Incidence of asymptomatic catheter-related thrombosis in intensive care unit patients: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) incidence, rate, and risk factors vary in literature due to differences in populations, catheters, diagnostic methods, and statistical approaches. The aim of this single-center, prospective, observational study was to assess incidence, incidence rate (IR), cumulative incidence, and risk factors by means of IR ratio (IRR) of asymptomatic CRT in a non-oncologic Intensive Care Unit (ICU) population. CRT development was assessed daily by means of ultrasound screening. The proportions of patients and catheters developing CRT and CRT incidence rates, expressed as the number of events per catheter-days (cd), were calculated. Kalbfleisch and Prentice's method was used to estimate the cumulative incidence of CRTs. Univariate and multivariable Poisson regression models were fitted to calculate IRR in risk factors analysis. RESULTS: Fifty (25%, 95% CI 19-31) out of 203 included patients, and 52 (14%, 95% CI 11-18) out of 375 catheters inserted developed CRT [IR 17.7 (13.5-23.2) CRTs/1000*cd], after 5 [3-10] days from insertion. Forty-six CRTs (88%) were partial thrombosis. All CRTs remained asymptomatic. Obesity and ECMO support were patient-related protective factors [IRR 0.24 (0.10-0.60), p = 0.002 and 0.05 (0.01-0.50), p = 0.011, respectively]. The internal jugular vein had higher CRT IR than other sites [20.1 vs. 5.9 CRTs/1000*cd, IRR 4.22 (1.22-14.63), p = 0.023]. Pulmonary artery catheter and left-side cannulation were catheter-related risk factors [IRR 4.24 (2.00-9.00), p < 0.001 vs. central venous catheters; IRR 2.69 (1.45-4.98), p = 0.002 vs. right cannulation, respectively]. No statistically significant effect of the number of simultaneously inserted catheters [IRR 1.11 (0.64-1.94), p = 0.708] and of the catheterization length [IRR 1.09 (0.97-1.22), p = 0.155] was detected. The ICU length of stay was longer in CRT patients (20 [15-31] vs. 6 [4-14] days, p < 0.001), while no difference in mortality was observed. CONCLUSIONS: CRTs are frequent but rarely symptomatic. This study suggests that obesity and ECMO are protective factors, while pulmonary artery catheter, internal jugular vein and left-side positioning are risk factors for CRT.

Physiological effects of lung-protective ventilation in patients with lung fibrosis and usual interstitial pneumonia pattern versus primary ARDS: a matched-control study.

BACKGROUND: Although patients with interstitial pneumonia pattern (ILD-UIP) and acute exacerbation (AE) leading to severe acute respiratory failure may require invasive mechanical ventilation (MV), physiological data on lung mechanics during MV are lacking. We aimed at describing the physiological effect of lung-protective ventilation in patients with AE-ILD-UIP compared with primary ARDS. METHODS: Partitioned lung and chest wall mechanics were assessed in a series of AE-ILD-UIP patients matched 1:1 with primary ARDS as controls (based on BMI and PaO2/FiO2 ratio). Three PEEP levels (zero = ZEEP, 4-8 cmH2O = PEEPLOW, and titrated to achieve positive end-expiratory transpulmonary pressure PL,EE = PEEPTITRATED) were used for measurements. RESULTS: Ten AE-ILD-UIP patients and 10 matched ARDS were included. In AE-ILD-UIP median PL,EE at ZEEP was - 4.3 [- 7.6- - 2.3] cmH2O and lung elastance (EL) 44 [40-51] cmH2O/L. At PEEPLOW, PL,EE remained negative and EL did not change (p = 0.995) versus ZEEP. At PEEPTITRATED, PL,EE increased to 0.8 [0.3-1.5] cmH2O and EL to 49 [43-59] (p = 0.004 and p < 0.001 compared to ZEEP and PEEPLOW, respectively). ΔPL decreased at PEEPLOW (p = 0.018) and increased at PEEPTITRATED (p = 0.003). In matched ARDS control PEEP titration to obtain a positive PL,EE did not result in significant changes in EL and ΔPL. CONCLUSIONS: In mechanically ventilated AE-ILD-UIP patients, differently than in patients with primary ARDS, PEEP titrated to obtain a positive PL,EE significantly worsened lung mechanics.

Hemodynamic failure and graft dysfunction after lung transplant: A possible clinical continuum with immediate and long-term consequences.

