High rate of HSV-1 reactivation in invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients: Immunological findings.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Seeßle J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8248692 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveWe determined the prevalences of hyperoxemia and excessive oxygen use, and the epidemiology, ventilation characteristics and outcomes associated with hyperoxemia in invasively ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsPost hoc analysis of a national, multicentre, observational study in 22 ICUs. Patients were classified in the first two days of invasive ventilation as 'hyperoxemic' or 'normoxemic'. The co-primary endpoints were prevalence of hyperoxemia (PaO2 > 90 mmHg) and prevalence of excessive oxygen use (FiO2 ≥ 60% while PaO2 > 90 mmHg or SpO2 > 92%). Secondary endpoints included ventilator settings and ventilation parameters, duration of ventilation, length of stay (LOS) in ICU and hospital, and mortality in ICU, hospital, and at day 28 and 90. We used propensity matching to control for observed confounding factors that may influence endpoints.ResultsOf 851 COVID-19 patients, 225 (26.4%) were classified as hyperoxemic. Excessive oxygen use occurred in 385 (45.2%) patients. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) severity was lowest in hyperoxemic patients. Hyperoxemic patients were ventilated with higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), while rescue therapies for hypoxemia were applied more often in normoxemic patients. Neither in the unmatched nor in the matched analysis were there differences between hyperoxemic and normoxemic patients with regard to any of the clinical outcomes.ConclusionIn this cohort of invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients, hyperoxemia occurred often and so did excessive oxygen use. The main differences between hyperoxemic and normoxemic patients were ARDS severity and use of PEEP. Clinical outcomes were not different between hyperoxemic and normoxemic patients.
| S-EPMC10155497 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To describe clinical characteristics and management of intensive care units (ICU) patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and to determine 90-day mortality after ICU admission and associated risk factors. This observational retrospective study was conducted in six intensive care units (ICUs) in three university hospitals in Marseille, France. Between 10 March and 10 May 2020, all adult patients admitted in ICU with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 and respiratory failure were eligible for inclusion. The statistical analysis was focused on the mechanically ventilated patients. The primary outcome was the 90-day mortality after ICU admission. Included in the study were 172 patients with COVID-19 related respiratory failure, 117 of whom (67%) received invasive mechanical ventilation. 90-day mortality of the invasively ventilated patients was 27.4%. Median duration of ventilation and median length of stay in ICU for these patients were 20 (9-33) days and 29 (17-46) days. Mortality increased with the severity of ARDS at ICU admission. After multivariable analysis was carried out, risk factors associated with 90-day mortality were age, elevated Charlson comorbidity index, chronic statins intake and occurrence of an arterial thrombosis. In this cohort, age and number of comorbidities were the main predictors of mortality in invasively ventilated patients. The only modifiable factor associated with mortality in multivariate analysis was arterial thrombosis.
| S-EPMC8658321 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 disease can lead to severe functional impairments after discharge. We assessed the quality of life of invasively ventilated COVID-19 ARDS survivors.MethodsWe carried out a prospective follow-up study of the patients admitted to the Intensive Care Units (ICUs) of a teaching hospital. Patients affected by COVID-19 ARDS who required invasive ventilation and were successfully discharged home were assessed through the telephone administration of validated tests. We explored survival, functional outcomes, return to work, quality of life, cognitive and psychological sequelae. The main variables of interest were the following: demographics, severity scores, laboratory values, comorbidities, schooling, working status, treatments received during ICU stay, complications, and psychological, cognitive, functional outcomes.ResultsOut of 116 consecutive invasively ventilated patients, overall survival was 65/116 (56%) with no death occurring after hospital discharge. Forty-two patients were already discharged home with a median follow-up time of 61 (51-71) days after ICU discharge and 39 of them accepted to be interviewed. Only one patient (1/39) experienced cognitive decline. The vast majority of patients reported no difficulty in walking (32/35:82%), self-care (33/39:85%), and usual activities (30/39:78%). All patients were either malnourished (15/39:38%) or at risk for malnutrition (24/39:62%). Exertional dyspnea was present in 20/39 (51%) patients. 19/39 (49%) reported alterations in senses of smell and/or taste either before or after hospitalization.ConclusionsInvasively ventilated COVID-19 ARDS survivors have an overall good recovery at a 2-months follow-up which is better than what was previously reported in non-COVID-19 ARDS patients.
