The use of prone position ventilation in Danish patients with COVID-19-induced severe acute respiratory distress syndrome treated with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A nationwide cohort study with focus on pulmonary effects.

BACKGROUND: Prone position ventilation (PPV) is recommended for patients with COVID-19 induced severe Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and is used for patients supported with V-V ECMO as well. The purpose of this study was to describe the use of PPV in these patients focusing on physiological effects with the hypothesis that PPV could reduce oxygen need and improve dynamic compliance. METHODS: This study was a nationwide retrospective analysis of all COVID-19 patients in Denmark from March 2020 - December 2021 with severe ARDS and need of V-V ECMO support. Data on the number of patients treated with PPV, number of PPV sessions, timing, the time spent in prone position, pulmonary physiological response types with analysis of variables affecting the response are reported. RESULTS: Out of 68 patients 44 were treated with 220 PPV sessions and a positive clinical response was observed in 80% of patients but only in 45% of sessions. On a single session level, increased compliance was observed in 38% and increased oxygenation in only 15% of 220 sessions, with within-patient heterogeneity. Higher dynamic compliance at the beginning of a PPV session was associated with a lower delta change in dynamic compliance during PPV. The response to a PPV session could not be predicted by the response in the prior session. Dynamic compliance did not change during the ECMO course. CONCLUSION: Eighty percent of patients responded positively during a PPV session, but this was not associated with overall pulmonary improvement. On a single patient level, responses were heterogenous and only 45% of sessions resulted in clinical improvement. Response in dynamic compliance was associated with starting values of compliance.

Combined effects of targeted blood pressure, oxygenation, and duration of device-based fever prevention after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest on 1-year survival: post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The "Blood Pressure and Oxygenation Targets in Post Resuscitation Care" (BOX) trial investigated whether a low versus high blood pressure target, a restrictive versus liberal oxygenation target, and a shorter versus longer duration of device-based fever prevention in comatose patients could improve outcomes. No differences in rates of discharge from hospital with severe disability or 90-day mortality were found. However, long-term effects and potential interaction of the interventions are unknown. Accordingly, the objective of this study is to investigate both individual and combined effects of the interventions on 1-year mortality rates. METHODS: The BOX trial was a randomized controlled two-center trial that assigned comatose resuscitated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients to the following three interventions at admission: A blood pressure target of either 63 mmHg or 77 mmHg; An arterial oxygenation target of 9-10 kPa or 13-14 kPa; Device-based fever prevention administered as an initial 24 h at 36 °C and then either 12 or 48 h at 37 °C; totaling 36 or 72 h of temperature control. Randomization occurred in parallel and simultaneously to all interventions. Patients were followed for the occurrence of death from all causes for 1 year. Analyzes were performed by Cox proportional models, and assessment of interactions was performed with the interventions stated as an interaction term. RESULTS: Analysis for all three interventions included 789 patients. For the intervention of low compared to high blood pressure targets, 1-year mortality rates were 35% (138 of 396) and 36% (143 of 393), respectively, hazard ratio (HR) 0.92 (0.73-1.16) p = 0.47. For the restrictive compared to liberal oxygenation targets, 1-year mortality rates were 34% (135 of 394) and 37% (146 of 395), respectively, HR 0.92 (0.73-1.16) p = 0.46. For device-based fever prevention for a total of 36 compared to 72 h, 1-year mortality rates were 35% (139 of 393) and 36% (142 of 396), respectively, HR 0.98 (0.78-1.24) p = 0.89. There was no sign of interaction between the interventions, and accordingly, no combination of randomizations indicated differentiated treatment effects. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in 1-year mortality rates for a low compared to high blood pressure target, a liberal compared to restrictive oxygenation target, or a longer compared to shorter duration of device-based fever prevention after cardiac arrest. No combination of the interventions affected these findings. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03141099, Registered 30 April 2017.

