Correction: Tele-Rapid Response Team (Tele-RRT): The effect of implementing patient safety network system on outcomes of medical patients-A before and after cohort study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277992.].

The potential role of extracorporeal cytokine removal with CytoSorb® as an adjuvant therapy in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Management of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) represents one of the greatest challenges in intensive care and despite all efforts mortality remains high. One common phenotype of ARDS is that of a secondary injury to a dysregulated inflammatory host response resulting in increased capillary congestion, interstitial lung edema, atelectasis, pulmonary embolism, muscle wasting, recurring infectious episodes, and multiple organ failure. In cases of hyperinflammation, immunomodulation by extracorporeal cytokine removal such as the CytoSorb hemoadsorption cartridge could conceptually enhance lung recovery during the early course of the disease. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the currently available data in this field and to provide an overview of pathophysiology and rationale for the use of CytoSorb hemoadsorption in patients with hyperinflammatory ARDS.

Tocilizumab Outcomes in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients Admitted to the ICU and the Role of Non-Tocilizumab COVID-19-Specific Medical Therapeutics.

BACKGROUND: Tocilizumab is a monoclonal antibody proposed to manage cytokine release syndrome (CRS) associated with severe COVID-19. Previously published reports have shown that tocilizumab may improve the clinical outcomes of critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. However, no precise data about the role of other medical therapeutics concurrently used for COVID-19 on this outcome have been published. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the overall outcome of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU who received tocilizumab with the outcome of matched patients who did not receive tocilizumab while controlling for other confounders, including medical therapeutics for critically ill patients admitted to ICUs. METHODS: A prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study was conducted among critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU of 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia between 1 March 2020, and October 31, 2020. Propensity-score matching was utilized to compare patients who received tocilizumab to patients who did not. In addition, the log-rank test was used to compare the 28 day hospital survival of patients who received tocilizumab with those who did not. Then, a multivariate logistic regression analysis of the matched groups was performed to evaluate the impact of the remaining concurrent medical therapeutics that could not be excluded via matching 28 day hospital survival rates. The primary outcome measure was patients' overall 28 day hospital survival, and the secondary outcomes were ICU length of stay and ICU survival to hospital discharge. RESULTS: A total of 1470 unmatched patients were included, of whom 426 received tocilizumab. The total number of propensity-matched patients was 1278. Overall, 28 day hospital survival revealed a significant difference between the unmatched non-tocilizumab group (586; 56.1%) and the tocilizumab group (269; 63.1%) (p-value = 0.016), and this difference increased even more in the propensity-matched analysis between the non-tocilizumab group (466.7; 54.6%) and the tocilizumab group (269; 63.1%) (p-value = 0.005). The matching model successfully matched the two groups' common medical therapeutics used to treat COVID-19. Two medical therapeutics remained significantly different, favoring the tocilizumab group. A multivariate logistic regression was performed for the 28 day hospital survival in the propensity-matched patients. It showed that neither steroids (OR: 1.07 (95% CI: 0.75-1.53)) (p = 0.697) nor favipiravir (OR: 1.08 (95% CI: 0.61-1.9)) (p = 0.799) remained as a predictor for an increase in 28 day survival. CONCLUSION: The tocilizumab treatment in critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU improved the overall 28 day hospital survival, which might not be influenced by the concurrent use of other COVID-19 medical therapeutics, although further research is needed to confirm this.

Impact of a national collaborative project to improve the care of mechanically ventilated patients.

