Assessment of Insulin Infusion Requirements in COVID-19-Infected Patients With Diabetic Ketoacidosis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is thought to contribute to diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and worse outcomes in patients with diabetes. This study compared the cumulative insulin dose required to achieve DKA resolution in the intensive care unit among patients with type 2 diabetes and COVID-19 infection versus without COVID-19 infection. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study evaluated 100 patients-50 patients with COVID-19 in cohort 1 and 50 patients without COVID-19 in cohort 2-treated with insulin infusions for DKA at a tertiary care teaching hospital. The primary outcome was to compare the cumulative insulin dose required to achieve DKA resolution in each cohort. The secondary outcomes included time to DKA resolution, mean insulin infusion rate, and mean weight-based cumulative insulin infusion dose required to achieve DKA resolution. All endpoints were adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: The mean cumulative insulin dose was 190.3 units in cohort 1 versus 116.4 units in cohort 2 (P = .0038). Patients receiving steroids had a mean time to DKA resolution of 35.9 hours in cohort 1 versus 15.6 hours in cohort 2 (P = .0014). In cohort 1 versus cohort 2, the mean insulin infusion rate was 7.1 units/hour versus 5.3 units/hour (P = .0025), whereas the mean weight-based cumulative insulin infusion dose was 2.1 units/kg versus 1.5 units/kg (P = .0437), respectively. CONCLUSION: COVID-19-infected patients required a significantly larger cumulative insulin dose, longer time to DKA resolution, higher insulin infusion rate, and higher weight-based insulin infusion dose to achieve DKA resolution versus non-COVID-19-infected patients with type 2 diabetes.

Trajectories of hypoxemia and pulmonary mechanics of COVID-19 ARDS in the NorthCARDS dataset.

BACKGROUND: Understanding heterogeneity seen in patients with COVIDARDS and comparing to non-COVIDARDS may inform tailored treatments. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team of frontline clinicians and data scientists worked to create the Northwell COVIDARDS dataset (NorthCARDS) leveraging over 11,542 COVID-19 hospital admissions. The data was then summarized to examine descriptive differences based on clinically meaningful categories of lung compliance, and to examine trends in oxygenation. FINDINGS: Of the 1536 COVIDARDS patients in the NorthCARDS dataset, there were 531 (34.6%) who had very low lung compliance (< 20 ml/cmH2O), 970 (63.2%) with low-normal compliance (20-50 ml/cmH2O), and 35 (2.2%) with high lung compliance (> 50 ml/cmH2O). The very low compliance group had double the median time to intubation compared to the low-normal group (107.3 h (IQR 25.8, 239.2) vs. 39.5 h (IQR 5.4, 91.6)). Overall, 68.8% (n = 1057) of the patients died during hospitalization. In comparison to non-COVIDARDS reports, there were less patients in the high compliance category (2.2% vs. 12%, compliance ≥ 50 mL/cmH20), and more patients with P/F ≤ 150 (59.8% vs. 45.6%). There is a statistically significant correlation between compliance and P/F ratio. The Oxygenation Index is the highest in the very low compliance group (12.51, SD(6.15)), and lowest in high compliance group (8.78, SD(4.93)). CONCLUSIONS: The respiratory system compliance distribution of COVIDARDS is similar to non-COVIDARDS. In some patients, there may be a relation between time to intubation and duration of high levels of supplemental oxygen treatment on trajectory of lung compliance.

