Awake proning in patients with COVID-19-related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: A rapid practice guideline.

This rapid practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the use of awake proning in adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19. The panel included 20 experts from 12 countries, including one patient representative, and used a strict conflict of interest policy for potential financial and intellectual conflicts of interest. Methodological support was provided by the guidelines in intensive care, development, and evaluation (GUIDE) group. Based on an updated systematic review, and the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) method we evaluated the certainty of evidence and developed recommendations using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. We conducted an electronic vote, requiring >80% agreement amongst the panel for a recommendation to be adopted. The panel made a strong recommendation for a trial of awake proning in adult patients with COVID-19 related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure who are not invasively ventilated. Awake proning appears to reduce the risk of tracheal intubation, although it may not reduce mortality. The panel judged that most patients would want a trial of awake proning, although this may not be feasible in some patients and some patients may not tolerate it. However, given the high risk of clinical deterioration amongst these patients, awake proning should be conducted in an area where patients can be monitored by staff experienced in rapidly detecting and managing clinical deterioration. This RPG panel recommends a trial of awake prone positioning in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19.

Pulmonary Recovery 12 Months after Non-Severe and Severe COVID-19: The Prospective Swiss COVID-19 Lung Study.

BACKGROUND: Lung function impairment persists in some patients for months after acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Long-term lung function, radiological features, and their association remain to be clarified. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to prospectively investigate lung function and radiological abnormalities over 12 months after severe and non-severe COVID-19. METHODS: 584 patients were included in the Swiss COVID-19 lung study. We assessed lung function at 3, 6, and 12 months after acute COVID-19 and compared chest computed tomography (CT) imaging to lung functional abnormalities. RESULTS: At 12 months, diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCOcorr) was lower after severe COVID-19 compared to non-severe COVID-19 (74.9% vs. 85.2% predicted, p < 0.001). Similarly, minimal oxygen saturation on 6-min walk test and total lung capacity were lower after severe COVID-19 (89.6% vs. 92.2%, p = 0.004, respectively, 88.2% vs. 95.1% predicted, p = 0.011). The difference for forced vital capacity (91.6% vs. 96.3% predicted, p = 0.082) was not statistically significant. Between 3 and 12 months, lung function improved in both groups and differences in DLCO between non-severe and severe COVID-19 patients decreased. In patients with chest CT scans at 12 months, we observed a correlation between radiological abnormalities and reduced lung function. While the overall extent of radiological abnormalities diminished over time, the frequency of mosaic attenuation and curvilinear patterns increased. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective cohort study, patients who had severe COVID-19 had diminished lung function over the first year compared to those after non-severe COVID-19, albeit with a greater extent of recovery in the severe disease group.

Response to the first awake prone positioning relates with intubation rate in SARS-CoV-2 patients suffering from acute respiratory failure with moderate to severe hypoxaemia: a retrospective study.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Awake prone positioning (aPP) in non-intubated patients with severe SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonia improves oxygenation and reduces the intubation rate, but no early predictors for success or failure of the strategy have been described. The main objective of this study was to assess whether response to the first aPP in terms of PaO2/FiO2, alveolar-arterial gradient (Aa-O2), respiratory rate and PaCO2 could predict the need for intubation. As secondary objective, we assessed the effects of aPP on the same parameters for all the sessions considered together. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of consecutive SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia patients suffering from acute respiratory failure with moderate to severe hypoxaemia for whom aPP was performed for at least 45 minutes based on the prescription of the clinician in charge according to predefined criteria. Respiratory rate, blood gases and oxygenation parameters (PaO2/FiO2 and Aa-O2), before and after the first aPP were compared between patients who were subsequently intubated or not. Effects of all the aPP sessions together were also analysed. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-six patients were admitted for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia during the study period. Among them, 50 received aPP lasting at least 45 minutes. Because 17 denied consent for data analysis and 2 were excluded because of a "do not intubate order", 31 patients (for a total of 116 aPP sessions without any severe adverse events reported) were included. Among them, 10 (32.3%) were intubated. Mean age ± standard deviation (SD) was 60 ± 12 years. At ICU admission, respiratory rate was 26 ± 7/minute, median PaO2/FiO2 94 (interquartile range [IQR] 74-116) mm Hg and median Aa-O2 412 (IQR 286-427) mm Hg (markedly increased). Baseline characteristics did not statistically differ between patients who subsequently needed intubation or not. During the first aPP, PaO2/FiO2 increased and Aa-O2 decreased. When comparing patients who later where intubated or not, we observed, in the non intubated group only, a clinically significant decrease in median Aa-O2, from 294 (280-414) to 204 (107-281) mm Hg, corresponding to a 40% (26-56%) reduction, and a PaO2/FiO2 increase, from 103 (84-116) to 162 (138-195), corresponding to an increase of 48% (11-93%). The p value is <0.005 for both. When all the aPP sessions (n = 80) were considered together, aPP was associated with a significant increase in PaO2/FiO2 from 112 (80-132) to 156 (86-183) mm Hg (p <0.001) and Aa-O2 decrease from 304 (244-418) to 224 (148-361) mm Hg (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Awake pronation in spontaneously breathing patients is feasible, and improves PaO2/FiO2 and Aa-O2. Response to the first session seems to be associated with lower intubation rate.

