Severe Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure Research Articles

Ratio of oxygen saturation index for predicting high-flow nasal cannula outcomes in emergency department for COVID-19 patients with severe hypoxemia: A retrospective study.

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy has been used as an initial ventilatory support for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with mixed levels of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). However, the effectiveness of HFNC when used as initial ventilatory support in COVID-19 patients with severe AHRF exclusively is not well documented. Ratio of oxygen saturation (ROX) index (ROX = [SpO2/fraction of inspired oxygen]/respiratory rate) was shown to predict the outcome of HFNC in intensive care unit patients. Our study aimed to evaluate the utility of the ROX index for predicting HFNC therapy success/failure in COVID-19 patients with severe AHRF when HFNC is used as the first line of ventilatory support. Retrospective study in 67 COVID-19 patients with severe AHRF receiving HFNC in the emergency department at a tertiary care academic medical center. ROX index was determined at 0, 2, 6, 12, and 24 h of HFNC onset. The need to escalate to noninvasive or invasive ventilatory support was documented. The receiver operating characteristic curves were performed and areas under the curves (AUCs) were calculated to evaluate the accuracy of ROX index for differentiating between patients who will succeed or fail HFNC therapy. HFNC therapy was successful in 19 patients (28.1%) and failed in 48 patients (71.6%). ROX index after 6 h of HFNC initiation had the best predictive capacity for the outcome of HFNC therapy (AUC = 0.78). ROX index >4.4 at 6 h of HFNC onset was significantly associated with HFNC success/failure. ROX index at 6 h after initiating HFNC therapy in COVID-19 patients with severe AHRF has a good predictive capacity for HFNC success/failure.

Impact of Center of Admission on Receipt of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Among Patients With Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Secondary Analysis of the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure and Reseau Europeen de Recherche en Ventilation Artificielle Influenza A(H1N1) Studies

BackgroundGiven the resources and specialized training required to deliver extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), the provision of ECMO is often centralized within expert centres. Spurred by recent evidence the use of ECMO has increased dramatically. However, given the centralized nature of ECMO it is possible that inequities in access exist. Research QuestionDoes centre of admission impact the likelihood of receiving ECMO among adults with moderate or severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 200mmHg within 48hrs of ventilation). Study Design and MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study using data from the LUNG SAFE and REVA influenza A (H1N1) databases. Using modified log-Poisson analysis we estimated the likelihood of receiving ECMO (initiation at the admitting hospital or transfer for initiation), adjusting for disease severity over time. To explore unmeasured confounding, we evaluated the association between centre of admission on three negative controls: neuromuscular blockade, prone positioning, and dialysis. ResultsAmong 1,581 patients (37.7% female, mean age 60.7 years), 76 (4.8%) received ECMO. Longitudinal analysis, adjusted for trends in disease severity, demonstrated that patients admitted to ECMO centres were two-times more likely to receive ECMO than those admitted to non-ECMO centres (RR 2.00; 95% CI 1.17-3.41). Patients at ECMO centres received ECMO two days earlier than those at non-ECMO centres, median (IQR) time to initiation 1 (1-5) vs 3 (2-5) days (p=0.04). Centre of admission was not associated with neuromuscular blockade (RR 1.08; 95% CI 0.90-1.30), prone positioning (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.68-1.28), or dialysis (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.84-1.27). InterpretationAdults with hypoxemic respiratory failure admitted to ECMO centres were twice as likely to receive ECMO as those admitted to non-ECMO centres. These finding raise concerns regarding equity in access to care and suggest a potential lower threshold among clinicians at ECMO centres to initiate ECMO.

Vitamin C deficiency in critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care unit.