Acute Opiate Overdose: An Update on Management Strategies in Emergency Department and Critical Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are natural, semisynthetic, or synthetic substances that act on opioid receptors in the central nervous system. Clinically, they are prescribed for pain management. Opioid overdose (OOD) occurs when the central nervous system and respiratory drive are suppressed because of excessive consumption of the drug. Symptoms of OOD include drowsiness, slow breathing, pinpoint pupils, cyanosis, loss of consciousness, and death. Due to their addictive potential and easy accessibility opioid addiction is a growing problem worldwide. Emergency medical services and the emergency department often perform initial management of OOD. Thereafter, some patients require intensive care management because of respiratory failure, metabolic encephalopathy, acute kidney injury, and other organ failure. AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: We sought to review the literature and present the most up-to-date treatment strategies of patients with acute OOD requiring critical care management. DATA SOURCES: A PubMed search was conducted to review all articles between 1950 and 2017 and the relevant articles were cited. RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS: Worldwide, approximately 69,000 people die of OOD each year, and approximately 15 million people have opioid addiction. In the United States, death from OOD has increased almost 5-fold from 2001 to 2013. OOD leading to intensive care unit admission has increased by 50% from 2009 to 2015. At the same time, the mortality associated with these admissions has doubled. The management strategies include airway management, use of reversal agents, assessing and treating coingestions and associated complications, treatment of opioid withdrawal with alpha-agonists, and psychosocial support to help with opiate addiction and withdrawal. This warrants awareness among clinicians regarding the adverse effects associated with opioid use, management strategies, and calls for a multidisciplinary approach to treating these patients.

Validation of a Host Response Assay, SeptiCyte LAB, for Discriminating Sepsis from Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome in the ICU.

RATIONALE: A molecular test to distinguish between sepsis and systemic inflammation of noninfectious etiology could potentially have clinical utility. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of a molecular host response assay (SeptiCyte LAB) designed to distinguish between sepsis and noninfectious systemic inflammation in critically ill adults. METHODS: The study employed a prospective, observational, noninterventional design and recruited a heterogeneous cohort of adult critical care patients from seven sites in the United States (n = 249). An additional group of 198 patients, recruited in the large MARS (Molecular Diagnosis and Risk Stratification of Sepsis) consortium trial in the Netherlands ( www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01905033), was also tested and analyzed, making a grand total of 447 patients in our study. The performance of SeptiCyte LAB was compared with retrospective physician diagnosis by a panel of three experts. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, SeptiCyte LAB had an estimated area under the curve of 0.82-0.89 for discriminating sepsis from noninfectious systemic inflammation. The relative likelihood of sepsis versus noninfectious systemic inflammation was found to increase with increasing test score (range, 0-10). In a forward logistic regression analysis, the diagnostic performance of the assay was improved only marginally when used in combination with other clinical and laboratory variables, including procalcitonin. The performance of the assay was not significantly affected by demographic variables, including age, sex, or race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: SeptiCyte LAB appears to be a promising diagnostic tool to complement physician assessment of infection likelihood in critically ill adult patients with systemic inflammation. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01905033 and NCT02127502).

Evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodule in human immunodeficiency virus infected patients.

BACKGROUND: While the etiologies of solitary pulmonary nodules (SPNs) in immunocompetent patients are well established, common etiology, diagnostic techniques, and guidelines to assess SPNs in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) have not been established. OBJECTIVE: To define the etiology of SPN in HIV-infected patients and to examine efficacy of diagnostic testing for SPN. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of HIV-infected patients admitted to a designated acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) center. Microbiological and histopathological specimens from sputum, bronchoalveolar lavage, and biopsies were analyzed. Charts were fully analyzed from time of admission until definitive diagnosis or loss to follow-up. RESULTS: During the 10-year observational period, 10 of 5,000 HIV-infected patients admitted to the hospital were diagnosed with SPN via chest radiography or computed tomography (CT). Among these 10 patients, 6 had a definitive diagnosis. Underlying etiologies included infection (5/10) and lung adenocarcinoma (1/10); none were identified in the remaining 4 subjects. Sputum analysis provided no diagnostic value in discovering pathogenesis in any of these cases. Fiberoptic bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage and transbronchial biopsy were diagnostic in 3 cases, while CT-guided percutaneous transthoracic needle biopsy (PTNB) was diagnostic in 2 cases. One patient required open lung biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Etiologies of SPN in HIV-infected patients are varied and difficult to diagnose. In our study, SPN was attributable to infectious etiology in 50% of cases. Sputum analysis was of no diagnostic value. Biopsy is necessary for definitive diagnosis and treatment.

