scholarly journals Long-term survival of mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19: an observational cohort study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Oscar Peñuelas ◽  
Laura del Campo-Albendea ◽  
Amanda Lesmes González de Aledo ◽  
José Manuel Añón ◽  
Carmen Rodríguez-Solís ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Predictive Factors ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated Patients ◽  
Ventilated Patients

Abstract Background Information is lacking regarding long-term survival and predictive factors for mortality in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation. We aimed to estimate 180-day mortality of patients with COVID-19 requiring invasive ventilation, and to develop a predictive model for long-term mortality. Methods Retrospective, multicentre, national cohort study between March 8 and April 30, 2020 in 16 intensive care units (ICU) in Spain. Participants were consecutive adults who received invasive mechanical ventilation for COVID-19. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection detected in positive testing of a nasopharyngeal sample and confirmed by real time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rt-PCR). The primary outcomes was 180-day survival after hospital admission. Secondary outcomes were length of ICU and hospital stay, and ICU and in-hospital mortality. A predictive model was developed to estimate the probability of 180-day mortality. Results 868 patients were included (median age, 64 years [interquartile range [IQR], 56–71 years]; 72% male). Severity at ICU admission, estimated by SAPS3, was 56 points [IQR 50–63]. Prior to intubation, 26% received some type of noninvasive respiratory support. The unadjusted overall 180-day survival rates was 59% (95% CI 56–62%). The predictive factors measured during ICU stay, and associated with 180-day mortality were: age [Odds Ratio [OR] per 1-year increase 1.051, 95% CI 1.033–1.068)), SAPS3 (OR per 1-point increase 1.027, 95% CI 1.011–1.044), diabetes (OR 1.546, 95% CI 1.085–2.204), neutrophils to lymphocytes ratio (OR per 1-unit increase 1.008, 95% CI 1.001–1.016), failed attempt of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation prior to orotracheal intubation (OR 1.878 (95% CI 1.124–3.140), use of selective digestive decontamination strategy during ICU stay (OR 0.590 (95% CI 0.358–0.972) and administration of low dosage of corticosteroids (methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg) (OR 2.042 (95% CI 1.205–3.460). Conclusion The long-term survival of mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19 reaches more than 50% and may help to provide individualized risk stratification and potential treatments. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04379258. Registered 10 April 2020 (retrospectively registered)

scholarly journals Long-Term Survival of Mechanically Ventilated Patients with Severe COVID-19: An Observational Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oscar Penuelas ◽  
Laura del Campo-Albendea ◽  
Amanda Lesmes González de Aledo ◽  
José Manuel Añón ◽  
Carmen Rodríguez-Solís ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Icu Mortality ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated Patients ◽  
Ventilated Patients

Abstract Background: Information is lacking regarding long-term survival and predictive factors for mortality in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation. We aimed to estimate 90-day and 180-day survival of patients with COVID-19 requiring invasive ventilation and to develop a predictive model for intensive care unit mortality.Methods: Retrospective, multicentre, national cohort study between March 8 and April 30, 2020 in 16 intensive care units (ICU) in Spain. Participants were consecutive adults who received invasive mechanical ventilation for COVID–19. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection detected in positive testing of a nasopharyngeal sample and confirmed by real time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rt-PCR). The primary outcomes were 90-day and 180-day survival after hospital admission. Secondary outcomes were length of ICU and hospital stay, and ICU and in-hospital mortality. A predictive model and a nomogram were developed to estimate the probability of ICU mortality. Results: 868 patients were included (median age, 64 years [interquartile range [IQR], 56-71 years]; 72% male). Severity at ICU admission, estimated by SAPS3, was 56 points [IQR 50-63]. Prior to intubation, 26% received some type of noninvasive respiratory support. The 90-day and 180-day survival rates were 69% (95% confidence interval [CI] 66%-72%) and 59% (95% CI 56%-62%) respectively. The predictive factors associated with ICU mortality were: age (odds ratio [OR] 1.049 [95% CI 1.032-1.066] per 1-year increase), SAPS3 (OR 1.025 [95% CI 1.008-1.041] per 1-point increase), neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (OR 1.009 [95% CI 1.002-1.016]), a failed attempt of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation previous to orotracheal intubation(OR 2.131 [95% CI 1.279-3.550]), and use of selective digestive decontamination (OR 0.587 [95% CI 0.358-0.963]).Conclusion: The long-term survival of mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19 reaches more than 50% and may help to provide individualized risk stratification and potential treatments.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04379258. Registered 10 April 2020 (retrospectively registered).

