Dataset Information

Plasma Exchange in Patients With Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Single-Center Experience.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Recent evidence suggests a multilevel inflammatory syndrome as a driving factor in some of the most severely ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients with overlapping features to other hyperinflammatory or autoimmune diseases. Therefore, plasma exchange is considered as potential therapy in these patients.

Objectives

We characterize the longitudinal therapeutic efficacy and safety profile of plasma exchange in critically ill patients with clinical and laboratory evidences of coronavirus disease 2019-related immunopathology.

Design setting and participants

A retropsective case-control study of critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients treated with plasma exchange at Heidelberg University Hospital between March and December 2020. Plasma exchange-treated patients were compared with coronavirus disease 2019 patients on standard therapy matched for age, gender, disease severity, and features of hyperinflammatory syndrome.

Main outcome and measures

Mortality rate and course of clinical and laboratory parameters in response to plasma exchange were assessed in coronavirus disease 2019 patients and in patients on standard care. A plasma volume of 50 mL per kg body weight or a maximum of 4 L was exchanged.

Results

In total, 28 critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients were treated with a median of three plasma exchange procedures per patient. No relevant complications occurred during plasma exchange therapy. Inflammatory and biochemical markers of end-organ damage and endothelial activation were significantly reduced following plasma exchange together with normalization of body temperature, improved pulmonary function, and reduced vasopressor demand. Most importantly, these improvements were maintained after the last plasma exchange. In contrast, no such effects were observed in the control group, although baseline clinical and laboratory parameters were comparable. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed improved 30-day survival in the plasma exchange group compared with the control group (67.9% vs 42.9%; p = 0.044). In a multivariable analysis, the hazard ratio for death was 0.27 (95% CI, 0.11-0.68; p = 0.005) with plasma exchange versus standard care.

Conclusions and relevance

Our data provide further evidence for plasma exchange as a novel therapeutic strategy in a subset of critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients by potentially reversing the complex coronavirus disease 2019 immunopathology. Randomized controlled trials are underway to confirm these positive results.

SUBMITTER: Nusshag C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8382335 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe current outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), epi-centered in Wuhan, Hubei Province of the China, has become a global health emergency. Several studies from China have recently provided the evidence of epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients. Investigation on the role of chest CT in patient screening and management course in a large cohort remains paucity.MethodsThis was a retrospective observational study based on the data collected between January 19 and 2020 to February 15, 2020. A clinic workflow using chest CT and RT-PCR assay to screen suspected patient was reviewed. Clinical data were evaluated and patients were classified to mild, common, severe and critical group. Chest CT characteristics of each patient were evaluated and a CT scoring system was applied to grade the lung involvement.ResultsOf 98 enrolled patients, 1, 29, 51 and 17 were clinically classified into mild, common, severe and critical group, respectively. Eighty-three patients (84.7%) demonstrated ground-glass opacity (GGO), 76 patients (77.5%) demonstrated consolidation and 18 patients (18.4%) demonstrated crazy-paving pattern on chest CT. Based on the CT scoring, 2, 35, 55 and 6 patients were categorized to grade 0, grade 1, grade 2 and grade 3, respectively, which significantly consistent with clinical classification (kappa =0.638, P﹤0.05). Twenty-nine patients admitted from fever clinic, with an average interval of 1.2 days (range, 0-4 days) between CT examination and onset of symptom. Three of these patients had negative initial RT-PCR result while abnormalities displayed on the initial chest CT.ConclusionsPeripheral lung distributed GGO and consolidation, without subpleural sparing, are the most common manifestations on chest CT of COVID-19. Abnormalities on chest CT can occur in an early stage of COVID-19, even when RT-PCR assay negative, which may help to early recognition and rapid diagnosis of this disease.

Project description:BackgroundExcessive inflammation contributes to the morbidity and mortality of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. Recombinant human plasma gelsolin (rhu-pGSN) improves disease outcomes in diverse experimental models of infectious and noninfectious inflammation.MethodsIn a blinded, randomized study, 61 subjects with documented COVID-19 pneumonia having a World Health Organization (WHO) Severity Score of 4 to 6 and evidence of a hyperinflammatory state were treated with standard care and either adjunctive rhu-pGSN 12 mg/kg or an equal volume of saline placebo given intravenously at entry, 12 hours, and 36 hours. The prespecified coprimary outcomes were survival without major respiratory, hemodynamic, or renal support on Day 14 and the incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) during the 90-day study period.ResultsAll subjects receiving ≥1 dose of study drug were analyzed. Fifty-four of 61 subjects (88.5%) were WHO severity level 4 at entry. The proportions of subjects alive without support on Day 14 were 25 of 30 rhu-pGSN recipients (83.3%) and 27 of 31 placebo recipients (87.1%). Over the duration of the study, WHO Severity Scores improved similarly in both treatment groups. No statistically significant differences were observed between treatment groups at any time point examined. Two subjects died in each group. Numerically fewer subjects in the rhu-pGSN group had SAEs (5 subjects; 16.7%) or ≥ Grade 3 adverse events (5 subjects; 16.7%) than in the placebo group (8 subjects [25.8%] and 9 subjects [29.0%], respectively), mostly involving the lungs. Three rhu-pGSN recipients (10.0%) were intubated compared to 6 placebo recipients (19.4%).ConclusionsOverall, subjects in this study did well irrespective of treatment arm. When added to dexamethasone and remdesivir, no definitive benefit was demonstrated for rhu-pGSN relative to placebo. Safety signals were not identified after the administration of 3 doses of 12 mg/kg rhu-pGSN over 36 hours. The frequencies of SAEs and intubation were numerically fewer in the rhu-pGSN group compared with placebo.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Increasing time to mechanical ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula use may be associated with mortality in coronavirus disease 2019. We examined the impact of time to intubation and use of high-flow nasal cannula on clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study. SETTING:Six coronavirus disease 2019-specific ICUs across four university-affiliated hospitals in Atlanta, Georgia. PATIENTS:Adults with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection who received high-flow nasal cannula or mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Among 231 patients admitted to the ICU, 109 (47.2%) were treated with high-flow nasal cannula and 97 (42.0%) were intubated without preceding high-flow nasal cannula use. Of those managed with high-flow nasal cannula, 78 (71.6%) ultimately received mechanical ventilation. In total, 175 patients received mechanical ventilation; 44.6% were female, 66.3% were Black, and the median age was 66 years (interquartile range, 56-75 yr). Seventy-six patients (43.4%) were intubated within 8 hours of ICU admission, 57 (32.6%) between 8 and 24 hours of admission, and 42 (24.0%) greater than or equal to 24 hours after admission. Patients intubated within 8 hours were more likely to have diabetes, chronic comorbidities, and higher admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores. Mortality did not differ by time to intubation (? 8 hr: 38.2%; 8-24 hr: 31.6%; ? 24 hr: 38.1%; p = 0.7), and there was no association between time to intubation and mortality in adjusted analysis. Similarly, there was no difference in initial static compliance, duration of mechanical ventilation, or ICU length of stay by timing of intubation. High-flow nasal cannula use prior to intubation was not associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS:In this cohort of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019, neither time from ICU admission to intubation nor high-flow nasal cannula use were associated with increased mortality. This study provides evidence that coronavirus disease 2019 respiratory failure can be managed similarly to hypoxic respiratory failure of other etiologies.