A Novel Method to Improve the Identification of Time of Intubation for Retrospective EHR Data Analysis During a Time of Resource Strain, the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Accurate determinations of the time of intubation (TOI) are critical for retrospective electronic health record (EHR) data analyses. In a retrospective study, the authors developed and validated an improved query (Ti) to identify TOI across numerous settings in a large health system, using EHR data, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, they evaluated the affect of Ti on peri-intubation patient parameters compared to a previous method-ventilator parameters (Tv). Ti identified an earlier TOI for 84.8% (n = 1666) of cases with a mean (SD) of 3.5 hours (15.5), resulting in alternate values for: partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO 2 ) in 18.4% of patients (mean 43.95 mmHg [54.24]); PaO 2 /fractional inspired oxygen (FiO 2 ) in 17.8% of patients (mean 48.29 [69.81]), and oxygen saturation/FiO 2 in 62.7% (mean 16.75 [34.14]), using the absolute difference in mean values within the first 4 hours of intubation. Differences in PaO 2 /FiO 2 using Ti versus Tv resulted in the reclassification of 7.3% of patients into different acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) severity categories.

Randomized Open Investigation Determining Steroid Dose in Severe COVID-19: The ROIDS-Dose Clinical Trial.

Introduction Treatment with dexamethasone reduces mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia requiring supplemental oxygen, but the optimal dose has not been determined. Objective To determine whether weight-based dexamethasone of 0.2 mg/kg is superior to 6 mg daily in reducing 28-day mortality in patients with COVID-19 and hypoxemia. Materials and methods A multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical trial was conducted between March 2021 and December 2021 at seven hospitals within Northwell Health. A total of 142 patients with confirmed COVID-19 and hypoxemia were included. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to dexamethasone 0.2 mg/kg intravenously daily (n = 70) or 6 mg daily (n = 72) for up to 10 days. Results There was no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome of 28-day all-cause mortality with deaths in 12 of 70 patients (17.14%) in the intervention group and 15 of 72 patients (20.83%) in the control group (p = 0.58). There were no statistically significant differences among the secondary outcomes. Conclusion In patients with COVID-19 and hypoxemia, the use of weight-based dexamethasone dosing was not superior to dexamethasone 6 mg in reducing all-cause mortality at 28 days. Clinical trial registration This study was registered under ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT04834375).

Training Pulmonary Critical Care Medicine Fellows in Thoracentesis Using a Head-Mounted Video Camera.

BACKGROUND: Determination of competence to perform procedures during pulmonary critical care medicine fellowship training has traditionally been based on subjective faculty opinion and numerical requirements. OBJECTIVE: To describe an objective means of assessing competence of fellows to perform thoracentesis using a head-mounted video camera with offline scoring of the thoracentesis performed on an actual patient. METHODS: To test competence in performance of thoracentesis after a multimodality training program, a total of eight first-year fellows performed a thoracentesis on an actual patient while recording the procedure with a lightweight head-mounted video camera in 2017 and 2018. The recordings were scored offline by two faculty members using a 30-point checklist. The percentage agreement between scorers was measured, as was the opinion of the fellows and the scorers on the testing process. If a fellow failed completion of all checklist items, they were provided with further training and retested to assure competence. As part of their training, fellows reviewed the video record of their procedures. RESULTS: Eight first-year fellows were tested, of whom seven successfully completed key checklist items as determined by the video scorers. One failing fellow passed after further training and testing. The percentage agreement between the scorers was high, and fellows indicated that the video device was useful for training. CONCLUSION: This study supports the use of video-based testing for assessment of competence and for training in performance of thoracentesis by fellows.

Pneumothorax in COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Case Series.