Impact of blood pressure targets on central hemodynamics during intensive care after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVES: The aim was to investigate the advanced hemodynamic effects of the two MAP-targets during intensive care on systemic hemodynamics in comatose patients after cardiac arrest. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Primary vasopressor used was per protocol norepinephrine. Hemodynamic monitoring was done with pulmonary artery catheters (PAC) and measurements were made on predefined time points. The primary endpoint of this substudy was the difference in cardiac index within 48 h from a repeated measurements-mixed model. Secondary endpoints included systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI), heart rate, and stroke volume index. PATIENTS: Comatose survivors after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. INTERVENTIONS: The "Blood pressure and oxygenations targets after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (BOX)"-trial was a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, multicenter-study comparing targeted mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 63 mmHg (MAP63) vs 77 mmHg (MAP77). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 789 randomized patients, 730 (93%) patients were included in the hemodynamic substudy. From PAC-insertion (median 1 hours after ICU-admission) and the next 48 hours, the MAP77-group received significantly higher doses of norepinephrine (mean difference 0.09 µg/kg/min, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07-0.11, pgroup < 0.0001). Cardiac index was significantly increased (0.20 L/min/m2 (CI 0.12-0.28), pgroup < 0.0001) as was SVRI with an overall difference of (43 dynes m2/s/cm5 (CI 7-79); pgroup = 0.02). Heart rate was increased in the MAP77-group (4 beats/minute; CI 2-6, pgroup < 0.003), but stroke volume index was not (pgroup = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Targeted MAP at 77 mmHg compared to 63 mmHg resulted in a higher dose of norepinephrine, increased cardiac index and SVRI. Heart rate was also increased, but stroke volume index was not affected by a higher blood pressure target.

Use of prone position ventilation in patients with COVID-19 induced severe ARDS supported with V-V ECMO: A danish cohort study with focus on adverse events.

INTRODUCTION: Prone position ventilation (PPV) of patients with adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) supported with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) may improve oxygenation and alveolar recruitment and is recommended when extensive dorsal consolidations are present, but only few data regarding adverse events (AE) related to PPV in this group of patients have been published. METHODS: Nationwide retrospective analysis of 68 COVID-19 patients admitted from March 2020 - December 2021 with severe ARDS and need of V-V ECMO support. The number of patients treated with PPV, number of PPV-events, timing, the time spent in prone position, number and causes of AE are reported. Causes to stop the PPV regimen and risk factors for AE were explored. RESULTS: 44 out of 68 patients were treated with PPV, and 220 PPV events are evaluated. AE were identified in 99 out of 220 (45%) PPV events and occurred among 31 patients (71%). 1 fatal PPV related AE was registered. Acute supination occurred in 19 events (9%). Causes to stop the PPV regimen were almost equally distributed between effect (weaned from ECMO), no effect, death (of other reasons) and AE. Frequent causes of AE were pressures sores and ulcers, hypoxia, airway related and ECMO circuit related. Most AE occurred during patients first or second PPV event. CONCLUSIONS: PPV treatment was found to carry a high incidence of PPV related AE in these patients. Causes and preventive measures to reduce occurrence of PPV related AE during V-V ECMO support need further exploration.

Improved description of terrestrial habitat types by including microbial communities as indicators.

Soils host diverse communities of microorganisms essential for ecosystem functions and soil health. Despite their importance, microorganisms are not covered by legislation protecting biodiversity or habitats, such as the Habitats Directive. Advances in molecular methods have caused breakthroughs in microbial community analysis, and recent studies have shown that parts of the communities are habitat-specific. If distinct microbial communities are present in the habitat types defined in the Habitats Directive, the Directive may be improved by including these communities. Thus, monitoring and reporting of biodiversity and conservation status of habitat types could be based not only on plant communities but also on microbial communities. In the present study, bacterial and plant communities were examined in six habitat types defined in the Habitats Directive by conducting botanical surveys and collecting soil samples for amplicon sequencing across 19 sites in Denmark. Furthermore, selected physico-chemical properties expected to differ between habitat types and explain variations in community composition of bacteria and vegetation were analysed (pH, electrical conductivity (EC), soil texture, soil water repellency, soil organic carbon content (OC), inorganic nitrogen, and in-situ water content (SWC)). Despite some variations within the same habitat type and overlaps between habitat types, habitat-specific communities were observed for both bacterial and plant communities, but no correlation was observed between the alpha diversity of vegetation and bacteria. PERMANOVA analysis was used to evaluate the variables best able to explain variation in the community composition of vegetation and bacteria. Habitat type alone could explain 46% and 47% of the variation in bacterial and plant communities, respectively. Excluding habitat type as a variable, the best model (pH, SWC, OC, fine silt, and Shannon's diversity index for vegetation) could explain 37% of the variation for bacteria. For vegetation, the best model (pH, EC, ammonium content and Shannon's diversity index for bacteria) could explain 25% of the variation. Based on these results, bacterial communities could be included in the Habitats Directive to improve the monitoring, as microorganisms are more sensitive to changes in the environment compared to vegetation, which the current monitoring is based on.