INTRODUCTION: The postoperative hemodynamic management after lung transplant (LUTX) is guided by limited evidence. We aimed to describe and evaluate risk factors and outcomes of postoperative vasoactive support of LUTX recipients. METHODS: In a single-center retrospective analysis of consecutive adult LUTX, two cohorts were identified: (1) patients needing prolonged vasoactive support (>12 h from ICU admission) (VASO+); (2) or not (VASO-). Postoperative hemodynamic characteristics were thoroughly analyzed. Risk factors and outcomes of VASO+ versus VASO- cohorts were assessed by multivariate logistic regression and propensity score matching. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-eight patients were included (86 (62%) VASO+ versus 52 (38%) VASO-). Vasopressors (epinephrine, norepinephrine, dopamine) were used in the first postoperative days (vasoactive inotropic score at 12 h: 6 [4-12]), while inodilators (dobutamine, levosimendan) later. Length of vasoactive support was 3 [2-4] days. Independent predictors of vasoactive use were: LUTX indication different from cystic fibrosis (p = .003), higher Oto score (p = .020), longer cold ischemia time (p = .031), but not preoperative cardiac catheterization. VASO+ patients showed concomitant hemodynamic and graft impairment, with longer mechanical ventilation (p = .010), higher primary graft dysfunction (PGD) grade at 72 h (PGD grade > 0 65% vs. 31%, p = .004, OR 4.2 [1.54-11.2]), longer ICU (p < .001) and hospital stay (p = .013). Levosimendan as a second-line inodilator appeared safe. CONCLUSIONS: Vasoactive support is frequently necessary after LUTX, especially in recipients of grafts of lesser quality. Postoperative hemodynamic dysfunction requiring vasopressor support and graft dysfunction may represent a clinical continuum with immediate and long-term consequences. Further studies may elucidate if this represents a possible treatable condition.

Interleukin-6 blocking agents for treating COVID-19: a living systematic review.

BACKGROUND: It has been reported that people with COVID-19 and pre-existing autoantibodies against type I interferons are likely to develop an inflammatory cytokine storm responsible for severe respiratory symptoms. Since interleukin 6 (IL-6) is one of the cytokines released during this inflammatory process, IL-6 blocking agents have been used for treating people with severe COVID-19. OBJECTIVES: To update the evidence on the effectiveness and safety of IL-6 blocking agents compared to standard care alone or to a placebo for people with COVID-19. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the Living OVerview of Evidence (L·OVE) platform, and the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register to identify studies on 7 June 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating IL-6 blocking agents compared to standard care alone or to placebo for people with COVID-19, regardless of disease severity. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of researchers independently conducted study selection, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for all critical and important outcomes. In this update we amended our protocol to update the methods used for grading evidence by establishing minimal important differences for the critical outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: This update includes 22 additional trials, for a total of 32 trials including 12,160 randomized participants all hospitalized for COVID-19 disease. We identified a further 17 registered RCTs evaluating IL-6 blocking agents without results available as of 7 June 2022.  The mean age range varied from 56 to 75 years; 66.2% (8051/12,160) of enrolled participants were men. One-third (11/32) of included trials were placebo-controlled. Twenty-two were published in peer-reviewed journals, three were reported as preprints, two trials had results posted only on registries, and results from five trials were retrieved from another meta-analysis. Eight were funded by pharmaceutical companies.  Twenty-six included studies were multicenter trials; four were multinational and 22 took place in single countries. Recruitment of participants occurred between February 2020 and June 2021, with a mean enrollment duration of 21 weeks (range 1 to 54 weeks). Nineteen trials (60%) had a follow-up of 60 days or more. Disease severity ranged from mild to critical disease. The proportion of participants who were intubated at study inclusion also varied from 5% to 95%. Only six trials reported vaccination status; there were no vaccinated participants included in these trials, and 17 trials were conducted before vaccination was rolled out. We assessed a total of six treatments, each compared to placebo or standard care. Twenty trials assessed tocilizumab, nine assessed sarilumab, and two assessed clazakizumab. Only one trial was included for each of the other IL-6 blocking agents (siltuximab, olokizumab, and levilimab). Two trials assessed more than one treatment. Efficacy and safety of tocilizumab and sarilumab compared to standard care or placebo for treating COVID-19 At day (D) 28, tocilizumab and sarilumab probably result in little or no increase in clinical improvement (tocilizumab: risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.11; 15 RCTs, 6116 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; sarilumab: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05; 7 RCTs, 2425 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For clinical improvement at ≥ D60, the certainty of evidence is very low for both tocilizumab (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.48; 1 RCT, 97 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and sarilumab (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.63; 2 RCTs, 239 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The effect of tocilizumab on the proportion of participants with a WHO Clinical Progression Score (WHO-CPS) of level 7 or above remains uncertain at D28 (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.12; 13 RCTs, 2117 participants; low-certainty evidence) and that for sarilumab very uncertain (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.33; 5 RCTs, 886 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Tocilizumab reduces all cause-mortality at D28 compared to standard care/placebo (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.94; 18 RCTs, 7428 participants; high-certainty evidence). The evidence about the effect of sarilumab on this outcome is very uncertain (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.30; 9 RCTs, 3305 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is uncertain for all cause-mortality at ≥ D60 for tocilizumab (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.04; 9 RCTs, 2775 participants; low-certainty evidence) and very uncertain for sarilumab (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.07; 6 RCTs, 3379 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Tocilizumab probably results in little to no difference in the risk of adverse events (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.12; 9 RCTs, 1811 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence about adverse events for sarilumab is uncertain (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.28; 4 RCT, 860 participants; low-certainty evidence).  The evidence about serious adverse events is very uncertain for tocilizumab (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.07; 16 RCTs; 2974 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and uncertain for sarilumab (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.21; 6 RCTs; 2936 participants; low-certainty evidence). Efficacy and safety of clazakizumab, olokizumab, siltuximab and levilimab compared to standard care or placebo for treating COVID-19 The evidence about the effects of clazakizumab, olokizumab, siltuximab, and levilimab comes from only one or two studies for each blocking agent, and is uncertain or very uncertain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized people with COVID-19, results show a beneficial effect of tocilizumab on all-cause mortality in the short term and probably little or no difference in the risk of adverse events compared to standard care alone or placebo. Nevertheless, both tocilizumab and sarilumab probably result in little or no increase in clinical improvement at D28. Evidence for an effect of sarilumab and the other IL-6 blocking agents on critical outcomes is uncertain or very uncertain. Most of the trials included in our review were done before the waves of different variants of concern and before vaccination was rolled out on a large scale. An additional 17 RCTs of IL-6 blocking agents are currently registered with no results yet reported. The number of pending studies and the number of participants planned is low. Consequently, we will not publish further updates of this review.