| S-EPMC8014684 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We describe the incidence and practice of prone positioning and determined the association of use of prone positioning with outcomes in invasively ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a national, multicenter observational study, performed at 22 intensive care units in the Netherlands. Patients were categorized into 4 groups, based on indication for and actual use of prone positioning. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were 90-day mortality, and ICU and hospital length of stay. In 734 patients, prone positioning was indicated in 60%-the incidence of prone positioning was higher in patients with an indication than in patients without an indication for prone positioning (77 vs. 48%, p = 0.001). Patients were left in the prone position for median 15.0 (10.5-21.0) hours per full calendar day-the duration was longer in patients with an indication than in patients without an indication for prone positioning (16.0 (11.0-23.0) vs. 14.0 (10.0-19.0) hours, p < 0.001). Ventilator settings and ventilation parameters were not different between the four groups, except for FiO2 which was higher in patients having an indication for and actually receiving prone positioning. Our data showed no difference in mortality at day 28 between the 4 groups (HR no indication, no prone vs. no indication, prone vs. indication, no prone vs. indication, prone: 1.05 (0.76-1.45) vs. 0.88 (0.62-1.26) vs. 1.15 (0.80-1.54) vs. 0.96 (0.73-1.26) (p = 0.08)). Factors associated with the use of prone positioning were ARDS severity and FiO2. The findings of this study are that prone positioning is often used in COVID-19 patients, even in patients that have no indication for this intervention. Sessions of prone positioning lasted long. Use of prone positioning may affect outcomes.
| S-EPMC8541588 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about the practice of ventilation management in patients with COVID-19. We aimed to describe the practice of ventilation management and to establish outcomes in invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19 in a single country during the first month of the outbreak.MethodsPRoVENT-COVID is a national, multicentre, retrospective observational study done at 18 intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands. Consecutive patients aged at least 18 years were eligible for participation if they had received invasive ventilation for COVID-19 at a participating ICU during the first month of the national outbreak in the Netherlands. The primary outcome was a combination of ventilator variables and parameters over the first 4 calendar days of ventilation: tidal volume, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), respiratory system compliance, and driving pressure. Secondary outcomes included the use of adjunctive treatments for refractory hypoxaemia and ICU complications. Patient-centred outcomes were ventilator-free days at day 28, duration of ventilation, duration of ICU and hospital stay, and mortality. PRoVENT-COVID is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04346342).FindingsBetween March 1 and April 1, 2020, 553 patients were included in the study. Median tidal volume was 6·3 mL/kg predicted bodyweight (IQR 5·7-7·1), PEEP was 14·0 cm H2O (IQR 11·0-15·0), and driving pressure was 14·0 cm H2O (11·2-16·0). Median respiratory system compliance was 31·9 mL/cm H2O (26·0-39·9). Of the adjunctive treatments for refractory hypoxaemia, prone positioning was most often used in the first 4 days of ventilation (283 [53%] of 530 patients). The median number of ventilator-free days at day 28 was 0 (IQR 0-15); 186 (35%) of 530 patients had died by day 28. Predictors of 28-day mortality were gender, age, tidal volume, respiratory system compliance, arterial pH, and heart rate on the first day of invasive ventilation.InterpretationIn patients with COVID-19 who were invasively ventilated during the first month of the outbreak in the Netherlands, lung-protective ventilation with low tidal volume and low driving pressure was broadly applied and prone positioning was often used. The applied PEEP varied widely, despite an invariably low respiratory system compliance. The findings of this national study provide a basis for new hypotheses and sample size calculations for future trials of invasive ventilation for COVID-19. These data could also help in the interpretation of findings from other studies of ventilation practice and outcomes in invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19.FundingAmsterdam University Medical Centers, location Academic Medical Center.
