scholarly journals Severe Acute Acrocyanosis and Digital Gangrene as a Sign of Catastrophic COVID-19 Infection

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arun Agarwal ◽  
Ambika Sharma ◽  
Rekha Jakhar ◽  
Mudit Agarwal
Keyword(s):  
Critically Ill ◽  
Poor Prognosis ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Lower Limbs ◽  
Small Subset ◽  
Prognostic Role ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Therapeutic Anticoagulation ◽  
Infection Disease ◽  
Extremity Ischemia

Corona Virus Infection Disease 2019 (COVID-19) may present with different symptoms and complications during its course. Emerging evidence suggests that it induces a hypercoagulable state with micro and macroangiopathy. This hypercoagulopathy has been identified in a subset of critically ill COVID-19 patients. However, extremity ischemia with acrocyanosis and digital gangrene has not been commonly reported with COVID-19. It is caused due to microangiopathic and immunothrombosis phenomenon, and may be accompanied by microvascular involvement of other organs. Here, a case of critically ill 67-year-old maleCOVID-19 patient is reported who developed digital acrocyanosis and gangrene in lower limbs while being mechanically ventilated for severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) despite being haemodynamically stable (i.e., not needing vasopressor) and on therapeutic anticoagulation. He subsequently succumbed to his disease due to multiorgan dysfunction. This suggests that extremity ischemia correlates with poor prognosis in this small subset of critically ill COVID-19 patients, and can have a prognostic role in the disease outcome. It may be the first clinical manifestation even in non-vasculopathic patients.

scholarly journals Pathophysiological Processes Underlying the High Prevalence of Deep Vein Thrombosis in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Voicu ◽  
Chahinez Ketfi ◽  
Alain Stépanian ◽  
Benjamin G. Chousterman ◽  
Nassim Mohamedi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Lower Limbs ◽  
Venous Stasis ◽  
Venous Blood Flow ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
High Prevalence ◽  
Deep Vein

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) predisposes to deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) particularly in mechanically ventilated adults with severe pneumonia. The extremely high prevalence of DVT in the COVID-19 patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit (ICU) has been established between 25 and 84% based on studies including systematic duplex ultrasound of the lower limbs when prophylactic anticoagulation was systematically administrated. DVT prevalence has been shown to be markedly higher than in mechanically ventilated influenza patients (6–8%). Unusually high inflammatory and prothrombotic phenotype represents a striking feature of COVID-19 patients, as reflected by markedly elevated reactive protein C, fibrinogen, interleukin 6, von Willebrand factor, and factor VIII. Moreover, in critically ill patients, venous stasis has been associated with the prothrombotic phenotype attributed to COVID-19, which increases the risk of thrombosis. Venous stasis results among others from immobilization under muscular paralysis, mechanical ventilation with high positive end-expiratory pressure, and pulmonary microvascular network injuries or occlusions. Venous return to the heart is subsequently decreased with increase in central and peripheral venous pressures, marked proximal and distal veins dilation, and drops in venous blood flow velocities, leading to a spontaneous contrast “sludge pattern” in veins considered as prothrombotic. Together with endothelial lesions and hypercoagulability status, venous stasis completes the Virchow triad and considerably increases the prevalence of DVT and PE in critically ill COVID-19 patients, therefore raising questions regarding the optimal doses for thromboprophylaxis during ICU stay.

scholarly journals Microvascular Thrombosis and Ischaemic Limb Losses in Critically Ill Patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (01) ◽  
pp. 006-019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore Warkentin
Keyword(s):  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Protein C ◽  
Lower Limbs ◽  
Small Subset ◽  
Limb Injury ◽  
Microvascular Thrombosis ◽  
Nucleated Red Blood Cells ◽  
Arterial Pulses ◽  
Scientific Attention