scholarly journals Increased susceptibility to intensive care unit-acquired pneumonia in severe COVID-19 patients: a multicentre retrospective cohort study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-François Llitjos ◽  
Swann Bredin ◽  
Jean-Baptiste Lascarrou ◽  
Thibaud Soumagne ◽  
Mariana Cojocaru ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Viral Pneumonia ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated Patients ◽  
Multicentre Cohort Study ◽  
Multicentre Cohort ◽  
Ventilated Patients

Abstract Background The aim of this study is to determine whether severe COVID-19 patients harbour a higher risk of ICU-acquired pneumonia. Methods This retrospective multicentre cohort study comprised all consecutive patients admitted to seven ICUs for severe COVID-19 pneumonia during the first COVID-19 surge in France. Inclusion criteria were laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation for 48 h or more. Control groups were two historical cohorts of mechanically ventilated patients admitted to the ICU for bacterial or non-SARS-CoV-2 viral pneumonia. The outcome of interest was the development of ICU-acquired pneumonia. The determinants of ICU-acquired pneumonia were investigated in a multivariate competing risk analysis. Result One hundred and seventy-six patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia admitted to the ICU between March 1st and 30th June of 2020 were included into the study. Historical control groups comprised 435 patients with bacterial pneumonia and 48 ones with viral pneumonia. ICU-acquired pneumonia occurred in 52% of COVID-19 patients, whereas in 26% and 23% of patients with bacterial or viral pneumonia, respectively (p < 0.001). Times from initiation of mechanical ventilation to ICU-acquired pneumonia were similar across the three groups. In multivariate analysis, the risk of ICU-acquired pneumonia remained independently associated with underlying COVID-19 (SHR = 2.18; 95 CI 1.2–3.98, p = 0.011). Conclusion COVID-19 appears an independent risk factor of ICU-acquired pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients with pneumonia. Whether this is driven by immunomodulatory properties by the SARS-CoV-2 or this is related to particular processes of care remains to be investigated.

scholarly journals COVIDTrach: a prospective cohort study of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 undergoing tracheostomy in the UK

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. e000077
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Prospective Cohort Study ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Clinical History ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated Patients ◽  
Pressure Setting ◽  
Uk National Health Service ◽  
Ventilated Patients

ObjectivesCOVIDTrach is a UK multicentre prospective cohort study project that aims to evaluate the outcomes of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 receiving mechanical ventilation and record the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers involved in the procedure.DesignData on patient demographic, clinical history and outcomes were entered prospectively and updated over time via an online database (REDCap). Clinical variables were compared with outcomes, with logistic regression used to develop a model for mortality. Participants recorded whether any operators tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within 2 weeks of the procedure.SettingUK National Health Service departments involved in treating patients with COVID-19 receiving mechanical ventilation.ParticipantsThe cohort comprised 1605 tracheostomy cases from 126 UK hospitals collected between 6 April and 26 August 2020.Main outcome measuresMortality following tracheostomy, successful wean from mechanical ventilation and length of time from tracheostomy to wean, discharge from hospital, complications from tracheostomy, reported SARS-CoV-2 infection among operators.ResultsThe median time from intubation to tracheostomy was 15 days (IQR 11, 21). 285 (18%) patients died following the procedure. 1229 (93%) of the survivors had been successfully weaned from mechanical ventilation at censoring and 1049 (81%) had been discharged from hospital. Age, inspired oxygen concentration, positive end-expiratory pressure setting, fever, number of days of ventilation before tracheostomy, C reactive protein and the use of anticoagulation and inotropic support independently predicted mortality. Six reports were received of operators testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 within 2 weeks of the procedure.ConclusionsTracheostomy appears to be safe in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 and to operators performing the procedure and we identified clinical parameters that are predictive of mortality.Trial registration numberThe study is registered with ClinicalTrials.Gov (NCT04572438).

scholarly journals Tracheostomy Practice in Mechanically Ventilated Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: a Single-center Retrospective Study With Focus on Tracheomalacia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcello Guarnieri ◽  
Patrizia Andreoni ◽  
Hedwige Gay ◽  
Riccardo Giudici ◽  
Maurizio Bottiroli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated Patients ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Ventilated Patients