Efficacy and adverse events profile of videolaryngoscopy in critically ill patients: subanalysis of the INTUBE study.

BACKGROUND: Tracheal intubation is a high-risk procedure in the critically ill, with increased intubation failure rates and a high risk of other adverse events. Videolaryngoscopy might improve intubation outcomes in this population, but evidence remains conflicting, and its impact on adverse event rates is debated. METHODS: This is a subanalysis of a large international prospective cohort of critically ill patients (INTUBE Study) performed from 1 October 2018 to 31 July 2019 and involving 197 sites from 29 countries across five continents. Our primary aim was to determine the first-pass intubation success rates of videolaryngoscopy. Secondary aims were characterising (a) videolaryngoscopy use in the critically ill patient population and (b) the incidence of severe adverse effects compared with direct laryngoscopy. RESULTS: Of 2916 patients, videolaryngoscopy was used in 500 patients (17.2%) and direct laryngoscopy in 2416 (82.8%). First-pass intubation success was higher with videolaryngoscopy compared with direct laryngoscopy (84% vs 79%, P=0.02). Patients undergoing videolaryngoscopy had a higher frequency of difficult airway predictors (60% vs 40%, P<0.001). In adjusted analyses, videolaryngoscopy increased the probability of first-pass intubation success, with an OR of 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.87). Videolaryngoscopy was not significantly associated with risk of major adverse events (odds ratio 1.24, 95% CI 0.95-1.62) or cardiovascular events (odds ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.60-1.02). CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients, videolaryngoscopy was associated with higher first-pass intubation success rates, despite being used in a population at higher risk of difficult airway management. Videolaryngoscopy was not associated with overall risk of major adverse events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03616054.

The role of hypoxia and inflammation in the regulation of iron metabolism and erythropoiesis in COVID-19: The IRONCOVID study.

Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) can be considered as a human pathological model of inflammation combined with hypoxia. In this setting, both erythropoiesis and iron metabolism appear to be profoundly affected by inflammatory and hypoxic stimuli, which act in the opposite direction on hepcidin regulation. The impact of low blood oxygen levels on erythropoiesis and iron metabolism in the context of human hypoxic disease (e.g., pneumonia) has not been fully elucidated. This multicentric observational study was aimed at investigating the prevalence of anemia, the alterations of iron homeostasis, and the relationship between inflammation, hypoxia, and erythropoietic parameters in a cohort of 481 COVID-19 patients admitted both to medical wards and intensive care units (ICU). Data were collected on admission and after 7 days of hospitalization. On admission, nearly half of the patients were anemic, displaying mild-to-moderate anemia. We found that hepcidin levels were increased during the whole period of observation. The patients with a higher burden of disease (i.e., those who needed intensive care treatment or had a more severe degree of hypoxia) showed lower hepcidin levels, despite having a more marked inflammatory pattern. Erythropoietin (EPO) levels were also lower in the ICU group on admission. After 7 days, EPO levels rose in the ICU group while they remained stable in the non-ICU group, reflecting that the initial hypoxic stimulus was stronger in the first group. These findings strengthen the hypothesis that, at least in the early phases, hypoxia-driven stimuli prevail over inflammation in the regulation of hepcidin and, finally, of erythropoiesis.

Association of COVID-19 Vaccinations With Intensive Care Unit Admissions and Outcome of Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19 Pneumonia in Lombardy, Italy.

