Anticoagulation strategy and safety in critically ill COVID-19 patients: a French retrospective multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with critical illness due to COVID-19 exhibit increased coagulability associated with a high risk of venous thrombo-embolism (VTE). Data on prophylactic anticoagulation for these patients are limited and conflicting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether intermediate-dose prophylactic anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19 requiring ICU admission was associated with better outcomes compared to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation. METHODS: We retrospectively included adults admitted with severe COVID-19 to any of 15 ICUs, in 2020 or 2021. We compared the groups given intermediate-dose vs. standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation. The primary outcome was all-cause day-90 mortality. Secondary outcomes were VTE (pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis), ICU stay length, and adverse effects of anticoagulation. RESULTS: Of 1174 included patients (mean age, 63 years), 399 received standard-dose and 775 intermediate-dose prophylactic anticoagulation. Of the 211 patients who died within 90 days, 86 (21%) received intermediate and 125 (16%) standard doses. After adjustment on early corticosteroid therapy and critical illness severity, there were no significant between-group differences in day-90 mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95%CI, 0.52-1.04; p = 0.09) or ICU stay length (HR, 0.93; 95%CI, 0.79-1.10; p = 0.38). Intermediate-dose anticoagulation was significantly associated with fewer VTE events (HR, 0.55; 95%CI, 0.38-0.80; p < 0.001). Bleeding events occurred in similar proportions of patients in the two groups (odds ratio, 0.86; 95%CI, 0.50-1.47; p = 0.57). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality on day 90 did not differ between the groups given standard-dose and intermediate-dose prophylactic anticoagulation, despite a higher incidence of VTE in the standard-dose group.

Early steroids and ventilator-associated pneumonia in COVID-19-related ARDS.

RATIONALE: Early corticosteroid treatment is used to treat COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Infection is a well-documented adverse effect of corticosteroid therapy. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether early corticosteroid therapy to treat COVID-19 ARDS was associated with ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). METHODS: We retrospectively included adults with COVID-19-ARDS requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) for ≥ 48 h at any of 15 intensive care units in 2020. We divided the patients into two groups based on whether they did or did not receive corticosteroids within 24 h. The primary outcome was VAP incidence, with death and extubation as competing events. Secondary outcomes were day 90-mortality, MV duration, other organ dysfunctions, and VAP characteristics. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 670 patients (mean age, 65 years), 369 did and 301 did not receive early corticosteroids. The cumulative VAP incidence was higher with early corticosteroids (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.29; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.05-1.58; P = 0.016). Antibiotic resistance of VAP bacteria was not different between the two groups (odds ratio 0.94, 95% CI 0.58-1.53; P = 0.81). 90-day mortality was 30.9% with and 24.3% without early corticosteroids, a nonsignificant difference after adjustment on age, SOFA score, and VAP occurrence (aHR 1.15; 95% CI 0.83-1.60; P = 0.411). VAP was associated with higher 90-day mortality (aHR 1.86; 95% CI 1.33-2.61; P = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: Early corticosteroid treatment was associated with VAP in patients with COVID-19-ARDS. Although VAP was associated with higher 90-day mortality, early corticosteroid treatment was not. Longitudinal randomized controlled trials of early corticosteroids in COVID-19-ARDS requiring MV are warranted.

Clinical features and outcome of influenza pneumonia in critically-ill immunocompromised patients.

