Project description:COVID-19 pneumonia typically begins with subpleural ground glass opacities with progressive extension on computerized tomography studies. Lung ultrasound is well suited to this interstitial, subpleural involvement, and it is now broadly used in intensive care units (ICUs). The extension and severity of lung infiltrates can be described numerically with a reproducible and validated lung ultrasound score (LUSS). We hypothesized that LUSS might be useful as a tool to non-invasively monitor the evolution of COVID-19 pneumonia at the bedside. LUSS monitoring was rapidly implemented in the management of our COVID-19 patients with RT-PCR-documented COVID-19. The LUSS was evaluated repeatedly at the bedside. We present a graphic description of the course of LUSS during COVID-19 in 10 consecutive patients admitted in our intensive care unit with moderate to severe ARDS between March 15 and 30th. LUSS appeared to be closely related to the disease progression. In successfully extubated patients, LUSS decreased and was lower than at the time of intubation. LUSS increased inexorably in a patient who died from refractory hypoxemia. LUSS helped with the diagnosis of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), showing an increased score and the presence of new lung consolidations in all 5 patients with VAPs. There was also a good agreement between CT-scans and LUSS as for the presence of lung consolidations. In conclusion, our early experience suggests that LUSS monitoring accurately reflect disease progression and indicates potential usefulness for the management of COVID-19 patients with ARDS. It might help with early VAP diagnosis, mechanical ventilation weaning management, and potentially reduce the need for X-ray and CT exams. LUSS evaluation is easy to use and readily available in ICUs throughout the world, and might be a safe, cheap and simple tool to optimize critically ill COVID-19 patients care during the pandemic.
Project description:BackgroundLung ultrasound can accurately detect pandemic coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pulmonary lesions. A lung ultrasound score (LUS) was developed to improve reproducibility of the technique.ObjectivesTo evaluate the clinical value of LUS monitoring to guide COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) management.MethodsWe conducted a single center, prospective observational study, including all patients admitted with COVID-19-associated ARDS between March and April 2020. A systematic daily LUS evaluation was performed.ResultsThirty-three consecutive patients were included. LUS was significantly and negatively correlated to PaO2/FIO2. LUS increased significantly over time in non-survivors compared to survivors. LUS increased in 83% of ventilatory associated pneumonia (VAP) episodes, when compared to the previous LUS evaluation. LUS was not significantly higher in patients presenting post-extubation respiratory failure.ConclusionsIn conclusion, our study demonstrates that LUS variations are correlated to disease severity and progression, and LUS monitoring could contribute to the early diagnosis of VAPs.
Project description:ObjectivesPoint-of-care lung ultrasound (LU) is an established tool in the first assessment of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). To assess the progression or regression of respiratory failure in critically ill patients with COVID-19 on Intensive Care Unit (ICU) by using LU.Materials and methodsWe analyzed all patients admitted to Internal Intensive Care Unit, Ludwig-Maximilians-University (LMU) of Munich, from March 2020 to December 2020 suffering lung failure caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2). LU was performed according to a standardized protocol at baseline and at follow up every other day for the first 15 days using a lung ultrasound score (LUSS). Ventilation data were collected simultaneously.ResultsOur study included 42 patients. At admission to ICU, 19 of them (45%) were mechanically ventilated. Of the non-invasive ventilated ones (n = 23, 55%), eleven patients required invasive ventilation over the course. While LUS did not differ at admission to ICU between the invasive ventilated ones (at baseline or during ICU stay) compared to the non-invasive ventilated ones (12±4 vs 11±2 points, p = 0.2497), LUS was significantly lower at d7 for those, who had no need for invasive ventilation over the course (13±5 vs 7±4 points, p = 0.0046). Median time of invasive ventilation counted 18 days; the 90-day mortality was 24% (n = 10) in our cohort. In case of increasing LUS between day 1 (d1) and day 7 (d7), 92% (n = 12/13) required invasive ventilation, while it was 57% (n = 10/17) in case of decreasing LUS. At d7 we found significant correlation between LU and FiO2 (Pearson 0.591; p = 0.033), p/F ratio (Pearson -0.723; p = 0.005), PEEP (Pearson 0.495; p = 0.043), pplat (Pearson 0.617; p = 0.008) and compliance (Pearson -0.572; p = 0.016).ConclusionLUS can be a useful tool in monitoring of progression and regression of respiratory failure and in indicating intubation in patients with COVID-19 in the ICU.