Importance: Data on the association of COVID-19 vaccination with intensive care unit (ICU) admission and outcomes of patients with SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonia are scarce. Objective: To evaluate whether COVID-19 vaccination is associated with preventing ICU admission for COVID-19 pneumonia and to compare baseline characteristics and outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients admitted to an ICU. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study on regional data sets reports: (1) daily number of administered vaccines and (2) data of all consecutive patients admitted to an ICU in Lombardy, Italy, from August 1 to December 15, 2021 (Delta variant predominant). Vaccinated patients received either mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) or adenoviral vector vaccines (ChAdOx1-S or Ad26.COV2). Incident rate ratios (IRRs) were computed from August 1, 2021, to January 31, 2022; ICU and baseline characteristics and outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients admitted to an ICU were analyzed from August 1 to December 15, 2021. Exposures: COVID-19 vaccination status (no vaccination, mRNA vaccine, adenoviral vector vaccine). Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidence IRR of ICU admission was evaluated, comparing vaccinated people with unvaccinated, adjusted for age and sex. The baseline characteristics at ICU admission of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients were investigated. The association between vaccination status at ICU admission and mortality at ICU and hospital discharge were also studied, adjusting for possible confounders. Results: Among the 10 107 674 inhabitants of Lombardy, Italy, at the time of this study, the median [IQR] age was 48 [28-64] years and 5 154 914 (51.0%) were female. Of the 7 863 417 individuals who were vaccinated (median [IQR] age: 53 [33-68] years; 4 010 343 [51.4%] female), 6 251 417 (79.5%) received an mRNA vaccine, 550 439 (7.0%) received an adenoviral vector vaccine, and 1 061 561 (13.5%) received a mix of vaccines and 4 497 875 (57.2%) were boosted. Compared with unvaccinated people, IRR of individuals who received an mRNA vaccine within 120 days from the last dose was 0.03 (95% CI, 0.03-0.04; P < .001), whereas IRR of individuals who received an adenoviral vector vaccine after 120 days was 0.21 (95% CI, 0.19-0.24; P < .001). There were 553 patients admitted to an ICU for COVID-19 pneumonia during the study period: 139 patients (25.1%) were vaccinated and 414 (74.9%) were unvaccinated. Compared with unvaccinated patients, vaccinated patients were older (median [IQR]: 72 [66-76] vs 60 [51-69] years; P < .001), primarily male individuals (110 patients [79.1%] vs 252 patients [60.9%]; P < .001), with more comorbidities (median [IQR]: 2 [1-3] vs 0 [0-1] comorbidities; P < .001) and had higher ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen (Pao2) and fraction of inspiratory oxygen (FiO2) at ICU admission (median [IQR]: 138 [100-180] vs 120 [90-158] mm Hg; P = .007). Factors associated with ICU and hospital mortality were higher age, premorbid heart disease, lower Pao2/FiO2 at ICU admission, and female sex (this factor only for ICU mortality). ICU and hospital mortality were similar between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, mRNA and adenoviral vector vaccines were associated with significantly lower risk of ICU admission for COVID-19 pneumonia. ICU and hospital mortality were not associated with vaccinated status. These findings suggest a substantial reduction of the risk of developing COVID-19-related severe acute respiratory failure requiring ICU admission among vaccinated people.

Longitudinal assessment of renal function after lung transplantation for cystic fibrosis: transition from post-operative acute kidney injury to acute kidney disease and chronic kidney failure.

INTRODUCTION: The clinical trajectory of post-operative acute kidney injury (AKI) following lung transplantation for cystic fibrosis is unknown. METHODS: Incidence and risk factors for post-operative AKI, acute kidney disease (AKD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) were retrospectively analyzed in cystic fibrosis patients undergoing lung transplantation. Logistic regressions, Chi-square, Cuzick rank tests, and Cox-proportional hazard models were used. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were included. Creatinine peaked 3[2-4] days after transplantation, with 15(18%), 15(18%), and 20(24%) patients having post-operative AKI stages 1, 2, and 3, while 15(18%), 19(23%) and 10(12%) developed AKD stage 1, stage 2 and 3, respectively. Higher AKI stage was associated with worsening AKD (p = 0.009) and CKD (p = 0.015) stages. Of the 50 patients with AKI, 32(66%) transitioned to AKD stage > 0, and then 27 (56%) to CKD stage > 1. Female sex, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support as a bridge to lung transplant and at the end of the surgery, the use of intraoperative blood components, and cold-ischemia time were associated with increased risk of post-operative AKI and AKD. Higher AKI stage prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation (p = 0.0001), ICU stay (p = 0.0001), and hospital stay (p = 0.0001), and increased the incidence of primary graft dysfunction (p = 0.035). Both AKI and AKD stages > 2 worsened long-term survival with risk ratios of 3.71 (1.34-10.2), p = 0.0131 and 2.65(1.02-6.87), p = 0.0443, respectively. DISCUSSION: AKI is frequent in cystic fibrosis patients undergoing lung transplantation, it often evolves to AKD and to chronic kidney disease, thereby worsening short- and long-term outcomes.