To determine vitamin C plasma kinetics, through the measurement of vitamin C plasma concentrations, in critically ill Coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, identifying eventually the onset of vitamin C deficiency. Prospective, observational, single-center study. Intensive Care Unit (ICU), Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona. Study period from November 12th, 2020, to February 24th, 2021. Patients who had a severe hypoxemic acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 were included. Plasma vitamin C concentrations were measured on days 1, 5, and 10 of ICU admission. There were no vitamin C enteral nor parenteral supplementation. The supportive treatment was performed following the standard of care or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients. Plasma vitamin C concentrations were analyzed using an ultra-performance liquid chromatography (UPLC) system with a photodiode array detector (wavelength set to 245 nm). We categorized plasmatic levels of vitamin C as follows: undetectable: < 1,5 mg/L, deficiency: <2 mg/L. Low plasma concentrations: 2-5 mg/L; (normal plasma concentration: > 5 mg/L). Forty-three patients were included (65% men; mean age 62 ± 10 years). The median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was 3 (1-4), and the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health disease Classification System (APACHE II) score was 13 (10-22). Five patients had shock. Bacterial coinfection was documented in 7 patients (16%). Initially all patients required high-flow oxygen therapy, and 23 (53%) further needed invasive mechanical ventilation during 21 (± 10) days. The worst PaO2/FIO2 registered was 93 (± 29). ICU and hospital survival were 77 and 74%, respectively. Low or undetectable levels remained constant throughout the study period in the vast majority of patients. This observational study showed vitamin C plasma levels were undetectable on ICU admission in 86% of patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia requiring respiratory support. This finding remained consistent throughout the study period.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula oxygen therapy in COVID-19: retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes - single center experience.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy emerged as the therapy of choice in COVID-19-related pneumonia and moderate to severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). HFNC oxygen therapy in COVID-19 has been recommended based its use to treat AHRF of other etiologies, and studies on assessing outcomes in COVID-19 patients are highly needed. This study aimed to examine outcomes in COVID-19 patients with pneumonia and severe AHRF treated with HFNC. The study included 235 COVID-19 patients with pneumonia treated with HFNC. Data extracted from medical records included demographic characteristics, comorbidities, laboratory parameters, clinical and oxygenation status, clinical complications, as well as the length of hospital stay. Patients were segregated into two groups based on their oxygen therapy needs: HDU group, those who exclusively required HFNC and ICU group, those whose oxygen therapy needed to be escalated at some point of hospital stay. The primary outcome was the need for respiratory support escalation (noninvasive or invasive mechanical ventilation) and the secondary outcome was the in-hospital all-cause mortality. The primary outcome was met in 113 (48%) of patients. The overall mortality was 70%, significantly higher in the ICU group [102 (90.2%) vs. 62 (50.1%), p < 0.001]. The rate of intrahospital infections was significantly higher in the ICU group while there were no significant differences in the length of hospital stay between the groups. The ICU group exhibited significant increases in D-dimer, NLR, and NEWS values, accompanied by a significant decrease in the SaO2/FiO2 ratio. The multivariable COX proportional regression analysis identified malignancy, higher levels of 4C Mortality Score and NEWS2 as significant predictors of mortality. High-Flow Nasal Cannula oxygen therapy is a safe type of respiratory support in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and acute hypoxemic respiratory failure with significantly less possibility for emergence of intrahospital infections. In 52% of patients, HFNC was successful in treating AHRF in COVID-19 patients. Overall, mortality in COVID-19 pneumonia with AHRF is still very high, especially in patients treated with noninvasive/invasive mechanical ventilation.

Identification of a pediatric acute hypoxemic respiratory failure signature in peripheral blood leukocytes at 24 hours post-ICU admission with machine learning.