Project description:BackgroundBedside lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a useful and non-invasive tool to detect lung involvement and monitor changes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical significance of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19.MethodThe LUS protocol consisted of 12 scanning zones and was performed in 280 consecutive patients with COVID-19. The LUS score based on B-lines, lung consolidation and pleural line abnormalities was evaluated.ResultsThe median time from admission to LUS examinations was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3-10). Patients in the highest LUS score group were more likely to have a lower lymphocyte percentage (LYM%); higher levels of D-dimer, C-reactive protein, hypersensitive troponin I and creatine kinase muscle-brain; more invasive mechanical ventilation therapy; higher incidence of ARDS; and higher mortality than patients in the lowest LUS score group. After a median follow-up of 14 days [IQR, 10-20 days], 37 patients developed ARDS, and 13 died. Patients with adverse outcomes presented a higher rate of bilateral involvement; more involved zones and B-lines, pleural line abnormalities and consolidation; and a higher LUS score than event-free survivors. The Cox models adding the LUS score as a continuous variable (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.05, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.02 ~ 1.08; P < 0.001; Akaike information criterion [AIC] = 272; C-index = 0.903) or as a categorical variable (HR 10.76, 95% CI 2.75 ~ 42.05; P = 0.001; AIC = 272; C-index = 0.902) were found to predict poor outcomes more accurately than the basic model (AIC = 286; C-index = 0.866). An LUS score cut-off > 12 predicted adverse outcomes with a specificity and sensitivity of 90.5% and 91.9%, respectively.ConclusionsThe LUS score devised by our group performs well at predicting adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and is important for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.
Project description:Background: Lung injury is a common condition among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, whether lung ultrasound (LUS) score predicts all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 is unknown. The aim of the present study was to explore the predictive value of lung ultrasound score for mortality in patients with COVID-19. Methods: Patients with COVID-19 who underwent lung ultrasound were prospectively enrolled from three hospitals in Wuhan, China between February 2020 and March 2020. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected from digital patient records. Lung ultrasound scores were analyzed offline by two observers. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Results: Of the 402 patients, 318 (79.1%) had abnormal lung ultrasound. Compared with survivors (n = 360), non-survivors (n = 42) presented with more B2 lines, pleural line abnormalities, pulmonary consolidation, and pleural effusion (all p < 0.05). Moreover, non-survivors had higher global and anterolateral lung ultrasound score than survivors. In the receiver operating characteristic analysis, areas under the curve were 0.936 and 0.913 for global and anterolateral lung ultrasound score, respectively. A cutoff value of 15 for global lung ultrasound score had a sensitivity of 92.9% and specificity of 85.3%, and 9 for anterolateral score had a sensitivity of 88.1% and specificity of 83.3% for prediction of death. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that both global and anterolateral scores were strong predictors of death (both p < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that global lung ultrasound score was an independent predictor (hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.16; p = 0.03) of death together with age, male sex, C-reactive protein, and creatine kinase-myocardial band. Conclusion: Lung ultrasound score as a semiquantitative tool can be easily measured by bedside lung ultrasound. It is a powerful predictor of in-hospital mortality and may play a crucial role in risk stratification of patients with COVID-19.
Project description:ObjectivesOne of the major challenges in treating patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is predicting the severity of disease. We aimed to develop a new score for predicting progression from mild/moderate to severe COVID-19.MethodsA total of 239 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from two medical centers in China between February 6 and April 6, 2020 were retrospectively included. The prognostic abilities of variables, including clinical data and laboratory findings from the electronic medical records of each hospital, were analysed using the Cox proportional hazards model and Kaplan-Meier methods. A prognostic score was developed to predict progression from mild/moderate to severe COVID-19.ResultsAmong the 239 patients, 216 (90.38%) patients had mild/moderate disease, and 23 (9.62%) progressed to severe disease. After adjusting for multiple confounding factors, pulmonary disease, age > 75, IgM, CD16+/CD56+ NK cells and aspartate aminotransferase were independent predictors of progression to severe COVID-19. Based on these five factors, a new predictive score (the 'PAINT score') was established and showed a high predictive value (C-index = 0.91, 0.902 ± 0.021, p < 0.001). The PAINT score was validated using a nomogram, bootstrap analysis, calibration curves, decision curves and clinical impact curves, all of which confirmed its high predictive value.ConclusionsThe PAINT score for progression from mild/moderate to severe COVID-19 may be helpful in identifying patients at high risk of progression.