Early short course of neuromuscular blocking agents in patients with COVID-19 ARDS: a propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: The role of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is not fully elucidated. Therefore, we aimed to investigate in COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS the impact of early use of NMBAs on 90-day mortality, through propensity score (PS) matching analysis. METHODS: We analyzed a convenience sample of patients with COVID-19 and moderate-to-severe ARDS, admitted to 244 intensive care units within the COVID-19 Critical Care Consortium, from February 1, 2020, through October 31, 2021. Patients undergoing at least 2 days and up to 3 consecutive days of NMBAs (NMBA treatment), within 48 h from commencement of IMV were compared with subjects who did not receive NMBAs or only upon commencement of IMV (control). The primary objective in the PS-matched cohort was comparison between groups in 90-day in-hospital mortality, assessed through Cox proportional hazard modeling. Secondary objectives were comparisons in the numbers of ventilator-free days (VFD) between day 1 and day 28 and between day 1 and 90 through competing risk regression. RESULTS: Data from 1953 patients were included. After propensity score matching, 210 cases from each group were well matched. In the PS-matched cohort, mean (± SD) age was 60.3 ± 13.2 years and 296 (70.5%) were male and the most common comorbidities were hypertension (56.9%), obesity (41.1%), and diabetes (30.0%). The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for death at 90 days in the NMBA treatment vs control group was 1.12 (95% CI 0.79, 1.59, p = 0.534). After adjustment for smoking habit and critical therapeutic covariates, the HR was 1.07 (95% CI 0.72, 1.61, p = 0.729). At 28 days, VFD were 16 (IQR 0-25) and 25 (IQR 7-26) in the NMBA treatment and control groups, respectively (sub-hazard ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.67, 1.00, p = 0.055). At 90 days, VFD were 77 (IQR 0-87) and 87 (IQR 0-88) (sub-hazard ratio 0.86 (95% CI 0.69, 1.07; p = 0.177). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19 and moderate-to-severe ARDS, short course of NMBA treatment, applied early, did not significantly improve 90-day mortality and VFD. In the absence of definitive data from clinical trials, NMBAs should be indicated cautiously in this setting.

Alkaline Liquid Ventilation of the Membrane Lung for Extracorporeal Carbon Dioxide Removal (ECCO2R): In Vitro Study.

Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) is a promising strategy to manage acute respiratory failure. We hypothesized that ECCO2R could be enhanced by ventilating the membrane lung with a sodium hydroxide (NaOH) solution with high CO2 absorbing capacity. A computed mathematical model was implemented to assess NaOH-CO2 interactions. Subsequently, we compared NaOH infusion, named "alkaline liquid ventilation", to conventional oxygen sweeping flows. We built an extracorporeal circuit with two polypropylene membrane lungs, one to remove CO2 and the other to maintain a constant PCO2 (60 ± 2 mmHg). The circuit was primed with swine blood. Blood flow was 500 mL × min-1. After testing the safety and feasibility of increasing concentrations of aqueous NaOH (up to 100 mmol × L-1), the CO2 removal capacity of sweeping oxygen was compared to that of 100 mmol × L-1 NaOH. We performed six experiments to randomly test four sweep flows (100, 250, 500, 1000 mL × min-1) for each fluid plus 10 L × min-1 oxygen. Alkaline liquid ventilation proved to be feasible and safe. No damages or hemolysis were detected. NaOH showed higher CO2 removal capacity compared to oxygen for flows up to 1 L × min-1. However, the highest CO2 extraction power exerted by NaOH was comparable to that of 10 L × min-1 oxygen. Further studies with dedicated devices are required to exploit potential clinical applications of alkaline liquid ventilation.

Pulmonary volume-feedback and ventilatory pattern after bilateral lung transplantation using neurally adjusted ventilatory assist ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Bilateral lung transplantation results in pulmonary vagal denervation, which potentially alters respiratory drive, volume-feedback, and ventilatory pattern. We hypothesised that Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) ventilation, which is driven by diaphragm electrical activity (EAdi), would reveal whether vagally mediated pulmonary-volume feedback is preserved in the early phases after bilateral lung transplantation. METHODS: We prospectively studied bilateral lung transplant recipients within 48 h of surgery. Subjects were ventilated with NAVA and randomised to receive 3 ventilatory modes (baseline NAVA, 50%, and 150% of baseline NAVA values) and 2 PEEP levels (6 and 12 cm H2O). We recorded airway pressure, flow, and EAdi. RESULTS: We studied 30 subjects (37% female; age: 37 (27-56) yr), of whom 19 (63%) had stable EAdi. The baseline NAVA level was 0.6 (0.2-1.0) cm H2O µV-1. Tripling NAVA level increased the ventilatory peak pressure over PEEP by 6.3 (1.8), 7.6 (2.4), and 8.7 (3.2) cm H2O, at 50%, 100%, and 150% of baseline NAVA level, respectively (P<0.001). EAdi peak decreased by 10.1 (9.0), 9.5 (9.4) and 8.8 µV (8.7) (P<0.001), accompanied by small increases in tidal volume, 8.3 (3.0), 8.7 (3.6), and 8.9 (3.3) ml kg-1 donor's predicted body weight at 50%, 100%, and 150% of baseline NAVA levels, respectively (P<0.001). Doubling PEEP did not affect tidal volume. CONCLUSIONS: NAVA ventilation was feasible in the majority of patients during the early postoperative period after bilateral lung transplantation. Despite surgical vagotomy distal to the bronchial anastomoses, bilateral lung transplant recipients maintained an unmodified respiratory pattern in response to variations in ventilatory assistance and PEEP. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03367221.