There is no generalizable transcriptomics signature of pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome. Our goal was to identify a whole blood differential gene expression signature for pediatric acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) using transcriptomic microarrays within twenty-four hours of diagnosis. We used publicly available human whole-blood gene expression arrays of a Berlin-defined pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (GSE147902) cohort and a sepsis-triggered AHRF (GSE66099) cohort within twenty-four hours of diagnosis and compared those children with a PaO2/FiO2 < 200 to those with a PaO2/FiO2 ≥ 200. We used stability selection, a bootstrapping method of 100 simulations using logistic regression as a classifier, to select differentially expressed genes associated with a PaO2/FiO2 < 200 vs. PaO2/FiO2 ≥ 200. The top-ranked genes that contributed to the AHRF signature were selected in each dataset. Genes common to both of the top 1,500 ranked gene lists were selected for pathway analysis. Pathway and network analysis was performed using the Pathway Network Analysis Visualizer (PANEV) and Reactome was used to perform an over-representation gene network analysis of the top-ranked genes common to both cohorts. Changes in metabolic pathways involved in energy balance, fundamental cellular processes such as protein translation, mitochondrial function, oxidative stress, immune signaling, and inflammation are differentially regulated early in pediatric ARDS and sepsis-induced AHRF compared to both healthy controls and to milder acute hypoxemia. Specifically, fundamental pathways related to the severity of hypoxemia emerged and included (1) ribosomal and eukaryotic initiation of factor 2 (eIF2) regulation of protein translation and (2) the nutrient, oxygen, and energy sensing pathway, mTOR, activated via PI3K/AKT signaling. Cellular energetics and metabolic pathways are important mechanisms to consider to further our understanding of the heterogeneity and underlying pathobiology of moderate and severe pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome. Our findings are hypothesis generating and support the study of metabolic pathways and cellular energetics to understand heterogeneity and underlying pathobiology of moderate and severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in children.

Outcomes Among Mechanically Ventilated Patients With Severe Pneumonia and Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure From SARS-CoV-2 and Other Etiologies

Early observations suggested that COVID-19 pneumonia had a higher mortality rate than other causes of pneumonia. To compare outcomes between mechanically ventilated patients with pneumonia due to COVID-19 (March 2020 to June 2021) and other etiologies (July 2016 to December 2019). This retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Johns Hopkins Healthcare System among adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with pneumonia who required mechanical ventilation in the first 2 weeks of hospitalization. Clinical, laboratory, and mechanical ventilation data were extracted from admission to hospital discharge or death. Pneumonia due to COVID-19. The primary outcome was 90-day in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were time to liberation from mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay, static respiratory system compliance, and ventilatory ratio. Unadjusted and multivariable-adjusted logistic regression, proportional hazards regression, and doubly robust regression were used in propensity score-matched sets to compare clinical outcomes. Overall, 719 patients (mean [SD] age, 61.8 [15.3] years; 442 [61.5%] were male; 460 [64.0%] belonged to a minoritized racial group and 253 [35.2%] were White) with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and 1127 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.9 [15.8] years; 586 [52.0%] were male; 459 [40.7%] belonged to a minoritized racial group and 655 [58.1%] were White) with severe non-COVID-19 pneumonia. In unadjusted analyses, patients with COVID-19 pneumonia had higher 90-day mortality (odds ratio, 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.41), longer time on mechanical ventilation (subdistribution hazard ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.63-0.81), and lower compliance (32.0 vs 28.4 mL/kg PBW/cm H2O; P < .001) when compared with those with non-COVID-19 pneumonia. In propensity score-matched analyses, patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were equally likely to die within 90 days as those with non-COVID-19 pneumonia (odds ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.35; P = .85), had similar respiratory system compliance (mean difference, 1.82 mL/cm H2O; 95% CI, -1.53 to 5.17 mL/cm H2O; P = .28) and ventilatory ratio (mean difference, -0.05; 95% CI, -0.22 to 0.11; P = .52), but had lower rates of liberation from mechanical ventilation (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.00) when compared with those with non-COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia had somewhat lower rates of being discharged from the hospital alive at 90 days (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.01) than those with non-COVID-19 pneumonia; however, this was not statistically significant. In this study, mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia had similar mortality rates as patients with other causes of severe pneumonia but longer times to liberation from mechanical ventilation. Mechanical ventilation use in COVID-19 pneumonia should follow the same evidence-based guidelines as for any pneumonia.

Outcomes of COVID-19 Patients with Severe Hypoxemic Acute Respiratory Failure: Non-Invasive Ventilation vs. Straight Intubation-A Propensity Score-Matched Multicenter Cohort Study.