This prospective quasi-experimental study from the NASAM (National Approach to Standardize and Improve Mechanical Ventilation) collaborative assessed the impact of evidence-based practices including subglottic suctioning, daily assessment for spontaneous awakening trial (SAT), spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), head of bed elevation, and avoidance of neuromuscular blockers unless otherwise indicated. The study outcomes included VAE (primary) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Changes in daily care process measures and outcomes were evaluated using repeated measures mixed modeling. The results were reported as incident rate ratio (IRR) for each additional month with 95% confidence interval (CI). A comprehensive program that included education on evidence-based practices for optimal care of mechanically ventilated patients with real-time benchmarking of daily care process measures to drive improvement in forty-two ICUs from 26 hospitals in Saudi Arabia (>27,000 days of observation). Compliance with subglottic suctioning, SAT and SBT increased monthly during the project by 3.5%, 2.1% and 1.9%, respectively (IRR 1.035, 95%CI 1.007-1.064, p = 0.0148; 1.021, 95% CI 1.010-1.032, p = 0.0003; and 1.019, 95%CI 1.009-1.029, p = 0.0001, respectively). The use of neuromuscular blockers decreased monthly by 2.5% (IRR 0.975, 95%CI 0.953-0.998, p = 0.0341). The compliance with head of bed elevation was high at baseline and did not change over time. Based on data for 83153 ventilator days, VAE rate was 15.2/1000 ventilator day (95%CI 12.6-18.1) at baseline and did not change during the project (IRR 1.019, 95%CI 0.985-1.053, p = 0.2812). Based on data for 8523 patients; the mortality was 30.4% (95%CI 27.4-33.6) at baseline, and decreased monthly during the project by 1.6% (IRR 0.984, 95%CI 0.973-0.996, p = 0.0067). A national quality improvement collaborative was associated with improvements in daily care processes. These changes were associated with a reduction in mortality but not VAEs. Registration The study is registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03790150).

Tele-Rapid Response Team (Tele-RRT): The effect of implementing patient safety network system on outcomes of medical patients-A before and after cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Rapid Response Teams were developed to provide interventions for deteriorating patients. Their activation depends on timely detection of deterioration. Automated calculation of warning scores may lead to early recognition, and improvement of RRT effectiveness. METHOD: This was a "Before" and "After" study, in the "Before" period ward nurses activated RRT after manually recording vital signs and calculating warning scores. In the "After" period, vital signs and warning calculations were automatically relayed to RRT through a wireless monitoring network. RESULTS: When compared to the before group, the after group had significantly lower incidence and rate of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (2.3 / 1000 inpatient days versus 3.8 / 1000 inpatient days respectively, p = 0.01), significantly shorter length of hospital stay and lower hospital mortality, but significantly higher number of RRT activations. In multivariable logistic regression model, being in the "After" group decreases odds of CPR by 33% (OR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.46-0.99]; p = 0.04). There was no difference between groups in ICU admission. CONCLUSION: Automated activation of the RRT significantly reduced CPR events and rates, improved CPR success rate, reduced hospital length of stay and mortality, but increased the number of RRT activations. There were no differences in unplanned ICU admission or readmission.

Favipiravir Efficacy And Safety For The Treatment Of Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Corona virus disease is caused by the enveloped, single stranded RNA virus known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) becoming the deadliest disease of the century. Its global outbreak has led researchers to develop drugs or vaccines to prevent the spread of the disease. Favipiravir is an approved orally administered antiviral drug that selectively inhibits RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, used off-label to treat COVID-19. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of this drug for severe COVID-19 infection. METHODS: This was an observational retrospective study, carried out at the ICU of King Saud Medical City (KSMC) from June 2020 to August 2020. Including a total of one thousand six hundred and ninety-nine patients (n=1699). Categorized into a treatment group (193 patients) who received Favipiravir along with standard care, and non-treatment group (1506 patients) who received standard care only. RESULTS: ICU all-cause mortality was similar in both groups i.e., (Treated group 38.3% Vs Untreated group 39.4%, 95% CI of difference: -6.6% to +8.4%; p = 0.8). The subgroup analysis of survivors as compared to deceased in the treatment group showed that survivors had significantly lower age, international normalising ratio (INR), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and creatinine. The mean ICU length of stay (LOS) was shorter for survivors compared to deceased (11.2± 8.03 Vs 16.7±9.8 days respectively), while hospital LOS was almost similar between the two groups. Advanced age (OR 1.03 [95% CI: 1.01-1.06]; p=0.004), higher INR and BUN were significantly associated with increased odds of mortality. Comparison of lab investigations at day 1 and day 10 in the treatment group (regardless of outcome) showed that there was a significant increase in Alanine transaminase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALK), and Bilirubin, while an insignificant trend of increase in Aspartate transaminase (AST) and creatinine was recorded. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, Favipiravir showed better therapeutic responses in patients with severe COVID-19 infection, in terms of average duration of stay in the intensive care unit and was well tolerated in the younger age, but showed no mortality benefit. However, elevated levels of inflammatory markers, including increased ALT, AST, BUN, bilirubin, and creatinine, needs to be carefully examined.