Immunocompromised subjects are at risk of severe viral infections which may require intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Data on the outcome of influenza pneumonia in critically-ill immunocompromised subjects are limited. We conducted a single-center observational study. All subjects admitted to the ICU for influenza pneumonia between 2016 and 2020 were included. The main objective was to compare the clinical features and outcome of critically-ill subjects with flu according to their immune status. 137 subjects (age 60 years-old, 58.4% male) were included, of whom 58 (42.34%) were intubated during the ICU stay. Forty-three (31.4%) subjects were immunocompromised. Immunocompromised subjects had a higher Charlson comorbidity index. In contrast, severity scores and hypoxemia at ICU admission, and ventilatory support during ICU stay were similar between the 2 groups. There was no difference in the rate of co-infections and ventilator-associated pneumonia between the 2 groups. Among intubated subjects, 10 (23.26%) immunocompromised subjects developed severe acute respiratory distress syndrome compared to 13 (13.83%) non-immunocompromised (P = .218). ICU mortality was 13.97%, with mortality being 3-times higher in immunocompromised subjects (25.58% vs 8.6%, P = .015). On multivariable analysis, immunocompromised status, higher age and lower arterial oxygen partial pressure/fraction of inspired oxygen were associated with an increased ICU mortality. Immunocompromised subjects with severe influenza pneumonia were more likely to develop severe acute respiratory distress syndrome and had a 3-fold increase in ICU mortality compared to non-immunocompromised subjects. Such difference was not explained by an increased rate of co-infections or nosocomial pneumonia, suggesting that influenza virus was by itself responsible of a more severe form of pulmonary disease in immunocompromised subjects.

Accuracy of clinicians' ability to predict the need for renal replacement therapy: a prospective multicenter study.

PURPOSE: Identifying patients who will receive renal replacement therapy (RRT) during intensive care unit (ICU) stay is a major challenge for intensivists. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of physicians in predicting the need for RRT at ICU admission and at acute kidney injury (AKI) diagnosis. METHODS: Prospective, multicenter study including all adult patients hospitalized in 16 ICUs in October 2020. Physician prediction was estimated at ICU admission and at AKI diagnosis, according to a visual Likert scale. Discrimination, risk stratification and benefit of physician estimation were assessed. Mixed logistic regression models of variables associated with risk of receiving RRT, with and without physician estimation, were compared. RESULTS: Six hundred and forty-nine patients were included, 270 (41.6%) developed AKI and 77 (11.8%) received RRT. At ICU admission and at AKI diagnosis, a model including physician prediction, the experience of the physician, SOFA score, serum creatinine and diuresis to determine need for RRT performed better than a model without physician estimation with an area under the ROC curve of 0.90 [95% CI 0.86-0.94, p < 0.008 (at ICU admission)] and 0.89 [95% CI 0.83-0.93, p = 0.0014 (at AKI diagnosis)]. In multivariate analysis, physician prediction was strongly associated with the need for RRT, independently of creatinine levels, diuresis, SOFA score and the experience of the doctor who made the prediction. CONCLUSION: As physicians are able to stratify patients at high risk of RRT, physician judgement should be taken into account when designing new randomized studies focusing on RRT initiation during AKI.

Oxygen reserve index for non-invasive early hypoxemia detection during endotracheal intubation in intensive care: the prospective observational NESOI study.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the ability of the oxygen reserve index (ORI) to predict the occurrence of mild hypoxemia (defined as SpO2 < 97%) during endotracheal intubation (ETI) of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: This observational single-centre study included patients without hypoxemia (defined as SpO2/FiO2 > 214) who required ETI in the ICU. Patients were followed during preoxygenation and ETI then until hospital discharge and/or day 28. We recorded cases of mild hypoxemia, moderate (SpO2 < 90%) and severe (SpO2 < 80%) hypoxemia, moderate arterial hypotension (systolic arterial pressure < 90 mmHg), oesophageal intubation, aspiration, cardiac arrest, and death. RESULTS: Between January 2019 and July 2020, 56 patients were included prospectively and 51 patients were analysed. Twenty patients had mild hypoxemia between the end of preoxygenation and the end of intubation; in 10 of these patients, the decrease in SpO2 below 97% was preceded by an ORI < 0.4, the median time difference being 81 s [interquartile range, 34-146]. By multivariable analysis, a higher ORI (by 0.1 increase) value during preoxygenation was associated with absence of hypoxemia (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.61;0.95; P = 0.0141). CONCLUSION: In non-hypoxemic patients, the 81-s [34-146] median time between the ORI decrease below 0.4 and the SpO2 decrease below 97% during apnoea may allow preventive action. A higher ORI value during preoxygenation was independently protective against hypoxemia. Whether these findings also apply to hypoxemic patients, and the clinical impact of a preoxygenation strategy based on ORI monitoring, remain to be evaluated prospectively. Trial Registration ClinicalTrial.gov, #NCT03600181.