| S-EPMC7584441 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough COVID-19 has greatly affected many low-income and middle-income countries, detailed information about patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) is still scarce. Our aim was to examine ventilation characteristics and outcomes in invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19 in Argentina, an upper middle-income country.MethodsIn this prospective, multicentre cohort study (SATICOVID), we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 who were on invasive mechanical ventilation and admitted to one of 63 ICUs in Argentina. Patient demographics and clinical, laboratory, and general management variables were collected on day 1 (ICU admission); physiological respiratory and ventilation variables were collected on days 1, 3, and 7. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. All patients were followed until death in hospital or hospital discharge, whichever occurred first. Secondary outcomes were ICU mortality, identification of independent predictors of mortality, duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, and patterns of change in physiological respiratory and mechanical ventilation variables. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04611269, and is complete.FindingsBetween March 20, 2020, and Oct 31, 2020, we enrolled 1909 invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19, with a median age of 62 years [IQR 52-70]. 1294 (67·8%) were men, hypertension and obesity were the main comorbidities, and 939 (49·2%) patients required vasopressors. Lung-protective ventilation was widely used and median duration of ventilation was 13 days (IQR 7-22). Median tidal volume was 6·1 mL/kg predicted bodyweight (IQR 6·0-7·0) on day 1, and the value increased significantly up to day 7; positive end-expiratory pressure was 10 cm H2O (8-12) on day 1, with a slight but significant decrease to day 7. Ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2) to fractional inspired oxygen (FiO2) was 160 (IQR 111-218), respiratory system compliance 36 mL/cm H2O (29-44), driving pressure 12 cm H2O (10-14), and FiO2 0·60 (0·45-0·80) on day 1. Acute respiratory distress syndrome developed in 1672 (87·6%) of patients; 1176 (61·6%) received prone positioning. In-hospital mortality was 57·7% (1101/1909 patients) and ICU mortality was 57·0% (1088/1909 patients); 462 (43·8%) patients died of refractory hypoxaemia, frequently overlapping with septic shock (n=174). Cox regression identified age (hazard ratio 1·02 [95% CI 1·01-1·03]), Charlson score (1·16 [1·11-1·23]), endotracheal intubation outside of the ICU (ie, before ICU admission; 1·37 [1·10-1·71]), vasopressor use on day 1 (1·29 [1·07-1·55]), D-dimer concentration (1·02 [1·01-1·03]), PaO2/FiO2 on day 1 (0·998 [0·997-0·999]), arterial pH on day 1 (1·01 [1·00-1·01]), driving pressure on day 1 (1·05 [1·03-1·08]), acute kidney injury (1·66 [1·36-2·03]), and month of admission (1·10 [1·03-1·18]) as independent predictors of mortality.InterpretationIn patients with COVID-19 who required invasive mechanical ventilation, lung-protective ventilation was widely used but mortality was high. Predictors of mortality in our study broadly agreed with those identified in studies of invasively ventilated patients in high-income countries. The sustained burden of COVID-19 on scarce health-care personnel might have contributed to high mortality over the course of our study in Argentina. These data might help to identify points for improvement in the management of patients in middle-income countries and elsewhere.FundingNone.TranslationFor the Spanish translation of the Summary see Supplementary Materials section.
| S-EPMC8253540 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lung ultrasound (LUS) can be used to assess loss of aeration, which is associated with outcome in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presenting to the emergency department. We hypothesized that LUS scores are associated with outcome in critically ill COVID-19 patients receiving invasive ventilation. This retrospective international multicenter study evaluated patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with at least one LUS study within 5 days after invasive mechanical ventilation initiation. The global LUS score was calculated by summing the 12 regional scores (range 0-36). Pleural line abnormalities and subpleural consolidations were also scored. The outcomes were successful liberation from the ventilator and intensive care mortality within 28 days, analyzed with multistate, competing risk proportional hazard models. One hundred thirty-seven patients with COVID-19-related ARDS were included in our study. The global LUS score was associated with successful liberation from mechanical ventilation (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.91 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-0.96; P = 0.0007) independently of the ARDS severity, but not with 28 days mortality (HR: 1.03; 95% CI 0.97-1.08; P = 0.36). Subpleural consolidation and pleural line abnormalities did not add to the prognostic value of the global LUS score. Examinations within 24 hours of intubation showed no prognostic value. To conclude, a lower global LUS score 24 hours after invasive ventilation initiation is associated with increased probability of liberation from the mechanical ventilator COVID-19 ARDS patients, independently of the ARDS severity.