Point prevalence of delirium among critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia: A multicenter observational study.

Background: Delirium in critically ill patients is independently associated with poor clinical outcomes. There is a scarcity of published data on the prevalence of delirium among critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, we sought to determine, in a multicenter fashion, the prevalence of delirium in critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia and explore associated risk factors. Methods: A cross-sectional point prevalence study was conducted on January 28, 2020, at 14 intensive care units (ICUs) across 3 universities and 11 other tertiary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Delirium was screened once using the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist. We excluded patients who were unable to participate in a valid delirium assessment, patients admitted with traumatic brain injury, and patients with documented dementia in their medical charts. Results: Of the 407 screened ICU patients, 233 patients were enrolled and 45.9% were diagnosed with delirium. The prevalence was higher in mechanically ventilated patients compared to patients not mechanically ventilated (57.5% vs. 33.6%; P < 0.001). In a multivariate model, risk factors independently associated with delirium included age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.021; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.04; P = 0.008), mechanical ventilation (AOR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.34-4.28; P = 0.003), and higher severity of illness (AOR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.001-1.021; P = 0.026). Conclusion: In our study, delirium remains a prevalent complication, with distinct risk factors. Further studies are necessary to investigate long-term outcomes of delirium in critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia.

"Ventilator-free days" composite outcome in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection treated with tocilizumab: A retrospective competing risk analysis.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection demonstrates a wide range of severity, with more severe cases presenting with a cytokine storm with elevated serum interleukin-6; hence, the interleukin-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab was used for the management of severe cases. OBJECTIVE: To explore the effect of tocilizumab on ventilator-free day composite outcomes among critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: This retrospective propensity score-matching study compared mechanically ventilated patients who received tocilizumab to a control group. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients in the intervention group were compared to 29 controls. The matched groups were similar. The ventilator-free days composite outcome was higher in the intervention group (sub-distribution hazard ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2-6.3; p = 0.02), the mortality rate in the intensive care unit was not different (37.9% vs 62%, p = 0.1), and actual ventilator-free days were significantly longer in the tocilizumab group (mean difference 4.7 days; p = 0.02). Sensitivity analysis showed a significantly lower hazard ratio for death in the tocilizumab group (HR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.25-0.97; p = 0.04). Positive cultures were not significantly different among the groups (55.2% vs 34.5% in the tocilizumab and control groups, respectively; p = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Tocilizumab may improve the composite outcome of ventilator-free days at day 28 among mechanically ventilated patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. It is associated with significantly longer actual ventilator-free days, insignificantly lower mortality, and higher superinfection.

Machine learning decision tree algorithm role for predicting mortality in critically ill adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and is currently a major cause of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions globally. The role of machine learning in the ICU is evolving but currently limited to diagnostic and prognostic values. A decision tree (DT) algorithm is a simple and intuitive machine learning method that provides sequential nonlinear analysis of variables. It is simple and might be a valuable tool for bedside physicians during COVID-19 to predict ICU outcomes and help in critical decision-making like end-of-life decisions and bed allocation in the event of limited ICU bed capacities. Herein, we utilized a machine learning DT algorithm to describe the association of a predefined set of variables and 28-day ICU outcome in adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. We highlight the value of utilizing a machine learning DT algorithm in the ICU at the time of a COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This was a prospective and multicenter cohort study involving 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia. We included critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU between March 1, 2020, and October 31, 2020. The predictors of 28-day ICU mortality were identified using two predictive models: conventional logistic regression and DT analyses. RESULTS: There were 1468 critically ill COVID-19 patients included in the study. The 28-day ICU mortality was 540 (36.8 %), and the 90-day mortality was 600 (40.9 %). The DT algorithm identified five variables that were integrated into the algorithm to predict 28-day ICU outcomes: need for intubation, need for vasopressors, age, gender, and PaO2/FiO2 ratio. CONCLUSION: DT is a simple tool that might be utilized in the ICU to identify critically ill COVID-19 patients who are at high risk of 28-day ICU mortality. However, further studies and external validation are still required.