Abstract Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic increased the number of patients needing invasive mechanical ventilation, either through an endotracheal tube or through a tracheostomy. Tracheomalacia is a rare, but potentially severe complication of mechanical ventilation, which can significantly complicate the weaning process. Aim of this study was to describe the strategies of airway management in mechanically ventilated patients with respiratory failure due to SARS-CoV-2, the incidence of severe tracheomalacia, and investigate the factors associated with its occurrence.Methods. Retrospective, single-center study performed in an Italian teaching hospital. All adult patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) between February 24 and June 30, 2020, treated with invasive mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure caused by SARS-CoV-2 were included. Clinical data were collected on the day of ICU admission, while information regarding airway management was collected daily.Results. A total of 151 patients were included in the study. On admission, ARDS severity was mild in 21%, moderate in 62%, and severe in 17% of the cases, with an overall mortality of 39.7%. A tracheostomy was performed in 73 (48.3%) patients: open surgical technique in 54 patients (74%) and percutaneous Ciaglia technique in 19 patients (26%). Patients in whom a tracheostomy was performed had, compared to the other patients, a longer duration of mechanical ventilation and longer ICU and hospital length of stay. Tracheomalacia was diagnosed in 8 (5%) patients. The factors associated with tracheomalacia were female sex, obesity, and tracheostomy.Conclusions. In our population, approximately 50% of patients with ARDS due to SARS-CoV-2 were tracheostomized. Tracheostomized patients had a longer ICU and hospital length of stay. Five percent of our population was diagnosed with tracheomalacia. This percentage is 10 times higher than what is reported in available literature and the underlying mechanisms are not fully understood.

scholarly journals Risk Factors for 28-Day in-Hospital Mortality in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with COVID-19: An International Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gianluigi Li Bassi ◽  
Jacky Y. Suen ◽  
Nicole White ◽  
Heidi J. Dalton ◽  
Jonathon Fanning ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Hospital Mortality ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Cox Regression Analysis ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated Patients ◽  
Ventilated Patients

Abstract Background: Risk factors associated with mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on mechanical ventilation are still not fully elucidated. Thus, we aimed to identify patient-level factors, readily available at the bedside, associated with the risk of in-hospital mortality within 28 days from commencement of invasive mechanical ventilation (28-day IMV mortality) in patients with COVID-19. Methods Prospective observational cohort study in 148 intensive care units in the global COVID-19 Critical Care Consortium. Patients with clinically suspected or laboratory confirmed COVID-19 infection admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) from February 2nd through December 29th, 2020, requiring IMV. No study-specific interventions were performed. Patient characteristics and clinical data were assessed upon ICU admission, the commencement of IMV and for 28 days thereafter. We primarily aimed to identify time-independent and time-dependent risk factors for 28-day IMV mortality. Results: A total of 1713 patients were included in the survival analysis, 588 patients died in hospital within 28 days of commencing IMV (34.3%). Cox-regression analysis identified associations between the hazard of 28-day IMV mortality with age (HR 1.27 per 10-year increase in age, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.37, P<0.001), PEEP upon commencement of IMV (HR 0.78 per 5-cmH2O increase, 95% CI 0.66-0.93, P=0.005). Time-dependent parameters associated with 28-day IMV mortality were serum creatinine (HR 1.30 per doubling, 95% CI 1.19-1.42, P<0.001), lactate (HR 1.16 per doubling, 95% CI 1.06-1.27 P=0.001), PaCO2 (HR 1.31 per doubling, 95% CI 1.05-1.64, P=0.015), pH (HR 0.82 per 0.1 increase, 95% CI 0.74-0.91, P<0.001), PaO2/FiO2 (HR 0.56 per doubling, 95% CI 0.50-0.62, P<0.001) and mean arterial pressure (HR 0.92 per 10 mmHg increase, 95% CI 0.88-0.97, P=0.002).Conclusions: This international study establishes that in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19, older age and clinically relevant variables monitored at the bedside are risk factors for 28-day IMV mortality. Further investigation is warranted to validate any causative roles these parameters might play in influencing clinical outcomes.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Protocolized Sedation Utilizing the COMFORT-B Scale in Mechanically Ventilated Children in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

2019 ◽  
Vol 08 (03) ◽  
pp. 156-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kantara Saelim ◽  
Shevachut Chavananon ◽  
Kanokpan Ruangnapa ◽  
Pharsai Prasertsan ◽  
Wanaporn Anuntaseree
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Pediatric Intensive Care ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated Patients ◽  
Sedation Protocol ◽  
Ventilated Patients