The best timing for endotracheal intubation in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hypoxemic acute respiratory failure (hARF) remains debated. Aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of COVID-19 patients with hARF receiving either a trial of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) or intubated with no prior attempt of NIV (“straight intubation”). All consecutive patients admitted to the 25 participating ICUs were included and divided in two groups: the “straight intubation” group and the “NIV” group. A propensity score matching was performed to correct for biases associated with the choice of the respiratory support. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of mechanical ventilation, hospital stay and reintubation rate. A total of 704 COVID-19 patients were admitted to ICUs during the study period. After matching, 141 patients were included in each group. No clinically relevant difference at ICU admission was found between groups. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower in the NIV group (22.0% vs. 36.2%), with no significant difference in secondary endpoints. There was no significant mortality difference between patients who received straight intubation and those intubated after NIV failure. In COVID-19 patients with hARF it is worth and safe attempting a trial of NIV prior to intubation.

Strategies for lung- and diaphragm-protective ventilation in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a physiological trial

BackgroundInsufficient or excessive respiratory effort during acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) increases the risk of lung and diaphragm injury. We sought to establish whether respiratory effort can be optimized to achieve lung- and diaphragm-protective (LDP) targets (esophageal pressure swing − 3 to − 8 cm H2O; dynamic transpulmonary driving pressure ≤ 15 cm H2O) during AHRF.MethodsIn patients with early AHRF, spontaneous breathing was initiated as soon as passive ventilation was not deemed mandatory. Inspiratory pressure, sedation, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), and sweep gas flow (in patients receiving veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO)) were systematically titrated to achieve LDP targets. Additionally, partial neuromuscular blockade (pNMBA) was administered in patients with refractory excessive respiratory effort.ResultsOf 30 patients enrolled, most had severe AHRF; 16 required VV-ECMO. Respiratory effort was absent in all at enrolment. After initiating spontaneous breathing, most exhibited high respiratory effort and only 6/30 met LDP targets. After titrating ventilation, sedation, and sweep gas flow, LDP targets were achieved in 20/30. LDP targets were more likely to be achieved in patients on VV-ECMO (median OR 10, 95% CrI 2, 81) and at the PEEP level associated with improved dynamic compliance (median OR 33, 95% CrI 5, 898). Administration of pNMBA to patients with refractory excessive effort was well-tolerated and effectively achieved LDP targets.ConclusionRespiratory effort is frequently absent under deep sedation but becomes excessive when spontaneous breathing is permitted in patients with moderate or severe AHRF. Systematically titrating ventilation and sedation can optimize respiratory effort for lung and diaphragm protection in most patients. VV-ECMO can greatly facilitate the delivery of a LDP strategy.Trial registration: This trial was registered in Clinicaltrials.gov in August 2018 (NCT03612583).

High-Dose Dexamethasone and Oxygen Support Strategies in Intensive Care Unit Patients With Severe COVID-19 Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure

The benefit of high-dose dexamethasone and oxygenation strategies vs standard of care for patients with severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) caused by COVID-19 pneumonia is debated. To assess the benefit of high-dose dexamethasone compared with standard of care dexamethasone, and to assess the benefit of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNo2) or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) compared with oxygen support standard of care (o2SC). This multicenter, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted in 19 intensive care units (ICUs) in France from April 2020 to January 2021. Eligible patients were consecutive ICU-admitted adults with COVID-19 AHRF. Randomization used a 2 × 3 factorial design for dexamethasone and oxygenation strategies; patients not eligible for at least 1 oxygenation strategy and/or already receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) were only randomized for dexamethasone. All patients were followed-up for 60 days. Data were analyzed from May 26 to July 31, 2021. Patients received standard dexamethasone (dexamethasone-phosphate 6 mg/d for 10 days [or placebo prior to RECOVERY trial results communication]) or high-dose dexamethasone (dexamethasone-phosphate 20 mg/d on days 1-5 then 10 mg/d on days 6-10). Those not requiring IMV were additionally randomized to o2SC, CPAP, or HFNo2. The main outcomes were time to all-cause mortality, assessed at day 60, for the dexamethasone interventions, and time to IMV requirement, assessed at day 28, for the oxygenation interventions. Differences between intervention groups were calculated using proportional Cox models and expressed as hazard ratios (HRs). Among 841 screened patients, 546 patients (median [IQR] age, 67.4 [59.3-73.1] years; 414 [75.8%] men) were randomized between standard dexamethasone (276 patients, including 37 patients who received placebo) or high-dose dexamethasone (270 patients). Of these, 333 patients were randomized among o2SC (109 patients, including 56 receiving standard dexamethasone), CPAP (109 patients, including 57 receiving standard dexamethasone), and HFNo2 (115 patients, including 56 receiving standard dexamethasone). There was no difference in 60-day mortality between standard and high-dose dexamethasone groups (HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.69-1.33]; P = .79). There was no significant difference for the cumulative incidence of IMV criteria at day 28 among o2 support groups (o2SC vs CPAP: HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.71-1.63]; o2SC vs HFNo2: HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.69-1.55]) or 60-day mortality (o2SC vs CPAP: HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.58-1.61; o2SC vs HFNo2: HR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.53-1.47]). Interactions between interventions were not significant. In this randomized clinical trial among ICU patients with COVID-19-related AHRF, high-dose dexamethasone did not significantly improve 60-day survival. The oxygenation strategies in patients who were not initially receiving IMV did not significantly modify 28-day risk of IMV requirement. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04344730; EudraCT: 2020-001457-43.