Mortality and Pulmonary Embolism in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome From COVID-19 vs. Non-COVID-19.

Purpose: There may be a difference in respiratory mechanics, inflammatory markers, and pulmonary emboli in COVID-19 associated ARDS vs. ARDS from other etiologies. Our purpose was to determine differences in respiratory mechanics, inflammatory markers, and incidence of pulmonary embolism in patients with and without COVID-19 associated ARDS admitted in the same period and treated with a similar ventilation strategy. Methods: A cohort study of COVID-19 associated ARDS and non COVID-19 patients in a Saudi Arabian center between June 1 and 15, 2020. We measured respiratory mechanics (ventilatory ratio (VR), recruitability index (RI), markers of inflammation, and computed tomography pulmonary angiograms. Results: Forty-two patients with COVID-19 and 43 non-COVID patients with ARDS comprised the cohort. The incidence of "recruitable" patients using the recruitment/inflation ratio was slightly lower in COVID-19 patients (62 vs. 86%; p = 0.01). Fifteen COVID-19 ARDS patients (35.7%) developed a pulmonary embolism as compared to 4 (9.3%) in other ARDS patients (p = 0.003). In COVID-19 patients, a D-Dimer ≥ 5.0 mcg/ml had a 73% (95% CI 45-92%) sensitivity and 89% (95% CI 71-98%) specificity for predicting pulmonary embolism. Crude 60-day mortality was higher in COVID-19 patients (35 vs. 15%; p = 0.039) but three multivariate analysis showed that independent predictors of 60-day mortality included the ventilatory ratio (OR 3.67, 95% CI 1.61-8.35), PaO2/FIO2 ratio (OR 0.93; 95% CI 0.87-0.99), IL-6 (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00-1.03), and D-dimer (OR 7.26, 95% CI 1.11-47.30) but not COVID-19 infection. Conclusion: COVID-19 patients were slightly less recruitable and had a higher incidence of pulmonary embolism than those with ARDS from other etiologies. A high D-dimer was predictive of pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 infection was not an independent predictor of 60-day mortality in the presence of ARDS.

Effect of Tocilizumab on "Ventilator Free Days" Composite Outcome in SARS-CoV-2 Patients: A Retrospective Competing Risk Analysis.

Background: SARS-CoV-2 infection demonstrates a wide range of severity. More severe cases demonstrate a cytokine storm with elevated serum interleukin-6, hence IL-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab was tried for the management of severe cases. Aims: Effect of tocilizumab on ventilator-free days among critically ill SARS-CoV-2 patients. Method: Retrospective propensity score matching study, comparing mechanically ventilated patients who received tocilizumab to a control group. Results: 29 patients in the intervention group were compared to 29 controls. Matched groups were similar. Ventilator-free days were more numerous in the intervention group (SHR 2.7, 95% CI: 1.2 - 6.3; p = 0.02), ICU mortality rate was not different (37.9% versus 62%, p = 0.1), actual ventilator-free periods were significantly longer in tocilizumab group (mean difference 4.7 days; p = 0.02). Sensitivity analysis showed a significantly lower hazard ratio of death in tocilizumab group (HR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.25 - 0.97; p = 0.04). There was no difference in positive cultures among groups (55.2% in tocilizumab group versus 34.5% in the control; p = 0.1). Conclusion: Tocilizumab may improve the composite outcome of ventilator-free days at day 28 among mechanically ventilated SARS-CoV-2 patients; it is associated with significantly longer actual ventilator-free periods, and insignificantly lower mortality and higher superinfection.

Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter Ultrasound for Raised Intracranial Pressure: A Literature Review and Meta-analysis of its Diagnostic Accuracy.

Optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) ultrasound is becoming increasingly more popular for estimating raised intracranial pressure (ICP). We performed a systematic review and analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of ONSD when compared to the standard invasive ICP measurement. METHOD: We performed a systematic search of PUBMED and EMBASE for studies including adult patients with suspected elevated ICP and comparing sonographic ONSD measurement to a standard invasive method. Quality of studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool by two independent authors. We used a bivariate model of random effects to summarize pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Heterogeneity was investigated by meta-regression and sub-group analyses. RESULTS: We included 18 prospective studies (16 studies including 619 patients for primary outcome). Only one study was of low quality, and there was no apparent publication bias. Pooled sensitivity was 0.9 [95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.85-0.94], specificity was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.8-0.89), and DOR was 46.7 (95% CI: 26.2-83.2) with partial evidence of heterogeneity. The Area-Under-the-Curve of the summary Receiver-Operator-Curve was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.91-0.95, P < .05). No covariates were significant in the meta-regression. Subgroup analysis of severe traumatic brain injury and parenchymal ICP found no heterogeneity. ICP and ONSD had a correlation coefficient of 0.7 (95% CI: 0.63-0.76, P < .05). CONCLUSION: ONSD is a useful adjunct in ICP evaluation but is currently not a replacement for invasive methods where they are feasible.

Comparison of severity of immunized versus non-immunized COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU: A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Vaccines against COVID-19 show high efficacy, yet, infection is still being detected among immunized patients, although with blunted severity. The purpose of this study was to assess the severity of COVID-19 infection among immunized versus non-immunized COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU. METHOD: A prospective observational cohort study, including all COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care unit between January 1st, 2021 and June 30th, 2021 were eligible for inclusion. A comparison of severity upon hospitalization of immunized versus non-immunized patients on a 7-level ordinal scale was conducted, using ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS: 592 patients were enrolled, 524 (88.5%) non-immunized, 63 (10.6%) partially immunized, and 5 (0.9%) fully immunized, partially and fully immunized patients were grouped together. Majority of immunized patients (86.7%) were symptomatic before 21 days of immunization. Non-immunized group had fewer patients in the lower severity categories, while more patients in the higher severity categories compared to immunized group. At least one dose of immunization was associated with reduction of odds of moving up severity scale (OR = 0.2 [95% CI: 0.15-0.4]; p < 0.001) in a well fitted ordinal logistic regression model. At least one dose of immunization was associated with lower adjusted odds of 30 day all-cause mortality (OR = 0.45 [95% CI: 0.23-0.89]; p = 0.02). Non-immunized group had higher mortality rate (43.9% versus 29.4% [95% CI: 1.5 to 25.8]; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Most COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU were non-immunized, most of the partially immunized patients got infected before immunity could develop, and fully immunized patients were likely non-responders. At least one dose of immunization significantly decreases severity of the disease across all ordinal severity categories, and is significantly associated with lower 30 day all-cause mortality. Accordingly, immunization status may have to be considered when deciding on disposition of COVID-19 patients at the point of triage.

Helmet Non-Invasive Ventilation for COVID-19 Patients (Helmet-COVID): study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) delivered by helmet has been used for respiratory support of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia. The aim of this study was to compare helmet NIV with usual care versus usual care alone to reduce mortality. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel randomised controlled trial that compares helmet NIV with usual care to usual care alone in a 1:1 ratio. A total of 320 patients will be enrolled in this study. The primary outcome is 28-day all-cause mortality. The primary outcome will be compared between the two study groups in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol cohorts. An interim analysis will be conducted for both safety and effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approvals are obtained from the institutional review boards of each participating institution. Our findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences and meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04477668.

Implementation of new ECMO centers during the COVID-19 pandemic: experience and results from the Middle East and India.