Project description:BackgroundAmong the challenges for personalizing the management of mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are the effects of different positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) levels and body positions in regional lung mechanics. Right-left lung aeration asymmetry and poorly recruitable lungs with increased recruitability with alternating body position between supine and prone have been reported. However, real-time effects of changing body position and PEEP on regional overdistension and collapse, in individual patients, remain largely unknown and not timely monitored. The aim of this study was to individualize PEEP and body positioning in order to reduce the mechanisms of ventilator-induced lung injury: collapse and overdistension.MethodsWe here report a series of five consecutive mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS in which sixteen decremental PEEP titrations were performed in the first days of mechanical ventilation (8 titration pairs: supine position immediately followed by 30° targeted lateral position). The choice of lateral tilt was based on X-Ray. This targeted lateral position strategy was defined by selecting the less aerated lung to be positioned up and the more aerated lung to be positioned down. For each PEEP level, global and regional collapse and overdistension maps and percentages were measured by electrical impedance tomography. Additionally, we present the incidence of lateral asymmetry in a cohort of forty-four patients.ResultsThe targeted lateral position strategy resulted in significantly smaller amounts of overdistension and collapse when compared with the supine one: less collapse along the PEEP titration was found within the left lung in targeted lateral (P = 0.014); and less overdistension along the PEEP titration was found within the right lung in targeted lateral (P = 0.005). Regarding collapse within the right lung and overdistension within the left lung: no differences were found for position. In the cohort of forty-four patients, ventilation inequality of > 65/35% was observed in 15% of cases.ConclusionsTargeted lateral positioning with bedside personalized PEEP provided a selective attenuation of overdistension and collapse in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS and right-left lung aeration/ventilation asymmetry.Trial registrationTrial registration number: NCT04460859.
Project description:BackgroundIn acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), extravascular lung water index (EVLWi) and pulmonary vascular permeability index (PVPI) measured by transpulmonary thermodilution reflect the degree of lung injury. Whether EVLWi and PVPI are different between non-COVID-19 ARDS and the ARDS due to COVID-19 has never been reported. We aimed at comparing EVLWi, PVPI, respiratory mechanics and hemodynamics in patients with COVID-19 ARDS vs. ARDS of other origin.MethodsBetween March and October 2020, in an observational study conducted in intensive care units from three university hospitals, 60 patients with COVID-19-related ARDS monitored by transpulmonary thermodilution were compared to the 60 consecutive non-COVID-19 ARDS admitted immediately before the COVID-19 outbreak between December 2018 and February 2020.ResultsDriving pressure was similar between patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS, at baseline as well as during the study period. Compared to patients without COVID-19, those with COVID-19 exhibited higher EVLWi, both at the baseline (17 (14-21) vs. 15 (11-19) mL/kg, respectively, p = 0.03) and at the time of its maximal value (24 (18-27) vs. 21 (15-24) mL/kg, respectively, p = 0.01). Similar results were observed for PVPI. In COVID-19 patients, the worst ratio between arterial oxygen partial pressure over oxygen inspired fraction was lower (81 (70-109) vs. 100 (80-124) mmHg, respectively, p = 0.02) and prone positioning and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were more frequently used than in patients without COVID-19. COVID-19 patients had lower maximal lactate level and maximal norepinephrine dose than patients without COVID-19. Day-60 mortality was similar between groups (57% vs. 65%, respectively, p = 0.45). The maximal value of EVLWi and PVPI remained independently associated with outcome in the whole cohort.ConclusionCompared to ARDS patients without COVID-19, patients with COVID-19 had similar lung mechanics, but higher EVLWi and PVPI values from the beginning of the disease. This was associated with worse oxygenation and with more requirement of prone positioning and ECMO. This is compatible with the specific lung inflammation and severe diffuse alveolar damage related to COVID-19. By contrast, patients with COVID-19 had fewer hemodynamic derangement. Eventually, mortality was similar between groups.Trial registration number and date of registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04337983). Registered 30 March 2020-Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04337983 .
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.