AbstractRelatively little scientific attention has been given to the small subset of critically ill patients with circulatory shock who develop ischaemic limb losses (symmetrical peripheral gangrene [SPG]). The clinical picture consists of acral (distal extremity) tissue necrosis involving lower limbs in a largely symmetrical fashion and with detectable arterial pulses; in one-third of patients the upper extremities are also affected (potential for four-limb amputations). The laboratory picture includes thrombocytopenia, coagulopathy, and normoblastemia (circulating nucleated red blood cells). The explanation for limb losses is microvascular thrombosis caused by disseminated intravascular coagulation usually secondary to cardiogenic or septic shock. A common myth is that vasopressors cause the ischaemic limb injury. However, the more likely explanation is failure of the natural anticoagulant systems (protein C and antithrombin) to downregulate thrombin generation in the microvasculature. This is because more than 90% of patients with SPG have preceding ‘shock liver’, which occurs 2 to 5 days (median, 3 days) prior to ischaemic limb injury, with impaired hepatic production of protein C and antithrombin.

scholarly journals High sedation needs of critically ill COVID-19 ARDS patients—A monocentric observational study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. e0253778
Author(s):  
Armin Niklas Flinspach ◽  
Hendrik Booke ◽  
Kai Zacharowski ◽  
Ümniye Balaban ◽  
Eva Herrmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critically Ill ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Prone Positioning ◽  
Mixed Effect ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Global Pandemic ◽  
Potential Association ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Sedation Regimen

Background Therapy of severely affected coronavirus patient, requiring intubation and sedation is still challenging. Recently, difficulties in sedating these patients have been discussed. This study aims to describe sedation practices in patients with 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods We performed a retrospective monocentric analysis of sedation regimens in critically ill intubated patients with respiratory failure who required sedation in our mixed 32-bed university intensive care unit. All mechanically ventilated adults with COVID-19-induced ARDS requiring continuously infused sedative therapy admitted between April 4, 2020, and June 30, 2020 were included. We recorded demographic data, sedative dosages, prone positioning, sedation levels and duration. Descriptive data analysis was performed; for additional analysis, a logistic regression with mixed effect was used. Results In total, 56 patients (mean age 67 (±14) years) were included. The mean observed sedation period was 224 (±139) hours. To achieve the prescribed sedation level, we observed the need for two or three sedatives in 48.7% and 12.8% of the cases, respectively. In cases with a triple sedation regimen, the combination of clonidine, esketamine and midazolam was observed in most cases (75.7%). Analgesia was achieved using sufentanil in 98.6% of the cases. The analysis showed that the majority of COVID-19 patients required an unusually high sedation dose compared to those available in the literature. Conclusion The global pandemic continues to affect patients severely requiring ventilation and sedation, but optimal sedation strategies are still lacking. The findings of our observation suggest unusual high dosages of sedatives in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. Prescribed sedation levels appear to be achievable only with several combinations of sedatives in most critically ill patients suffering from COVID-19-induced ARDS and a potential association to the often required sophisticated critical care including prone positioning and ECMO treatment seems conceivable.

scholarly journals Bronchoscopic Intervention May be Associated with Better Outcomes in Mechanically Ventilated Coronavirus Disease-19 Patients: A Case Series

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (T1) ◽  
pp. 276-281
Author(s):  
Dewiyana A. Kusmana ◽  
Edwin Adhi Darmawan Batubara ◽  
Raka Aldy Nugraha ◽  
Theresia Rasta Karina ◽  
Natasha Setyasty Primaditta
Keyword(s):  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Aerosol Formation ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
Aerosol Generation ◽  
Therapeutic Benefits ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Infection Disease ◽  
Tracheal Suctioning ◽  
Coronavirus Infection