| S-EPMC8641363 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is no information on acute kidney injury (AKI) and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) among invasively ventilated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in Western healthcare systems.ObjectiveTo study the prevalence, characteristics, risk factors and outcome of AKI and CRRT among invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients.MethodsObservational study in a tertiary care hospital in Milan, Italy.ResultsAmong 99 patients, 72 (75.0%) developed AKI and 17 (17.7%) received CRRT. Most of the patients developed stage 1 AKI (33 [45.8%]), while 15 (20.8%) developed stage 2 AKI and 24 (33.4%) a stage 3 AKI. Patients who developed AKI or needed CRRT at latest follow-up were older, and among CRRT treated patients a greater proportion had preexisting CKD. Hospital mortality was 38.9% for AKI and 52.9% for CRRT patients.ConclusionsAmong invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients, AKI is very common and CRRT use is common. Both carry a high risk of in-hospital mortality.
| S-EPMC7445373 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLung ultrasound (LUS) can detect pulmonary edema and it is under consideration to be added to updated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) criteria. However, it remains uncertain whether different LUS scores can be used to quantify pulmonary edema in patient with ARDS.ObjectivesThis study examined the diagnostic accuracy of four LUS scores with the extravascular lung water index (EVLWi) assessed by transpulmonary thermodilution in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 ARDS.MethodsIn this predefined secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized-controlled trial (InventCOVID), patients were enrolled within 48 hours after intubation and underwent LUS and EVLWi measurement on the first and fourth day after enrolment. EVLWi and ∆EVLWi were used as reference standards. Two 12-region scores (global LUS and LUS-ARDS), an 8-region anterior-lateral score and a 4-region B-line score were used as index tests. Pearson correlation was performed and the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROCC) for severe pulmonary edema (EVLWi > 15 mL/kg) was calculated.Results26 out of 30 patients (87%) had complete LUS and EVLWi measurements at time point 1 and 24 out of 29 patients (83%) at time point 2. The global LUS (r = 0.54), LUS-ARDS (r = 0.58) and anterior-lateral score (r = 0.54) correlated significantly with EVLWi, while the B-line score did not (r = 0.32). ∆global LUS (r = 0.49) and ∆anterior-lateral LUS (r = 0.52) correlated significantly with ∆EVLWi. AUROCC for EVLWi > 15 ml/kg was 0.73 for the global LUS, 0.79 for the anterior-lateral and 0.85 for the LUS-ARDS score.ConclusionsOverall, LUS demonstrated an acceptable diagnostic accuracy for detection of pulmonary edema in moderate-to-severe COVID-19 ARDS when compared with PICCO. For identifying patients at risk of severe pulmonary edema, an extended score considering pleural morphology may be of added value.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04794088, registered on 11 March 2021. European Clinical Trials Database number 2020-005447-23.
| S-EPMC10545605 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundQuantitative radiological scores for the extent and severity of pulmonary infiltrates based on chest radiography (CXR) and computed tomography (CT) scan are increasingly used in critically ill invasively ventilated patients. This study aimed to determine and compare the prognostic capacity of the Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema (RALE) score and the chest CT Severity Score (CTSS) in a cohort of invasively ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19.MethodsTwo-center retrospective observational study, including consecutive invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients. Trained scorers calculated the RALE score of first available CXR and the CTSS of the first available CT scan. The primary outcome was ICU mortality; secondary outcomes were duration of ventilation in survivors, length of stay in ICU, and hospital-, 28-, and 90-day mortality. Prognostic accuracy for ICU death was expressed using odds ratios and Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curves (AUROC).ResultsA total of 82 patients were enrolled. The median RALE score (22 [15-37] vs. 26 [20-39]; p = 0.34) and the median CTSS (18 [16-21] vs. 21 [18-23]; p = 0.022) were both lower in ICU survivors compared to ICU non-survivors, although only the difference in CTSS reached statistical significance. While no association was observed between ICU mortality and RALE score (OR 1.35 [95%CI 0.64-2.84]; p = 0.417; AUC 0.50 [0.44-0.56], this was noticed with the CTSS (OR, 2.31 [1.22-4.38]; p = 0.010) although with poor prognostic capacity (AUC 0.64 [0.57-0.69]). The correlation between the RALE score and CTSS was weak (r2 = 0.075; p = 0.012).ConclusionsDespite poor prognostic capacity, only CTSS was associated with ICU mortality in our cohort of COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC9497927 | biostudies-literature