Long-term outcomes in COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care in Denmark: A nationwide observational study.

BACKGROUND: Among ICU patients with COVID-19, it is largely unknown how the overall outcome and resource use have changed with time, different genetic variants, and vaccination status. METHODS: For all Danish ICU patients with COVID-19 from March 10, 2020 to March 31, 2022, we manually retrieved data on demographics, comorbidities, vaccination status, use of life support, length of stay, and vital status from medical records. We compared patients based on the period of admittance and vaccination status and described changes in epidemiology related to the Omicron variant. RESULTS: Among all 2167 ICU patients with COVID-19, 327 were admitted during the first (March 10-19, 2020), 1053 during the second (May 20, 2020 to June 30, 2021) and 787 during the third wave (July 1, 2021 to March 31, 2022). We observed changes over the three waves in age (median 72 vs. 68 vs. 65 years), use of invasive mechanical ventilation (81% vs. 58% vs. 51%), renal replacement therapy (26% vs. 13% vs. 12%), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (7% vs. 3% vs. 2%), duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (median 13 vs. 13 vs. 9 days) and ICU length of stay (median 13 vs. 10 vs. 7 days). Despite these changes, 90-day mortality remained constant (36% vs. 35% vs. 33%). Vaccination rates among ICU patients were 42% as compared to 80% in society. Unvaccinated versus vaccinated patients were younger (median 57 vs. 73 years), had less comorbidity (50% vs. 78%), and had lower 90-day mortality (29% vs. 51%). Patient characteristics changed significantly after the Omicron variant became dominant including a decrease in the use of COVID-specific pharmacological agents from 95% to 69%. CONCLUSIONS: In Danish ICUs, the use of life support declined, while mortality seemed unchanged throughout the three waves of COVID-19. Vaccination rates were lower among ICU patients than in society, but the selected group of vaccinated patients admitted to the ICU still had very severe disease courses. When the Omicron variant became dominant a lower fraction of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients received COVID treatment indicating other causes for ICU admission.

Superinfections in COVID-19 patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support.

BACKGROUND: The risk of superinfections and associations with mortality among patients with corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) receiving veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) is poorly elucidated. METHOD: We identified all patients with COVID-19 treated with VV-ECMO >24 h at Rigshospitalet, Denmark from March 2020 to December 2021. Data were obtained by review of medical files. Associations between superinfections and mortality were assessed by logistic regression analyses adjusted for sex and age. RESULTS: Fifty patients, median age 53 years (interquartile range [IQR] 45-59), 66% male, were included. Median time on VV-ECMO was 14.5 days (IQR 6.3-23.5), 42% were discharged from hospital alive. Bacteremia, ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP), invasive candidiasis, pulmonary aspergillosis, herpes simplex virus, and cytomegalovirus (CMV) were detected in 38%, 42%, 12%, 12%, 14%, and 20% of patients, respectively. No patients with pulmonary aspergillosis survived. CMV was associated with increased risk of death, odds ratio 12.6 (95% confidence interval 1.9-257, p = .05), whereas we found no associations between other superinfections and risk of death. CONCLUSION: Bacteremia and VAP are common but does not seem to affect mortality, whereas pulmonary aspergillosis and CMV are associated with poor prognosis among COVID-19 patients treated with VV-ECMO.