Physiological response to prone positioning in intubated adults with COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has specific characteristics compared to ARDS in other populations. Proning is recommended by analogy with other forms of ARDS, but few data are available regarding its physiological effects in this population. This study aimed to assess the effects of proning on oxygenation parameters (PaO2/FiO2 and alveolo-arterial gradient (Aa-gradient)), blood gas analysis, ventilatory ratio (VR), respiratory system compliance (CRS) and estimated dead space fraction (VD/VT HB). We also looked for variables associated with treatment failure. METHODS: Retrospective monocentric study of intubated COVID-19 ARDS patients managed with an early intubation, low to moderate positive end-expiratory pressure and early proning strategy hospitalized from March 6 to April 30 2020. Blood gas analysis, PaO2/FiO2, Aa-gradient, VR, CRS and VD/VT HB were compared before and at the end of each proning session with paired t-tests or Wilcoxon tests (p < 0.05 considered as significant). Proportions were assessed using Fischer exact test or Chi square test. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were included for a total of 191 proning sessions, median duration of 16 (5-36) hours. Considering all sessions, PaO2/FiO2 increased (180 [148-210] vs 107 [90-129] mmHg, p < 0.001) and Aa-gradient decreased (127 [92-176] vs 275 [211-334] mmHg, p < 0.001) with proning. CRS (36.2 [30.0-41.8] vs 32.2 [27.5-40.9] ml/cmH2O, p = 0.003), VR (2.4 [2.0-2.9] vs 2.3 [1.9-2.8], p = 0.028) and VD/VT HB (0.72 [0.67-0.76] vs 0.71 [0.65-0.76], p = 0.022) slightly increased. Considering the first proning session, PaO2/FiO2 increased (186 [165-215] vs 104 [94-126] mmHg, p < 0.001) and Aa-gradient decreased (121 [89-160] vs 276 [238-321] mmHg, p < 0.001), while CRS, VR and VD/VT HB were unchanged. Similar variations were observed during the subsequent proning sessions. Among the patients who experienced treatment failure (defined as ICU death or need for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation), fewer expressed a positive response in terms of oxygenation (defined as increase of more than 20% in PaO2/FiO2) to the first proning (67 vs 97%, p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: Proning in COVID-19 ARDS intubated patients led to an increase in PaO2/FiO2 and a decrease in Aa-gradient if we consider all the sessions together, the first one or the 4 subsequent sessions independently. When considering all sessions, CRS increased and VR and VD/VT HB only slightly increased.

Frailty assessment for COVID-19 follow-up: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is increasingly used for clinical decision making in acute care but little is known about frailty after COVID-19. OBJECTIVES: To investigate frailty and the CFS for post-COVID-19 follow-up. METHODS: This prospective multicentre cohort study included COVID-19 survivors aged ≥50 years presenting for a follow-up visit ≥3 months after the acute illness. Nine centres retrospectively collected pre-COVID-19 CFS and prospectively CFS at follow-up. Three centres completed the Frailty Index (FI), the short physical performance battery (SPPB), 30 s sit-to-stand test and handgrip strength measurements. Mixed effect logistic regression models accounting for repeated measurements and potential confounders were used to investigate factors associated with post-COVID-19 CFS. Criterion and construct validity were determined by correlating the CFS to other concurrently assessed frailty measurements and measures of respiratory impairment, respectively. RESULTS: Of the 288 participants 65% were men, mean (SD) age was 65.1 (9) years. Median (IQR) CFS at follow-up was 3 (2-3), 21% were vulnerable or frail (CFS ≥4). The CFS was responsive to change, correlated with the FI (r=0.69, p<0.001), the SPPB score (r=-0.48, p<0.001) (criterion validity) and with the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (r=0.59, p<0.001), forced vital capacity %-predicted (r=-0.25, p<0.001), 6 min walk distance (r=-0.39, p<0.001) and modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) (r=0.59, p<0.001). Dyspnoea was significantly associated with a higher odds for vulnerability/frailty (per one mMRC adjusted OR 2.01 (95% CI 1.13 to 3.58), p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The CFS significantly increases with COVID-19, and dyspnoea is an important risk factor for post-COVID-19 frailty and should be addressed thoroughly.

Infection control in the intensive care unit: expert consensus statements for SARS-CoV-2 using a Delphi method.

During the current COVID-19 pandemic, health-care workers and uninfected patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 as a result of transmission from infected patients and health-care workers. In the absence of high-quality evidence on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, clinical practice of infection control and prevention in ICUs varies widely. Using a Delphi process, international experts in intensive care, infectious diseases, and infection control developed consensus statements on infection control for SARS-CoV-2 in an ICU. Consensus was achieved for 31 (94%) of 33 statements, from which 25 clinical practice statements were issued. These statements include guidance on ICU design and engineering, health-care worker safety, visiting policy, personal protective equipment, patients and procedures, disinfection, and sterilisation. Consensus was not reached on optimal return to work criteria for health-care workers who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 or the acceptable disinfection strategy for heat-sensitive instruments used for airway management of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Well designed studies are needed to assess the effects of these practice statements and address the remaining uncertainties.

Expert consensus statements for the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure using a Delphi method.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice. METHODS: Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ2) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable). RESULTS: Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment. CONCLUSION: Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome with refractory cardiogenic shock due to acute myocarditis and mononeuritis multiplex after SARS-CoV-2 infection in an adult.

A 22-year-old male with a typical history of pauci-symptomatic COVID-19 3 weeks earlier, confirmed by positive serology for SARS-CoV-2 (IgG), was admitted to the intensive care unit because of severe myocarditis with refractory cardiogenic shock that required extracorporeal life support. Due to a clinical presentation suggestive of Kawasaki-like disease with coronary aneurysm and severe systemic inflammation, intravenous immunoglobulins were administered in combination with tocilizumab. The initial clinical course was favourable with these treatments. However, the patient subsequently developed a severe mononeuritis multiplex leading to bilateral foot drop, which required intensive immunosuppressive therapy (corticosteroids, cyclophosphamide and rituximab). The clinical presentation meets the criteria for multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with SARS-CoV-2, but includes very severe organ damages. Early recognition, a multidisciplinary approach and aggressive therapeutic intervention can lead to a favourable outcome.