Objective The study aims to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) who developed pneumothorax. Design and setting A retrospective chart review was performed of the electronic medical record. Patients were included if they were identified as having confirmed COVID-19 as well as pneumothorax from March 16, 2020 to May 31, 2020. Patients' demographic and clinical characteristics, mechanical ventilator parameters, lung compliance measurements and outcomes during hospitalization were collected. This case series was conducted in intensive care units at two large tertiary care centers within the Northwell Health System, located in New York State. Patients A total of 75 patients were identified who were predominantly male (73.3%) with an average age of 62.8 years. Thirty (40%) were Hispanic, 20 (26.7%) were White, 16 (21.3%) were Asian, and nine (12%) were Black. Common comorbid conditions were hypertension (52%), diabetes mellitus (26.7%), hyperlipidemia (32.0%), and chronic pulmonary disease (8, 10.7%). Measurements and main results Most of the patients were diagnosed with pneumothorax while on mechanical ventilation (92%) despite overall adherence with lung-protective ventilation strategies. Average tidal volume was 6.66 mL/kg) of ideal body weight. The average positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) was 10.83 (cm) H2O. Lung compliance was poor, with average peak and plateau pressures of 41.9 cm H2O and 35.2 cm H2O, respectively. Inpatient mortality was high in these patients (76%). Conservative management with initial observation had a success rate (73.3%) with similar mortality and shorter length of stay (LOS) on average. Significant factors in the conservatively managed group included lack of tension physiology, the smaller size of pneumothorax, lack of underlying diabetes, presence of pneumomediastinum, and not being on mechanical ventilation during diagnosis. Conclusion Despite overall adherence to best practice ventilator management in ARDS, we observed a large number of pneumothoraces during the COVID-19 pandemic. Conservative management may be appropriate if there are no clinical signs or symptoms of tension physiology and pneumothorax size is small.

Physician agreement on the diagnosis of sepsis in the intensive care unit: estimation of concordance and analysis of underlying factors in a multicenter cohort.

BACKGROUND: Differentiating sepsis from the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) in critical care patients is challenging, especially before serious organ damage is evident, and with variable clinical presentations of patients and variable training and experience of attending physicians. Our objective was to describe and quantify physician agreement in diagnosing SIRS or sepsis in critical care patients as a function of available clinical information, infection site, and hospital setting. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of previously collected data from a prospective, observational trial (N = 249 subjects) in intensive care units at seven US hospitals, in which physicians at different stages of patient care were asked to make diagnostic calls of either SIRS, sepsis, or indeterminate, based on varying amounts of available clinical information (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02127502). The overall percent agreement and the free-marginal, inter-observer agreement statistic kappa (κ free) were used to quantify agreement between evaluators (attending physicians, site investigators, external expert panelists). Logistic regression and machine learning techniques were used to search for significant variables that could explain heterogeneity within the indeterminate and SIRS patient subgroups. RESULTS: Free-marginal kappa decreased between the initial impression of the attending physician and (1) the initial impression of the site investigator (κ free 0.68), (2) the consensus discharge diagnosis of the site investigators (κ free 0.62), and (3) the consensus diagnosis of the external expert panel (κ free 0.58). In contrast, agreement was greatest between the consensus discharge impression of site investigators and the consensus diagnosis of the external expert panel (κ free 0.79). When stratified by infection site, κ free for agreement between initial and later diagnoses had a mean value + 0.24 (range - 0.29 to + 0.39) for respiratory infections, compared to + 0.70 (range + 0.42 to + 0.88) for abdominal + urinary + other infections. Bioinformatics analysis failed to clearly resolve the indeterminate diagnoses and also failed to explain why 60% of SIRS patients were treated with antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable uncertainty surrounds the differential clinical diagnosis of sepsis vs. SIRS, especially before organ damage has become highly evident, and for patients presenting with respiratory clinical signs. Our findings underscore the need to provide physicians with accurate, timely diagnostic information in evaluating possible sepsis.