PaCO2 trajectories in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19: A population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify PaCO2 trajectories and assess their associations with mortality in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the first and second waves of the pandemic in Denmark. DESIGN: A population-based cohort study with retrospective data collection. PATIENTS: All COVID-19 patients were treated in eight intensive care units (ICUs) in the Capital Region of Copenhagen, Denmark, between March 1, 2020 and March 31, 2021. MEASUREMENTS: Data from the electronic health records were extracted, and latent class analyses were computed based on up to the first 3 weeks of mechanical ventilation to depict trajectories of PaCO2 levels. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3, sex and age with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for death according to PaCO2 trajectories. MAIN RESULTS: In latent class trajectory models, including 25,318 PaCO2 measurements from 244 patients, three PaCO2 latent class trajectories were identified: a low isocapnic (Class I; n = 130), a high isocapnic (Class II; n = 80), as well as a progressively hypercapnic (Class III; n = 34) trajectory. Mortality was higher in Class II [aHR: 2.16 {1.26-3.68}] and Class III [aHR: 2.97 {1.63-5.40}]) compared to Class I (reference). CONCLUSION: Latent class analysis of arterial blood gases in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients identified distinct PaCO2 trajectories, which were independently associated with mortality.

Thromboembolic and bleeding events in ICU patients with COVID-19: A nationwide, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have an increased risk of thromboembolic complications. We describe the occurrence of thromboembolic and bleeding events in all ICU patients with COVID-19 in Denmark during the first and second waves of the pandemic. METHODS: This was a sub-study of the Danish Intensive Care Covid database, in which all patients with SARS-CoV-2 admitted to Danish ICUs from 10th March 2020 to 30th June 2021 were included. We registered coagulation variables at admission, and all thromboembolic and bleeding events, and the use of heparins during ICU stay. Variables associated with thrombosis and bleeding and any association with 90-day mortality were estimated using Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: We included 1369 patients in this sub-study; 158 (12%, 95% confidence interval 10-13) had a thromboembolic event in ICU and 309 (23%, 20-25) had a bleeding event, among whom 81 patients (6%, 4.8-7.3) had major bleeding. We found that mechanical ventilation and increased D-dimer were associated with thrombosis and mechanical ventilation, low platelet count and presence of haematological malignancy were associated with bleeding. Most patients (76%) received increased doses of thromboprophylaxis during their ICU stay. Thromboembolic events were not associated with mortality in adjusted analysis (hazard ratio 1.35 [0.91-2.01, p = .14], whereas bleeding events were 1.55 [1.18-2.05, p = .002]). CONCLUSIONS: Both thromboembolic and bleeding events frequently occurred in ICU patients with COVID-19. Based on these data, it is not apparent that increased doses of thromboprophylaxis were beneficial.

Duration of Device-Based Fever Prevention after Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend active fever prevention for 72 hours after cardiac arrest. Data from randomized clinical trials of this intervention have been lacking. METHODS: We randomly assigned comatose patients who had been resuscitated after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac cause to device-based temperature control targeting 36°C for 24 hours followed by targeting of 37°C for either 12 or 48 hours (for total intervention times of 36 and 72 hours, respectively) or until the patient regained consciousness. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause or hospital discharge with a Cerebral Performance Category of 3 or 4 (range, 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating more severe disability; a category of 3 or 4 indicates severe cerebral disability or coma) within 90 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes included death from any cause and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score (range, 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive ability) at 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 393 patients were randomly assigned to temperature control for 36 hours, and 396 patients were assigned to temperature control for 72 hours. At 90 days after randomization, a primary end-point event had occurred in 127 of 393 patients (32.3%) in the 36-hour group and in 133 of 396 patients (33.6%) in the 72-hour group (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.77 to 1.26; P = 0.70) and mortality was 29.5% in the 36-hour group and 30.3% in the 72-hour group. At 3 months, the median Montreal Cognitive Assessment score was 26 (interquartile range, 24 to 29) and 27 (interquartile range, 24 to 28), respectively. There was no significant between-group difference in the incidence of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Active device-based fever prevention for 36 or 72 hours after cardiac arrest did not result in significantly different percentages of patients dying or having severe disability or coma. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation; BOX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03141099.).