Sedation Practices in the PICU: An Unexpected Casualty of COVID-19.

Pediatric intensivists often use an “analgosedation” approach in mechanically ventilated children. By prioritizing analgesia and minimizing sedation, patients experience less delirium. However, when COVID-19 surged, our pediatric intensive care unit providers were tasked with caring for adults with severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF). As documented in the literature, adults with COVID-19-AHRF received significantly higher doses of sedatives than matched cohorts with non-COVID-19 AHRF. Surprisingly, when the pediatric intensive care unit returned to caring for children, a quality review showed that we were unintentionally using far more sedatives than that prior to COVID-19. This experience is not unique to our institution, or to COVID-19. Lingering effects of crisis care can persist beyond the event itself. We seek to share our experience in order to extend the conversation regarding the unexpected effects of crises on best practices and to stress the need for high-quality research on interventions to support mental health and resilience in frontline healthcare providers.

Higher mortality and intubation rate in COVID-19 patients treated with noninvasive ventilation compared with high-flow oxygen or CPAP

The effectiveness of noninvasive respiratory support in severe COVID-19 patients is still controversial. We aimed to compare the outcome of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and hypoxemic respiratory failure treated with high-flow oxygen administered via nasal cannula (HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or noninvasive ventilation (NIV), initiated outside the intensive care unit (ICU) in 10 university hospitals in Catalonia, Spain. We recruited 367 consecutive patients aged ≥ 18 years who were treated with HFNC (155, 42.2%), CPAP (133, 36.2%) or NIV (79, 21.5%). The main outcome was intubation or death at 28 days after respiratory support initiation. After adjusting for relevant covariates and taking patients treated with HFNC as reference, treatment with NIV showed a higher risk of intubation or death (hazard ratio 2.01; 95% confidence interval 1.32–3.08), while treatment with CPAP did not show differences (0.97; 0.63–1.50). In the context of the pandemic and outside the intensive care unit setting, noninvasive ventilation for the treatment of moderate to severe hypoxemic acute respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 resulted in higher mortality or intubation rate at 28 days than high-flow oxygen or CPAP. This finding may help physicians to choose the best noninvasive respiratory support treatment in these patients.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04668196.

Closed-loop oxygen control improves oxygen therapy in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure patients under high flow nasal oxygen: a randomized cross-over study (the HILOOP study)

BackgroundWe aimed to assess the efficacy of a closed-loop oxygen control in critically ill patients with moderate to severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) treated with high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO).MethodsIn this single-centre, single-blinded, randomized crossover study, adult patients with moderate to severe AHRF who were treated with HFNO (flow rate ≥ 40 L/min with FiO2 ≥ 0.30) were randomly assigned to start with a 4-h period of closed-loop oxygen control or 4-h period of manual oxygen titration, after which each patient was switched to the alternate therapy. The primary outcome was the percentage of time spent in the individualized optimal SpO2 range.ResultsForty-five patients were included. Patients spent more time in the optimal SpO2 range with closed-loop oxygen control compared with manual titrations of oxygen (96.5 [93.5 to 98.9] % vs. 89 [77.4 to 95.9] %; p < 0.0001) (difference estimate, 10.4 (95% confidence interval 5.2 to 17.2). Patients spent less time in the suboptimal range during closed-loop oxygen control, both above and below the cut-offs of the optimal SpO2 range, and less time above the suboptimal range. Fewer number of manual adjustments per hour were needed with closed-loop oxygen control. The number of events of SpO2 < 88% and < 85% were not significantly different between groups.ConclusionsClosed-loop oxygen control improves oxygen administration in patients with moderate-to-severe AHRF treated with HFNO, increasing the percentage of time in the optimal oxygenation range and decreasing the workload of healthcare personnel. These results are especially relevant in a context of limited oxygen supply and high medical demand, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.Trial registration The HILOOP study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov under the identifier NCT04965844.