Mechanical ventilation parameters in critically ill COVID-19 patients: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The mortality of critically ill patients with COVID-19 is high, particularly among those receiving mechanical ventilation (MV). Despite the high number of patients treated worldwide, data on respiratory mechanics are currently scarce and the optimal setting of MV remains to be defined. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of available data about respiratory mechanics, gas exchange and MV settings in patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) for COVID-19-associated acute respiratory failure, and to identify knowledge gaps. MAIN TEXT: PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases were searched from inception to October 30, 2020 for studies providing at least one ventilatory parameter collected within 24 h from the ICU admission. The quality of the studies was independently assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form for Cohort Studies. A total of 26 studies were included for a total of 14,075 patients. At ICU admission, positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) values ranged from 9 to 16.5 cm of water (cmH2O), suggesting that high levels of PEEP were commonly used for setting MV for these patients. Patients with COVID-19 are severely hypoxemic at ICU admission and show a median ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ranging from 102 to 198 mmHg. Static respiratory system compliance (Crs) values at ICU admission were highly heterogenous, ranging between 24 and 49 ml/cmH2O. Prone positioning and neuromuscular blocking agents were widely used, ranging from 17 to 81 and 22 to 88%, respectively; both rates were higher than previously reported in patients with "classical" acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). CONCLUSIONS: Available data show that, in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19, respiratory mechanics and MV settings within 24 h from ICU admission are heterogeneous but similar to those reported for "classical" ARDS. However, to date, complete data regarding mechanical properties of respiratory system, optimal setting of MV and the role of rescue treatments for refractory hypoxemia are still lacking in the medical literature.

Interleukin-6 blocking agents for treating COVID-19: a living systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin 6 (IL-6) blocking agents have been used for treating severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Their immunosuppressive effect might be valuable in patients with COVID-19 characterised by substantial immune system dysfunction by controlling inflammation and promoting disease tolerance. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of IL-6 blocking agents compared to standard care alone or with placebo on efficacy and safety outcomes in COVID-19. We will update this assessment regularly. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (up to 11 February 2021) and the L-OVE platform, and Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register to identify trials up to 26 February 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating IL-6 blocking agents compared with standard care alone or with placebo for people with COVID-19, regardless of disease severity. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methodology. The protocol was amended to reduce the number of outcomes considered. Two review authors independently collected data and assessed the risk of bias with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. We rated the certainty of evidence with the GRADE approach for the critical outcomes such as clinical improvement (defined as hospital discharge or improvement on the scale used by trialists to evaluate clinical progression or recovery) (day (D) 28 / ≥ D60); WHO Clinical Progression Score of level 7 or above (i.e. the proportion of participants with mechanical ventilation +/- additional organ support OR death) (D28 / ≥ D60); all-cause mortality (D28 / ≥ D60); incidence of any adverse events; and incidence of serious adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 10 RCTs with available data including one platform trial comparing tocilizumab and sarilumab with standard of care. These trials evaluated tocilizumab (nine RCTs including two platform trials; seven were reported as peer-reviewed articles, two as preprints; 6428 randomised participants); and two sarilumab (one platform trial reported as peer reviewed article, one reported as preprint, 880 randomised participants). All trials included were multicentre trials. They were conducted in Brazil, China, France, Italy, UK, USA, and four were multi-country trials. The mean age range of participants ranged from 56 to 65 years; 4572 (66.3%) of trial participants were male. Disease severity ranged from mild to critical disease. The reported proportion of participants on oxygen at baseline but not intubated varied from 56% to 100% where reported. Five trials reported the inclusion of intubated patients at baseline. We identified a further 20 registered RCTs of tocilizumab compared to placebo/standard care (five completed without available results, five terminated without available results, eight ongoing, two not recruiting); 11 RCTs of sarilumab (two completed without results, three terminated without available results, six ongoing); six RCTs of clazakisumab (five ongoing, one not recruiting); two RCTs of olokizumab (one completed, one not recruiting); one of siltuximab (ongoing) and one RCT of levilimab (completed without available results). Of note, three were cancelled (2 tocilizumab, 1 clazakisumab). One multiple-arm RCT evaluated both tocilizumab and sarilumab compared to standard of care, one three-arm RCT evaluated tocilizumab and siltuximab compared to standard of care and consequently they appear in each respective comparison. Tocilizumab versus standard care alone or with placebo a. Effectiveness of tocilizumab for patients with COVID-19 Tocilizumab probably results in little or no increase in the outcome of clinical improvement at D28 (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.13; I2 = 40.9%; 7 RCTs, 5585 participants; absolute effect: 31 more with clinical improvement per 1000 (from 0 fewer to 67 more); moderate-certainty evidence). However, we cannot exclude that some subgroups of patients could benefit from the treatment. We did not obtain data for longer-term follow-up (≥ D60). The effect of tocilizumab on the proportion of participants with a WHO Clinical Progression Score of level of 7 or above is uncertain at D28 (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.74; I2 = 64.4%; 3 RCTs, 712 participants; low-certainty evidence). We did not obtain data for longer-term follow-up (≥ D60). Tocilizumab reduces all-cause mortality at D28 compared to standard care alone or placebo (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.97; I2 = 0.0%; 8 RCTs, 6363 participants; absolute effect: 32 fewer deaths per 1000 (from 52 fewer to 9 fewer); high-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests uncertainty around the effect on mortality at ≥ D60 (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.40; I2 = 0.0%; 2 RCTs, 519 participants; low-certainty evidence). b. Safety of tocilizumab for patients with COVID-19 The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of tocilizumab on adverse events (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.72; I2 = 86.4%; 7 RCTs, 1534 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Nevertheless, tocilizumab probably results in slightly fewer serious adverse events than standard care alone or placebo (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.06; I2 = 0.0%; 8 RCTs, 2312 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Sarilumab versus standard care alone or with placebo The evidence is uncertain about the effect of sarilumab on all-cause mortality at D28 (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.36; 2 RCTs, 880 participants; low certainty), on all-cause mortality at ≥ D60 (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.0; 1 RCT, 420 participants; low certainty), and serious adverse events (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.77; 2 RCTs, 880 participants; low certainty). It is unlikely that sarilumab results in an important increase of adverse events (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.25; 1 RCT, 420 participants; moderate certainty). However, an increase cannot be excluded No data were available for other critical outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: On average, tocilizumab reduces all-cause mortality at D28 compared to standard care alone or placebo and probably results in slightly fewer serious adverse events than standard care alone or placebo. Nevertheless, tocilizumab probably results in little or no increase in the outcome clinical improvement (defined as hospital discharge or improvement measured by trialist-defined scales) at D28. The impact of tocilizumab on other outcomes is uncertain or very uncertain. With the data available, we were not able to explore heterogeneity. Individual patient data meta-analyses are needed to be able to identify which patients are more likely to benefit from this treatment. Evidence for an effect of sarilumab is uncertain and evidence for other anti-IL6 agents is unavailable. Thirty-nine RCTs of IL-6 blocking agents with no results are currently registered, of which nine are completed and seven trials were terminated with no results available. The findings of this review will be updated as new data are made available on the COVID-NMA platform (covid-nma.com).