Blood-Pressure Targets in Comatose Survivors of Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Evidence to support the choice of blood-pressure targets for the treatment of comatose survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who are receiving intensive care is limited. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design, we evaluated a mean arterial blood-pressure target of 63 mm Hg as compared with 77 mm Hg in comatose adults who had been resuscitated after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac cause; patients were also assigned to one of two oxygen targets (reported separately). The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause or hospital discharge with a Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) of 3 or 4 within 90 days (range, 0 to 5, with higher categories indicating more severe disability; a category of 3 or 4 indicates severe disability or coma). Secondary outcomes included neuron-specific enolase levels at 48 hours, death from any cause, scores on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (range, 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive ability) and the modified Rankin scale (range, 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability) at 3 months, and the CPC at 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 789 patients were included in the analysis (393 in the high-target group and 396 in the low-target group). A primary-outcome event occurred in 133 patients (34%) in the high-target group and in 127 patients (32%) in the low-target group (hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.37; P = 0.56). At 90 days, 122 patients (31%) in the high-target group and 114 patients (29%) in the low-target group had died (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.46). The median CPC was 1 (interquartile range, 1 to 5) in both the high-target group and the low-target group; the corresponding median modified Rankin scale scores were 1 (interquartile range, 0 to 6) and 1 (interquartile range, 0 to 6), and the corresponding median Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores were 27 (interquartile range, 24 to 29) and 26 (interquartile range, 24 to 29). The median neuron-specific enolase level at 48 hours was also similar in the two groups. The percentages of patients with adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Targeting a mean arterial blood pressure of 77 mm Hg or 63 mm Hg in patients who had been resuscitated from cardiac arrest did not result in significantly different percentages of patients dying or having severe disability or coma. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation; BOX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03141099.).

Oxygen Targets in Comatose Survivors of Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate oxygenation target for mechanical ventilation in comatose survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is unknown. METHODS: In this randomized trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design, we randomly assigned comatose adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in a 1:1 ratio to either a restrictive oxygen target of a partial pressure of arterial oxygen (Pao2) of 9 to 10 kPa (68 to 75 mm Hg) or a liberal oxygen target of a Pao2 of 13 to 14 kPa (98 to 105 mm Hg); patients were also assigned to one of two blood-pressure targets (reported separately). The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause or hospital discharge with severe disability or coma (Cerebral Performance Category [CPC] of 3 or 4; categories range from 1 to 5, with higher values indicating more severe disability), whichever occurred first within 90 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes were neuron-specific enolase levels at 48 hours, death from any cause, the score on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (ranging from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive ability), the score on the modified Rankin scale (ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability), and the CPC at 90 days. RESULTS: A total of 789 patients underwent randomization. A primary-outcome event occurred in 126 of 394 patients (32.0%) in the restrictive-target group and in 134 of 395 patients (33.9%) in the liberal-target group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 1.21; P = 0.69). At 90 days, death had occurred in 113 patients (28.7%) in the restrictive-target group and in 123 (31.1%) in the liberal-target group. On the CPC, the median category was 1 in the two groups; on the modified Rankin scale, the median score was 2 in the restrictive-target group and 1 in the liberal-target group; and on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, the median score was 27 in the two groups. At 48 hours, the median neuron-specific enolase level was 17 µg per liter in the restrictive-target group and 18 µg per liter in the liberal-target group. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Targeting of a restrictive or liberal oxygenation strategy in comatose patients after resuscitation for cardiac arrest resulted in a similar incidence of death or severe disability or coma. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation; BOX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03141099.).

Changes over time in characteristics, resource use and outcomes among ICU patients with COVID-19-A nationwide, observational study in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: Characteristics and care of intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19 may have changed during the pandemic, but longitudinal data assessing this are limited. We compared patients with COVID-19 admitted to Danish ICUs in the first wave with those admitted later. METHODS: Among all Danish ICU patients with COVID-19, we compared demographics, chronic comorbidities, use of organ support, length of stay and vital status of those admitted 10 March to 19 May 2020 (first wave) versus 20 May 2020 to 30 June 2021. We analysed risk factors for death by adjusted logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Among all hospitalised patients with COVID-19, a lower proportion was admitted to ICU after the first wave (13% vs. 8%). Among all 1374 ICU patients with COVID-19, 326 were admitted during the first wave. There were no major differences in patient's characteristics or mortality between the two periods, but use of invasive mechanical ventilation (81% vs. 58% of patients), renal replacement therapy (26% vs. 13%) and ECMO (8% vs. 3%) and median length of stay in ICU (13 vs. 10 days) and in hospital (20 vs. 17 days) were all significantly lower after the first wave. Risk factors for death were higher age, larger burden of comorbidities (heart failure, pulmonary disease and kidney disease) and active cancer, but not admission during or after the first wave. CONCLUSIONS: After the first wave of COVID-19 in Denmark, a lower proportion of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 were admitted to ICU. Among ICU patients, use of organ support was lower and length of stay was reduced, but mortality rates remained at a relatively high level.