PURPOSE: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients has increased during the course of the pandemic. As uncertainty existed regarding patient's outcomes, early guidelines recommended against establishing new ECMO centers. We aimed to explore the epidemiology and outcomes of ECMO for COVID-19 related cardiopulmonary failure in five countries in the Middle East and India and to evaluate the results of ECMO in 5 new centers. METHODS: This is a retrospective, multicenter international, observational study conducted in 19 ECMO centers in five countries in the Middle East and India from March 1, 2020, to September 30, 2020. We included patients with COVID-19 who received ECMO for refractory hypoxemia and severe respiratory acidosis with or without circulatory failure. Data collection included demographic data, ECMO-related specific data, pre-ECMO patient condition, 24 h post-ECMO initiation data, and outcome. The primary outcome was survival to home discharge. Secondary outcomes included mortality during ECMO, survival to decannulation, and outcomes stratified by center type. RESULTS: Three hundred and seven COVID-19 patients received ECMO support during the study period, of whom 78 (25%) were treated in the new ECMO centers. The median age was 45 years (interquartile range IQR 37-52), and 81% were men. New center patients were younger, were less frequently male, had received higher PEEP, more frequently inotropes and prone positioning before ECMO and were less frequently retrieved from a peripheral center on ECMO. Survival to home discharge was 45%. In patients treated in new and established centers, survival was 55 and 41% (p = 0.03), respectively. Multivariable analysis retained only a SOFA score < 12 at ECMO initiation as associated with survival (odds ratio, OR 1.93 (95% CI 1.05-3.58), p = 0.034), but not treatment in a new center (OR 1.65 (95% CI 0.75-3.67)). CONCLUSIONS: During pandemics, ECMO may provide favorable outcomes in highly selected patients as resources allow. Newly formed ECMO centers with appropriate supervision of regional experts may have satisfactory results.

Therapeutic plasma exchange in patients with life-threatening COVID-19: a randomised controlled clinical trial.

Assessment of efficacy of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) following life-threatening COVID-19. This was an open-label, randomised clinical trial of ICU patients with life-threatening COVID-19 (positive RT-qPCR plus ARDS, sepsis, organ failure, hyperinflammation). Study was terminated after 87/120 patients enrolled. Standard treatment plus TPE (n = 43) versus standard treatment (n = 44), and stratified by PaO2/FiO2 ratio (>150 vs. ≤150), were compared. Primary outcomes were 35-day mortality and TPE safety. Secondary outcomes were association between TPE and mortality, improvement in SOFA score, change in inflammatory biomarkers, days on mechanical ventilation (MV), and ICU length of stay (LOS). Eighty-seven patients [median age 49 (IQR 34-63) years; 82.8% male] were randomised (44 standard care; 43 standard care plus TPE). Days on MV (P = 0.007) and ICU LOS (P = 0.02) were lower in the TPE group. 35-Day mortality was non-significantly lower in the TPE group (20.9% vs. 34.1%; Kaplan-Meier, P = 0.582). TPE was associated with increased lymphocytes and ADAMTS-13 activity and decreased serum lactate, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, d-dimers and interleukin-6. Multivariable regression analysis provided several predictors of 35-day mortality: PaO2/FiO2 ratio (HR, 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.00; P = 0.02]; ADAMTS-13 activity (HR, 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.98; P = 0.01); pulmonary embolism (HR, 3.57, 95% CI 1.43-8.92; P = 0.007). Post-hoc analysis revealed a significant reduction in SOFA score for TPE patients (P < 0.05). In critically-ill COVID-19 patients, addition of TPE to standard ICU therapy was associated with faster clinical recovery and no increased 35-day mortality.

Delayed intensive care unit admission from the emergency department: impact on patient outcomes. A retrospective study. / Retardo na transferência do pronto-socorro para a unidade de terapia intensiva: impacto nos desfechos do paciente. Um estudo retrospectivo.