BACKGROUND: The emergence of a new strain of coronavirus infection, the coronavirus infection disease 2019 (COVID-19), has been a pandemic burden across the globe. Severe COVID-19, particularly in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), is associated with increased risk of admission to intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation, and mortality. Bronchoscopy has been widely employed as an adjunctive therapy in mechanically ventilated patients. However, the use of bronchoscopy in patients with COVID-19 has been strictly limited due to aerosol transmission. CASE REPORT: We reported 3 COVID-19 Cases presented to the hospital with ARDS. All of the patients were immediately intubated to improve oxygenation. During admission, the patients produced immense airway secretions that might have resulted in partial airway obstruction. A conventional tracheal suctioning did not help to promote clinical improvement. We decided to perform bronchoscopy with controlled suctioning by following a very tight protocol to prevent aerosol formation. A significant clinical and respiratory improvement was observed in all patients following bronchoscopy. Three of them were transferred to regular ward, however, one patient died during hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Bronchoscopic procedures may provide significant therapeutic benefits in severe COVID-19 patients. However, it should be kept in mind that this procedure should only be performed with a rigorous protocol to reduce the risk of aerosol generation and subsequent viral transmission.

First reported case of Weissella confusa abundance in the lung microbiota of a critically ill trauma patient with acute respiratory distress syndrome - caution warranted in the use of the Weissella genus as a probiotic

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandeep Chakraborty
Keyword(s):  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Starter Cultures ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Virulence Determinants ◽  
Prosthetic Joint

Weissella strains are currently being used for biotechnological and probiotic purposes [1]. While, Weissella hellenica found in flounder intestine had probiotic effects [2], certain species from this genus are opportunistic pathogens in humans. Apart from being implicated in disease in farmed rainbow trout [3], Weissella has been found to cause the following disease in humans.1. endocarditis [4,5]2. bacteraemia [6]3. prosthetic joint infection [7]Whole genome sequences ‘find several virulence determinants such as collagen adhesins, aggregation sub- stances, mucus-binding proteins, and hemolysins in some species’, as well as antibiotic resistance-encoding genes [8]. Caution is warranted in selecting of Weissella strains as starter cultures or probiotics, if at all, since the other option, Lactobacillus, are rarely involved in human disease.Here, the analysis of the lung microbiota in critically ill trauma patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome [9] shows (Accid:ERR1992912) shows complete colonization of Weissella (Fig 1). While, the study mentions ‘significant enrichment of potential pathogens including Streptococcus, Fusobacterium, Prevotella, Haemophilus and Treponema’, there is no reference to the Weissella genus. The percentages of Weissella strains are :confusa=81, soli=7 ,hellenica=5 ,diestrammenae=2. I believe this is the first reported case of Weissella causing ARDS in humans.

scholarly journals Etiology, incidence, and outcomes of patient–ventilator asynchrony in critically-ill patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yongfang Zhou ◽  
Steven R. Holets ◽  
Man Li ◽  
Gustavo A. Cortes-Puentes ◽  
Todd J. Meyer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Surgical Intensive Care ◽  
Mechanically Ventilated ◽  
History Of ◽  
Training Background ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractPatient–ventilator asynchrony (PVA) is commonly encountered during mechanical ventilation of critically ill patients. Estimates of PVA incidence vary widely. Type, risk factors, and consequences of PVA remain unclear. We aimed to measure the incidence and identify types of PVA, characterize risk factors for development, and explore the relationship between PVA and outcome among critically ill, mechanically ventilated adult patients admitted to medical, surgical, and medical-surgical intensive care units in a large academic institution staffed with varying provider training background. A single center, retrospective cohort study of all adult critically ill patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation for ≥ 12 h. A total of 676 patients who underwent 696 episodes of mechanical ventilation were included. Overall PVA occurred in 170 (24%) episodes. Double triggering 92(13%) was most common, followed by flow starvation 73(10%). A history of smoking, and pneumonia, sepsis, or ARDS were risk factors for overall PVA and double triggering (all P < 0.05). Compared with volume targeted ventilation, pressure targeted ventilation decreased the occurrence of events (all P < 0.01). During volume controlled synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation and pressure targeted ventilation, ventilator settings were associated with the incidence of overall PVA. The number of overall PVA, as well as double triggering and flow starvation specifically, were associated with worse outcomes and fewer hospital-free days (all P < 0.01). Double triggering and flow starvation are the most common PVA among critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients. Overall incidence as well as double triggering and flow starvation PVA specifically, portend worse outcome.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document