Long-term cognitive and functional status in Danish ICU patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: ICU admission due to COVID-19 may result in cognitive and physical impairment. We investigated the long-term cognitive and physical status of Danish ICU patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We included all patients with COVID-19 admitted to Danish ICUs between March 10 and May 19, 2020. Patients were the contacted prospectively at 6 and 12 months for follow-up. Our primary outcomes were cognitive function and frailty at 6 and 12 months after ICU admission, estimated by the Mini Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and the Clinical Frailty Scale. Secondary outcomes were 6- and 12-month mortality, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessed by EQ-5D-5L, functional status (Barthel activities of daily living and Lawton-Brody instrumental activities of daily living), and fatigue (Fatigue Assessment Scale). The study had no information on pre-ICU admission status for the participants. RESULTS: A total of 326 patients were included. The 6- and 12-month mortality was 37% and 38%, respectively. Among the 204 six-month survivors, 105 (51%) participated in the 6-month follow-up; among the 202 twelve-month survivors, 95 (47%) participated in the 12-month follow-up. At 6 months, cognitive scores indicated impairment for 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.4-12.4) and at 12 months for 17% (95% CI, 12.0-12.8) of participants. Frailty was indicated in 20% (95% CI, 3.4-3.9) at 6 months, and for 18% (95% CI, 3.3-3.8) at 12 months. Fatigue was reported by 52% at 6 months, and by 47% at 12 months. For HRQoL, moderate, severe, or extreme health problems were reported by 28% at 6 months, and by 25% at 12 months. CONCLUSION: Long-term cognitive, functional impairment was found in up to one in four of patients surviving intensive care for COVID-19. Fatigue was present in nearly half the survivors at both 6 and 12 months. However, pre-ICU admission status of the patients was unknown.

Long-term outcomes of dexamethasone 12 mg versus 6 mg in patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxaemia.

PURPOSE: We assessed long-term outcomes of dexamethasone 12 mg versus 6 mg given daily for up to 10 days in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and severe hypoxaemia. METHODS: We assessed 180-day mortality and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using EuroQoL (EQ)-5D-5L index values and EQ visual analogue scale (VAS) in the international, stratified, blinded COVID STEROID 2 trial, which randomised 1000 adults with confirmed COVID-19 receiving at least 10 L/min of oxygen or mechanical ventilation in 26 hospitals in Europe and India. In the HRQoL analyses, higher values indicated better outcomes, and deceased patients were given a score of zero. RESULTS: We obtained vital status at 180 days for 963 of 982 patients (98.1%) in the intention-to-treat population, EQ-5D-5L index value data for 922 (93.9%) and EQ VAS data for 924 (94.1%). At 180 days, 164 of 486 patients (33.7%) had died in the 12 mg group versus 184 of 477 (38.6%) in the 6 mg group [adjusted risk difference - 4.3%; 99% confidence interval (CI) - 11.7-3.0; relative risk 0.89; 0.72-1.09; P = 0.13]. The adjusted mean differences between the 12 mg and the 6 mg groups in EQ-5D-5L index values were 0.06 (99% CI - 0.01 to 0.12; P = 0.10) and in EQ VAS scores 4 (- 3 to 10; P = 0.22). CONCLUSION: Among patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxaemia, dexamethasone 12 mg compared with 6 mg did not result in statistically significant improvements in mortality or HRQoL at 180 days, but the results were most compatible with benefit from the higher dose.

Dexamethasone 12 mg versus 6 mg for patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxaemia: a pre-planned, secondary Bayesian analysis of the COVID STEROID 2 trial.