ELMO, a new helmet interface for CPAP to treat COVID-19-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure outside the ICU: a feasibility study.

ABSTRACTObjective:To assess the feasibility of using a new helmet interface for CPAP, designated ELMO, to treat COVID-19-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) outside the ICU. Methods:This was a proof-of-concept study involving patients with moderate to severe AHRF secondary to COVID-19 admitted to the general ward of a public hospital. The intervention consisted of applying CPAP via the ELMO interface integrated with oxygen and compressed air flow meters (30 L/min each) and a PEEP valve (CPAP levels = 8-10 cmH2O), forming the ELMOcpap system. The patients were monitored for cardiorespiratory parameters, adverse events, and comfort. Results:Ten patients completed the study protocol. The ELMOcpap system was well tolerated, with no relevant adverse effects. Its use was feasible outside the ICU for a prolonged amount of time and was shown to be successful in 60% of the patients. A CPAP of 10 cmH2O with a total gas flow of 56-60 L/min improved oxygenation after 30-to 60-min ELMOcpap sessions, allowing a significant decrease in estimated FIO2 (p = 0.014) and an increase in estimated PaO2/FIO2 ratio (p = 0.008) within the first hour without CO2 rebreathing. Conclusions:The use of ELMOcpap has proven to be feasible and effective in delivering high-flow CPAP to patients with COVID-19-related AHRF outside the ICU. There were no major adverse effects, and ELMO was considered comfortable. ELMOcpap sessions significantly improved oxygenation, reducing FIO2 without CO2 rebreathing. The overall success rate was 60% in this pilot study, and further clinical trials should be carried out in the future.(ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04470258 [http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/])

Features and evolution of patients with COVID-19 who required mechanical ventilation

The overall mortality of patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care units is approximately 40%. To describe the characteristics of a cohort of patients with COVID-19 who required invasive mechanical ventilation due to severe hypoxemic acute respiratory failure at a general hospital in Santiago, Chile. Review of medical records and follow up for 28 days of patients with COVID-19 confirmed by polymerase chain reaction who required invasive mechanical ventilation and who were admitted to the intensive care unit from March 24 to June 7, 2020. Data from 152 patients aged 58 (interquartile range (IQR) 47-65 years (66% men) was analyzed. As of July 5, 36 (24%) had died, 75 (49%) were discharged, 10 (7%) were still on invasive mechanical ventilation, 11 (7%) remained with tracheostomy but without invasive mechanical ventilation, and 20 (13%) were hospitalized in a basic unit. The median time on invasive mechanical ventilation among extubated patients was 14 days (IQR 10-21) and 121 (80%) were in the prone position. Patients who died were older, had a higher frequency of diabetes mellitus and a higher driving pressure at 7 days than those discharged alive from the intensive care unit. In this study mortality was lower than that reported in the first international studies, probably due to the selection of younger patients and greater knowledge of the disease.