SARS-CoV-2 RNA in plasma samples of COVID-19 affected individuals: a cross-sectional proof-of-concept study.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies showed that plasma SARS-CoV-2 RNA seems to be associated with worse COVID-19 outcome. However, whether specific population can be at higher risk of viremia are to date unexplored. METHODS: This cross-sectional proof-of-concept study included 41 SARS-CoV-2-positive adult individuals (six affected by haematological malignancies) hospitalized at two major hospital in Milan, for those demographic, clinical and laboratory data were available. SARS-CoV-2 load was quantified by ddPCR in paired plasma and respiratory samples. To assess significant differences between patients with and patients without viremia, Fisher exact test and Wilcoxon test were used for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. RESULTS: Plasma SARS-CoV-2 RNA was found in 8 patients (19.5%), with a median (IQR) value of 694 (209-1023) copies/mL. Viremic patients were characterized by an higher mortality rate (50.0% vs 9.1%; p = 0.018) respect to patients without viremia. Viremic patients were more frequently affected by haematological malignancies (62.5% vs. 3.0%; p < 0.001), and had higher viral load in respiratory samples (9,404,000 [586,060-10,000,000] vs 1560 [312-25,160] copies/mL; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Even if based on a small sample population, this proof-of-concept study poses the basis for an early identification of patients at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 viremia, and therefore likely to develop severe COVID-19, and supports the need of a quantitative viral load determination in blood and respiratory samples of haematologic patients with COVID-19 in order to predict prognosis and consequently to help their further management.

Heparin-Free Lung Transplantation on Venovenous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Bridge.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) bridge to lung transplantation (LuTX) exposes the patients to a high risk of perioperative bleeding secondary to systemic anticoagulation and coagulation factors deficiency. With this case series, we propose innovative "no-heparin" management of ECMO-bridge support during LuTX, based upon 1) control heparin resistance with antithrombin III in the preoperative period; 2) relying upon a fully functional, brand new heparinized ECMO circuit; 3) completely avoiding perioperative heparin; 4) hampering fibrinolysis with tranexamic acid; and 5) limiting venoarterial (VA) ECMO escalation, and the following need for full anticoagulation. Following the application of this new approach, we carried out three challenging clinical cases of bilateral ECMO-bridged LuTX effectively, with limited intraoperative blood requirement and no major postoperative bleeding or thromboembolic events. Of note, two of them had an extremely high risk for hemorrhage due to complete right lung anatomic derangement in case number 2 and surgical adhesion following first LuTX in case number 3, while for the case number 1, no blood products were administered during surgery. Despite the limited patient population, such an approach relies on a strong rationale and may be beneficial for managing ECMO bridging to LuTX. Prospective studies are necessary to confirm the validity of our strategy.