PURPOSE: We compared dexamethasone 12 versus 6 mg daily for up to 10 days in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and severe hypoxaemia in the international, randomised, blinded COVID STEROID 2 trial. In the primary, conventional analyses, the predefined statistical significance thresholds were not reached. We conducted a pre-planned Bayesian analysis to facilitate probabilistic interpretation. METHODS: We analysed outcome data within 90 days in the intention-to-treat population (data available in 967 to 982 patients) using Bayesian models with various sensitivity analyses. Results are presented as median posterior probabilities with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) and probabilities of different effect sizes with 12 mg dexamethasone. RESULTS: The adjusted mean difference on days alive without life support at day 28 (primary outcome) was 1.3 days (95% CrI -0.3 to 2.9; 94.2% probability of benefit). Adjusted relative risks and probabilities of benefit on serious adverse reactions was 0.85 (0.63 to 1.16; 84.1%) and on mortality 0.87 (0.73 to 1.03; 94.8%) at day 28 and 0.88 (0.75 to 1.02; 95.1%) at day 90. Probabilities of benefit on days alive without life support and days alive out of hospital at day 90 were 85 and 95.7%, respectively. Results were largely consistent across sensitivity analyses, with relatively low probabilities of clinically important harm with 12 mg on all outcomes in all analyses. CONCLUSION: We found high probabilities of benefit and low probabilities of clinically important harm with dexamethasone 12 mg versus 6 mg daily in patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxaemia on all outcomes up to 90 days.

Effect of 12 mg vs 6 mg of Dexamethasone on the Number of Days Alive Without Life Support in Adults With COVID-19 and Severe Hypoxemia: The COVID STEROID 2 Randomized Trial.

Importance: A daily dose with 6 mg of dexamethasone is recommended for up to 10 days in patients with severe and critical COVID-19, but a higher dose may benefit those with more severe disease. Objective: To assess the effects of 12 mg/d vs 6 mg/d of dexamethasone in patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter, randomized clinical trial was conducted between August 2020 and May 2021 at 26 hospitals in Europe and India and included 1000 adults with confirmed COVID-19 requiring at least 10 L/min of oxygen or mechanical ventilation. End of 90-day follow-up was on August 19, 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to 12 mg/d of intravenous dexamethasone (n = 503) or 6 mg/d of intravenous dexamethasone (n = 497) for up to 10 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the number of days alive without life support (invasive mechanical ventilation, circulatory support, or kidney replacement therapy) at 28 days and was adjusted for stratification variables. Of the 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, 5 are included in this analysis (the number of days alive without life support at 90 days, the number of days alive out of the hospital at 90 days, mortality at 28 days and at 90 days, and ≥1 serious adverse reactions at 28 days). Results: Of the 1000 randomized patients, 982 were included (median age, 65 [IQR, 55-73] years; 305 [31%] women) and primary outcome data were available for 971 (491 in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group and 480 in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group). The median number of days alive without life support was 22.0 days (IQR, 6.0-28.0 days) in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group and 20.5 days (IQR, 4.0-28.0 days) in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted mean difference, 1.3 days [95% CI, 0-2.6 days]; P = .07). Mortality at 28 days was 27.1% in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group vs 32.3% in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted relative risk, 0.86 [99% CI, 0.68-1.08]). Mortality at 90 days was 32.0% in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group vs 37.7% in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted relative risk, 0.87 [99% CI, 0.70-1.07]). Serious adverse reactions, including septic shock and invasive fungal infections, occurred in 11.3% in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group vs 13.4% in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted relative risk, 0.83 [99% CI, 0.54-1.29]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia, 12 mg/d of dexamethasone compared with 6 mg/d of dexamethasone did not result in statistically significantly more days alive without life support at 28 days. However, the trial may have been underpowered to identify a significant difference. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04509973 and ctri.nic.in Identifier: CTRI/2020/10/028731.