OBJECTIVE: To study the impact of delayed admission by more than 4 hours on the outcomes of critically ill patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study in which adult patients admitted directly from the emergency department to the intensive care unit were divided into two groups: Timely Admission if they were admitted within 4 hours and Delayed Admission if admission was delayed for more than 4 hours. Intensive care unit length of stay and hospital/intensive care unit mortality were compared between the groups. Propensity score matching was performed to correct for imbalances. Logistic regression analysis was used to explore delayed admission as an independent risk factor for intensive care unit mortality. RESULTS: During the study period, 1,887 patients were admitted directly from the emergency department to the intensive care unit, with 42% being delayed admissions. Delayed patients had significantly longer intensive care unit lengths of stay and higher intensive care unit and hospital mortality. These results were persistent after propensity score matching of the groups. Delayed admission was an independent risk factor for intensive care unit mortality (OR = 2.6; 95%CI 1.9 - 3.5; p < 0.001). The association of delay and intensive care unit mortality emerged after a delay of 2 hours and was highest after a delay of 4 hours. CONCLUSION: Delayed admission to the intensive care unit from the emergency department is an independent risk factor for intensive care unit mortality, with the strongest association being after a delay of 4 hours.

OBJETIVO: Estudar o impacto do retardo na admissão à unidade de terapia intensiva em mais do que 4 horas nos desfechos de pacientes críticos. MÉTODOS: Este foi um estudo observacional retrospectivo, no qual pacientes adultos admitidos diretamente do pronto-socorro para a unidade de terapia intensiva foram divididos em dois grupos: Tempo Adequado, se admitidos dentro de 4 horas, e Admissão Retardada, nos casos em que a admissão demorou mais do que 4 horas para ocorrer. Compararam-se, entre os grupos, o tempo de permanência na unidade de terapia intensiva e a taxa de mortalidade na unidade de terapia intensiva e no hospital. Foi realizado pareamento por escore de propensão para correção de desequilíbrios. Utilizou-se uma análise de regressão logística para explorar retardo da admissão como fator independente de risco para mortalidade na unidade de terapia intensiva. RESULTADOS: Durante o período do estudo, 1.887 pacientes foram admitidos diretamente do pronto-socorro para a unidade de terapia intensiva, sendo que 42% dessas admissões foram retardadas. Os pacientes com retardo tiveram permanências na unidade de terapia intensiva significantemente mais longas e maior mortalidade na unidade de terapia intensiva e no hospital. Esses resultados persistiram após pareamento dos grupos por escore de propensão. O retardo da admissão foi fator independente de risco para mortalidade na unidade de terapia intensiva (RC = 2,6; IC95% 1,9 - 3,5; p < 0,001). A associação de retardo e mortalidade na unidade de terapia intensiva surgiu após período de retardo de 2 horas e foi mais alta após período de retardo de 4 horas. CONCLUSÃO: O retardo da admissão do pronto-socorro para a unidade de terapia intensiva é fator de risco independente para mortalidade na unidade de terapia intensiva, sendo a associação mais forte após retardo de 4 horas.

A Retrospective Analysis of Thromboembolic Phenomena in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have shown an increased prevalence of thromboembolic disease in critically ill patients with the novel SARS-CoV-2 disease (COVID-19). However, the use of enhanced anticoagulation therapy in these patients remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of thromboembolic phenomena (TEP) and hemorrhagic events (HEs) in intensive care unit (ICU) COVID-19 patients. METHODS: One hundred and sixty ICU patients with COVID-19 were enrolled. Clinical examination results, laboratory data, and imaging studies (computed tomography/Doppler ultrasound scans) for these patients were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Outcome measures including days on mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, and day-28 mortality were recorded. RESULTS: Sixty patients (37.5%) developed TEP including thirty patients with deep vein thrombosis, 55 patients with pulmonary embolism, and 7 patients with arterial thromboembolism. Cardiac arrhythmias, lymphocytopenia, and increased D-dimers were more frequently observed in the TEP group compared to the non-TEP group of patients (all p < 0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of a cutoff D-dimer level of 3.0 µg/mL for predicting PE were 74.5%, 95.1%, 86.8%, and 91.9%, respectively. Thirteen patients experienced HEs, which were more frequently observed in the TEP group (p < 0.05). Twenty-eight-day mortality was higher in the TEP group (60%) compared to the non-TEP group (30%) of patients (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The rates of TEP and HEs in mechanically ventilated critically ill COVID-19 patients were 37. 5% and 8.1%. Twenty-eight-day mortality was higher in the TEP group (60%) compared to the non-TEP group (30%) of patients.