Overcoming the Limits of Reconditioning: Seventeen Hours of EVLP With Successful Transplantation From Uncontrolled Circulatory Death Donor.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors are an extraordinary resource to increase the number of lungs available for transplantation. However, the risk of the warm ischemia resulting from cardiac arrest to irreversibly damage the organs is considerable. Moreover, graft preservation issues and organizational problems often worsen the dangerous effects of warm ischemia. Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) enables us to evaluate and recondition lungs whose functionality is doubtful, as well as to overcome the difficulties related to time and logistics. METHODS: We report the case of uncontrolled DCD lungs successfully treated with an exceptionally prolonged EVLP. Because the donor's blood count and liver biopsy showed signs of possible leukemia, EVLP was protracted up to 17 h while waiting for immunohistochemical analyses to rule out this diagnosis; eventually, the results came back negative, and the lungs were judged suitable for transplantation. RESULTS: The recipient was a 32-y-old male individual with cystic fibrosis, colonized by Pandoraea pnomenusa. Bilateral transplantation required central extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The patient was extubated after 36 h and was discharged 21 d after the operation. Despite early recolonization by Pandoraea pnomenusa and airway complications requiring pneumatic dilatation, he is alive and has a satisfactory respiratory function 15 mo after transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Uncontrolled DCD represents a challenge due to both logistical issues and the complexity of graft evaluation before procurement. EVLP with cellular perfusate could be a valuable tool to overcome these limits. Nonetheless, caution should be exercised when interpreting the effects of this technique on airway healing.

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation-associated Lung Edema (CRALE). A Translational Study.

Rationale: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation is the cornerstone of cardiac arrest (CA) treatment. However, lung injuries associated with it have been reported.Objectives: To assess 1) the presence and characteristics of lung abnormalities induced by cardiopulmonary resuscitation and 2) the role of mechanical and manual chest compression (CC) in its development.Methods: This translational study included 1) a porcine model of CA and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (n = 12) and 2) a multicenter cohort of patients with out-of-hospital CA undergoing mechanical or manual CC (n = 52). Lung computed tomography performed after resuscitation was assessed qualitatively and quantitatively along with respiratory mechanics and gas exchanges.Measurements and Main Results: The lung weight in the mechanical CC group was higher compared with the manual CC group in the experimental (431 ± 127 vs. 273 ± 66, P = 0.022) and clinical study (1,208 ± 630 vs. 837 ± 306, P = 0.006). The mechanical CC group showed significantly lower oxygenation (P = 0.043) and respiratory system compliance (P < 0.001) compared with the manual CC group in the experimental study. The variation of right atrial pressure was significantly higher in the mechanical compared with the manual CC group (54 ± 11 vs. 31 ± 6 mm Hg, P = 0.001) and significantly correlated with lung weight (r = 0.686, P = 0.026) and respiratory system compliance (r = -0.634, P = 0.027). Incidence of abnormal lung density was higher in patients treated with mechanical compared with manual CC (37% vs. 8%, P = 0.018).Conclusions: This study demonstrated the presence of cardiopulmonary resuscitation-associated lung edema in animals and in patients with out-of-hospital CA, which is more pronounced after mechanical as opposed to manual CC and correlates with higher swings of right atrial pressure during CC.

Early detection of deep vein thrombosis in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: who to screen and who not to with Doppler ultrasound?

PURPOSE: Aim of the study is to evaluate the incidence of DVT in COVID-19 patients and its correlation with the severity of the disease and with clinical and laboratory findings. METHODS: 234 symptomatic patients with COVID-19, diagnosed according to the World Health Organization guidelines, were included in the study. The severity of the disease was classified as moderate, severe and critical. Doppler ultrasound (DUS) was performed in all patients. DUS findings, clinical, laboratory's and therapeutic variables were investigated by contingency tables, Pearson chi square test and by Student t test and Fisher's exact test. ROC curve analysis was applied to study significant continuous variables. RESULTS: Overall incidence of DVT was 10.7% (25/234): 1.6% (1/60) among moderate cases, 13.8% (24/174) in severely and critically ill patients. Prolonged bedrest and intensive care unit admission were significantly associated with the presence of DVT (19.7%). Fraction of inspired oxygen, P/F ratio, respiratory rate, heparin administration, D-dimer, IL-6, ferritin and CRP showed correlation with DVT. CONCLUSION: DUS may be considered a useful and valid tool for early identification of DVT. In less severely affected patients, DUS as screening of DVT might be unnecessary. High rate of DVT found in severe patients and its correlation with respiratory parameters and some significant laboratory findings suggests that these can be used as a screening tool for patients who should be getting DUS.