50 Emergency Department Management and Outcomes of COVID-19 Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure During the New York City Surge

Delays in intensive care unit (ICU) admission for critically ill patients are associated with worse outcomes, but the effect of “boarding” during the COVID-19 pandemic has not been well characterized. This study describes the emergency department (ED)-based care for patients presenting with COVID-19-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) to five hospitals in a large, academic health system during the initial surge in New York City, examining both respiratory modality choice and settings. For those managed with noninvasive respiratory support, we also aimed to explore the association between ED boarding time and patient morbidity and mortality. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of ED patients presenting from 3/1/2020 to 7/10/2020 with COVID-19-related AHRF and requiring ICU admission at any time during their hospitalization. Patient demographics, comorbidities, severity of illness (Mortality Probability Model III on admission), clinical course, including the use, settings (initial and changes), and duration of respiratory support modalities (ie, noninvasive ventilation [NIV], high flow nasal cannula [HFNC], invasive mechanical ventilation [IMV]), as well as hospital site, were collected through validated electronic query and standardized manual chart abstraction. AHRF severity was defined using a PaO2/FiO2 ratio (PF): 200-300 (mild), 100-199 (moderate), and <100 (severe). For patients without a PaO2, the PF was imputed using SpO2/FiO2 ratio using previously validated non-linear conversion. Boarding was defined as the time interval from ED request for admission to ED departure. The primary outcome was a composite outcome of ICU admission, intubation, or mortality within 48 hours of ED arrival. Descriptive analyses stratified by boarding duration and AHRF were completed. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to determine the association between ED boarding and the primary outcome. A total of 679 ED patients with COVID-19 AHRF required ICU admission during the study period. They were managed with low flow oxygen only (261, 38.4%), or with NIV (120, 17.7%), HF (51, 7.5%), and/or IMV (99, 14.6%), with setting ranges detailed in Table 1. Of the patients with a known PF ratio (N=418), 110 (26.35%) had mild, 34 (5.0%) had moderate, and 274 (40.4%) had severe AHRF. Of these patients, 279 (41.1%) had a change documented to their settings, with increased likelihood of adjustments with longer boarding time (p<0.001) and higher AHRF severity (p<0.001). Median boarding duration across all site was 9.5 hours (IQR 5.3-16.9 hours) with site variation. AHRF severity and support modality were not associated with differences of boarding time (p = 0.77 and p=0.54). Controlling for age, sex, race, and severity of illness, boarding time was not associated with worse patient outcomes in 48 hours (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.67-1.08, p=0.17) During the COVID-19 pandemic, critically ill patients presented to the ED and boarded for long periods of time, requiring prolonged ventilatory management. Despite the surge state and resource limitations, boarding times did not worsen post-ED outcomes for patients managed with non-invasive modalities.

OUTCOME OF NON-INVASIVE VENTILATION IN COVID-19 PATIENTS

Introduction: In covid-19, signicant number of patients developed severe respiratory symptoms and Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure(AHRF) that required oxygen support. Initially treatment included early intubation and invasive ventilation, but Non-invasive ventilation(NIV) has been proven to be an effective bridging adjunct in early part of disease process and may prevent the need for invasive mechanical ventilation, which also decreases the risks to health care workers. Aims &amp; Objectives: To study the outcome of non-invasive ventilation in covid-19 patients ;Primary outcome is number of patients recovered and death, Secondary outcome is the need for invasive mechanical ventilation Materials &amp; Methods: This prospective study was conducted in the Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Dr.PSIMS &amp; RF, which included 84 patients of covid-19 admitted in intensive care unit (ICU) during the period of May 2020 to November 2020. All patients were treated with NIV as per the requirement and followed up with laboratory parameters , CXR and outcome was studied during the course of hospital stay. Observation And Conclusion: out of 84 patients studied,67% recovered , 33% died . 19 patients required invasive mechanical ventilation. Age of &lt; 65yrs ;SPO2 of 88-92% at the time of presentation, absence of obesity ;Normal C-Reactive protein(CRP) and Ferritin with Mild involvement on chest x-ray and longer duration of NIVhas better recovery rate. So, by our study we conclude that NIVhas a denite role in management of COVID-19 and also decrease the need for invasive ventilation .

Articles That May Change Your Practice: Helmet Continuous Positive Airway Pressure

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), primarily affects the respiratory system. A high percentage of patients with COVID-19 who are admitted to an intensive care unit develop severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and ultimately require mechanical ventilation. For patients with COVID-19, noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) with face masks or high-flow nasal oxygen may avert the need for tracheal intubation.