Low-dose hydrocortisone in patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia: The COVID STEROID randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In the early phase of the pandemic, some guidelines recommended the use of corticosteroids for critically ill patients with COVID-19, whereas others recommended against the use despite lack of firm evidence of either benefit or harm. In the COVID STEROID trial, we aimed to assess the effects of low-dose hydrocortisone on patient-centred outcomes in adults with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia. METHODS: In this multicentre, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, blinded, centrally randomised, stratified clinical trial, we randomly assigned adults with confirmed COVID-19 and severe hypoxia (use of mechanical ventilation or supplementary oxygen with a flow of at least 10 L/min) to either hydrocortisone (200 mg/d) vs a matching placebo for 7 days or until hospital discharge. The primary outcome was the number of days alive without life support at day 28 after randomisation. RESULTS: The trial was terminated early when 30 out of 1000 participants had been enrolled because of external evidence indicating benefit from corticosteroids in severe COVID-19. At day 28, the median number of days alive without life support in the hydrocortisone vs placebo group were 7 vs 10 (adjusted mean difference: -1.1 days, 95% CI -9.5 to 7.3, P = .79); mortality was 6/16 vs 2/14; and the number of serious adverse reactions 1/16 vs 0/14. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial of adults with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia, we were unable to provide precise estimates of the benefits and harms of hydrocortisone as compared with placebo as only 3% of the planned sample size were enrolled. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04348305. European Union Drug Regulation Authorities Clinical Trials (EudraCT) Database: 2020-001395-15.

Higher vs Lower Doses of Dexamethasone in Patients with COVID-19 and Severe Hypoxia (COVID STEROID 2) trial: Protocol for a secondary Bayesian analysis.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to severe hypoxic respiratory failure and death. Corticosteroids decrease mortality in severely or critically ill patients with COVID-19. However, the optimal dose remains unresolved. The ongoing randomised COVID STEROID 2 trial investigates the effects of higher vs lower doses of dexamethasone (12 vs 6 mg intravenously daily for up to 10 days) in 1,000 adult patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia. METHODS: This protocol outlines the rationale and statistical methods for a secondary, pre-planned Bayesian analysis of the primary outcome (days alive without life support at day 28) and all secondary outcomes registered up to day 90. We will use hurdle-negative binomial models to estimate the mean number of days alive without life support in each group and present results as mean differences and incidence rate ratios with 95% credibility intervals (CrIs). Additional count outcomes will be analysed similarly and binary outcomes will be analysed using logistic regression models with results presented as probabilities, relative risks and risk differences with 95% CrIs. We will present probabilities of any benefit/harm, clinically important benefit/harm and probabilities of effects smaller than pre-defined clinically minimally important differences for all outcomes analysed. Analyses will be adjusted for stratification variables and conducted using weakly informative priors supplemented by sensitivity analyses using sceptic priors. DISCUSSION: This secondary, pre-planned Bayesian analysis will supplement the primary, conventional analysis and may help clinicians, researchers and policymakers interpret the results of the COVID STEROID 2 trial while avoiding arbitrarily dichotomised interpretations of the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04509973; EudraCT: 2020-003363-25.

Characteristics, interventions, and longer term outcomes of COVID-19 ICU patients in Denmark-A nationwide, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Most data on intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19 originate in selected populations from stressed healthcare systems with shorter term follow-up. We present characteristics, interventions and longer term outcomes of the entire, unselected cohort of all ICU patients with COVID-19 in Denmark where the ICU capacity was not exceeded. METHODS: We identified all patients with SARS-CoV-2 admitted to any Danish ICU from 10 March to 19 May 2020 and registered demographics, chronic comorbidities, use of organ support, length of stay, and vital status from patient files. Risk factors for death were analyzed using adjusted Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: There were 323 ICU patients with confirmed COVID-19. Median age was 68 years, 74% were men, 50% had hypertension, 21% diabetes, and 20% chronic pulmonary disease; 29% had no chronic comorbidity. Invasive mechanical ventilation was used in 82%, vasopressors in 83%, renal replacement therapy in 26%, and extra corporeal membrane oxygenation in 8%. ICU stay was median 13 days (IQR 6-22) and hospital stay 19 days (11-30). Median follow-up was 79 days. At end of follow-up, 118 had died (37%), 15 (4%) were still in hospital hereof 4 in ICU as of 16 June 2020. Risk factors for mortality included male gender, age, chronic pulmonary disease, active cancer, and number of co-morbidities. CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide, population-based cohort of ICU patients with COVID-19, longer term survival was high despite high age and substantial use of organ support. Male gender, age, and chronic co-morbidities, in particular chronic pulmonary disease, were associated with increased risk of death.