AbstractAppropriate sedation in mechanically ventilated patients is important to facilitate adequate respiratory support and maintain patient safety. However, the optimal sedation protocol for children is unclear. This study assessed the effectiveness of a sedation protocol utilizing the COMFORT-B sedation scale in reducing the duration of mechanical ventilation in children. This was a nonrandomized prospective cohort study compared with a historical control. The prospective cohort study was conducted between November 2015 and August 2016 and included 58 mechanically ventilated patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). All patients received protocolized sedation utilizing the COMFORT-B scale, which was assessed every 12 hours after intubation by a single assessor. The prospective data were compared with retrospective data of 58 mechanically ventilated patients who received sedation by usual care from November 2014 to August 2015. Fifty percent of 116 patients were male and the mean age was 22 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 6.6–68.4). Patients in the intervention group showed no difference in the duration of mechanical ventilation (median 4.5 [IQR: 2.2–10.5] vs. 5 [IQR: 3–8.8] days). Also, there were no significant differences in the PICU length of stay (LOS; median 7 vs. 7 days, p = 0.59) and hospital LOS (median 18 vs. 14 days, p = 0.14) between the intervention and control groups. The percentages of sedative drugs, including fentanyl, morphine, and midazolam, in each group were not statistically different. The COMFORT-B scale with protocolized sedation in mechanically ventilated pediatric patients in the PICU did not reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation compared with usual care.

scholarly journals Effect of enterally administered sleep-promoting medication on the intravenous sedative dose and its safety and cost profile in mechanically ventilated patients: A retrospective cohort study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. e0261305
Author(s):  
Takefumi Tsunemitsu ◽  
Yuki Kataoka ◽  
Masaru Matsumoto ◽  
Takashi Hashimoto ◽  
Takao Suzuki
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Body Weight ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated Patients ◽  
Ventilated Patients ◽  
Sedative Dose

Background The clinical effect of enteral administration of sleep-promoting medication (SPM) in mechanically ventilated patients remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between enteral SPM administration and the intravenous sedative dose and examine the safety and cost of enteral SPM administration. Methods This single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted in a Japanese tertiary hospital intensive care unit (ICU). The exposure was enteral SPM administration during mechanical ventilation. The outcome was the average daily propofol dose per body weight administered as a continuous sedative during mechanical ventilation. Patients were divided into three groups based on the timing of SPM administration at ICU admission: “administration within 48 hours (early administration [EA]),” “administration after 48 hours (late administration [LA]),” and “no administration (NA).” We used multiple linear regression models. Results Of 123 included patients, 37, 50, and 36 patients were assigned to the EA, LA, and NA groups, respectively. The average daily propofol dose per body weight was significantly lower in the EA group than in the LA and NA groups (β -5.13 [95% confidence interval (CI) -8.93 to -1.33] and β -4.51 [95% CI -8.59 to -0.43], respectively). Regarding safety, enteral SPM administration did not increase adverse events, including self-extubation. The total cost of neuroactive drugs tended to be lower in the EA group than in the LA and NA groups. Conclusions Early enteral SPM administration reduced the average daily propofol dose per body weight without increasing adverse events.

scholarly journals Selection strategy for sedation depth in critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (S2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Longxiang Su ◽  
Chun Liu ◽  
Fengxiang Chang ◽  
Bo Tang ◽  
Lin Han ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Dimensionality Reduction ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Latent Profile Analysis ◽  
Profile Analysis ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated Patients ◽  
Sedation And Analgesia ◽  
Ventilated Patients

Abstract Background Analgesia and sedation therapy are commonly used for critically ill patients, especially mechanically ventilated patients. From the initial nonsedation programs to deep sedation and then to on-demand sedation, the understanding of sedation therapy continues to deepen. However, according to different patient’s condition, understanding the individual patient’s depth of sedation needs remains unclear. Methods The public open source critical illness database Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III was used in this study. Latent profile analysis was used as a clustering method to classify mechanically ventilated patients based on 36 variables. Principal component analysis dimensionality reduction was used to select the most influential variables. The ROC curve was used to evaluate the classification accuracy of the model. Results Based on 36 characteristic variables, we divided patients undergoing mechanical ventilation and sedation and analgesia into two categories with different mortality rates, then further reduced the dimensionality of the data and obtained the 9 variables that had the greatest impact on classification, most of which were ventilator parameters. According to the Richmond-ASS scores, the two phenotypes of patients had different degrees of sedation and analgesia, and the corresponding ventilator parameters were also significantly different. We divided the validation cohort into three different levels of sedation, revealing that patients with high ventilator conditions needed a deeper level of sedation, while patients with low ventilator conditions required reduction in the depth of sedation as soon as possible to promote recovery and avoid reinjury. Conclusion Through latent profile analysis and dimensionality reduction, we divided patients treated with mechanical ventilation and sedation and analgesia into two categories with different mortalities and obtained 9 variables that had the greatest impact on classification, which revealed that the depth of sedation was limited by the condition of the respiratory system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document