Rabdomyolysis as a serious complication of COVID-19

<abstract> Rhabdomyolysis is an acute condition with skeletal muscle damage and release of toxins produced by myocytes with variable clinical presentation. Laboratory diagnosis is based on an increase in serum creatine phosphokinase (CPK), which can trigger irreversible renal impairment. The aim was to describe the association of COVID-19 with rhabdomyolysis as a serious complication, in order to promote early diagnosis and treatment. Case description: Female patient, 18 years old, grade 3 obesity, complaining of dry cough for 7 days, associated with continuous fever for 4 days, myalgia of the lower limbs and moderate dyspnea for 2 days, was admitted to the emergency room and sent to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), with positive PCR-RT. After 12 hours of admission, the patient developed severe hypoxemic acute respiratory failure. On the second day of hospitalization, an exponential increase in CPK was found and measures of volume optimization were initiated. On the seventh day of hospitalization, associated with increased CPK, a decline in renal function was observed, evolving to the need for renal replacement therapy. On the ninth day of hospitalization, she presented with multiple organ dysfunction and death. In conclusion, COVID-19 can generate rhabdomyolysis by direct myocyte injury by SARS-CoV-2, an exacerbated immune response to the virus resulting in a cytokine storm with concomitant muscle damage and through direct injury by circulating viral toxins. However, as it is an uncommon manifestation and presents a nonspecific clinical condition, early diagnosis is not always performed. This conclusion was based on the case report presented and not only on the results of the literature review, since the clinical case is in accordance with the literature and can contribute to the recognition of these conditions, leading to better management in the treatment. </abstract>

Use of nasal high flow oxygen during acute respiratory failure.

Nasal high flow (NHF) has gained popularity among intensivists to manage patients with acute respiratory failure. An important literature has accompanied this evolution. In this review, an international panel of experts assessed potential benefits of NHF in different areas of acute respiratory failure management. Analyses of the physiological effects of NHF indicate flow-dependent improvement in various respiratory function parameters. These beneficial effects allow some patients with severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure to avoid intubation and improve their outcome. They require close monitoring to not delay intubation. Such a delay may worsen outcome. The ROX index may help clinicians decide when to intubate. In immunocompromised patients, NHF reduces the need for intubation but does not impact mortality. Beneficial physiological effects of NHF have also been reported in patients with chronic respiratory failure, suggesting a possible indication in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure. When intubation is required, NHF can be used to pre-oxygenate patients either alone or in combination with non-invasive ventilation (NIV). Similarly, NHF reduces reintubation alone in low-risk patients and in combination with NIV in high-risk patients. NHF may be used in the emergency department in patients who would not be offered intubation and can be better tolerated than NIV.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00134-020-06228-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Preparedness and Reorganization of Care for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients in a Swiss ICU: Characteristics and Outcomes of 129 Patients.

In many countries, large numbers of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 are admitted to the ICUs within a short period of time, overwhelming usual care capacities. Preparedness and reorganization ahead of the wave to increase ICU surge capacity may be associated with favorable outcome. The purpose of this study was to report our experience in terms of ICU organization and anticipation, as well as reporting patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes. A prospective observational study. The division of intensive care at the Geneva University Hospitals (Geneva, Switzerland). All consecutive adult patients with acute respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 admitted in the ICU between March 9, 2020, and May 19, 2020, were enrolled. Patients' demographic data, comorbidities, laboratory values, treatments, and clinical outcomes were collected. None. The ICU was reorganized into cells of six to eight patients under the care of three physicians and five nurses. Its capacity increased from 30 to 110 beds, fully equipped and staffed, transforming the surgical intermediate care unit, the postoperative care facility, and operating theaters into ICUs. Surge capacity has always exceeded the number of patients hospitalized. Among 129 critically ill patients with severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, 96% required invasive mechanical ventilation. A total of 105 patients (81%) were discharged alive and 24 died, corresponding to a mortality of 19%. Patients who died were significantly older, with higher severity scores at admission, had higher levels of d-dimers, plasma creatinine, high-sensitive troponin T, C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin, and required more frequent prone sessions. A rapid increase in ICU bed capacity, including adequate equipment and staffing, allowed for a large number of critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients to be taken care of within a short period of time. Anticipation and preparedness ahead of the wave may account for the low mortality observed in our center. These results highlight the importance of resources management strategy in the context of the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.