitoring of symptoms and clinical characteristics. We stratified all COVID-19 cases in our database and evaluated clinical characteristics in different COVID-19 subgroups (symptomatic with pneumonia, symptomatic without pneumonia, asymptomatic with pneumonia, and asymptomatic without pneumonia).Results: According to symptoms and laboratory and radiologic findings, COVID-19 cases were defined as symptomatic with pneumonia, symptomatic without pneumonia, asymptomatic with pneumonia, or asymptomatic without pneumonia. There were differences in the clinical characteristics and prognosis among the four groups. Both non-invasive mechanical ventilation (18, 4.2%) and invasive mechanical ventilation (11, 2.6%) were applied in only the symptomatic with pneumonia group. Likewise, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and continuous renal replacement therapy were applied in only the symptomatic with pneumonia group. There were no differences in viral load, the durations of viral shedding, and hospitalization among the four groups.Conclusion: We have defined a comprehensive spectrum of COVID-19 with and without pneumonia. The symptomatic with pneumonia group consumed more medical resources than the other groups, and extra caution and monitoring should be applied in this group. The asymptomatic COVID-19 group had a similar viral load and viral shedding duration as the symptomatic COVID-19 group.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document