Comparison of hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, and standard of care in critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia: an opportunistic retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak is spreading worldwide. To date, no specific treatment has convincingly demonstrated its efficacy. Hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir have potential interest, but virological and clinical data are scarce, especially in critically ill patients. METHODS: The present report took the opportunity of compassionate use and successive drug shortages to compare the effects of two therapeutic options, lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine, as compared to standard of care only. The primary outcomes were treatment escalation (intubation, extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation support, or renal replacement therapy) after day 1 until day 28. Secondary outcomes included ventilator-free days at day 28, mortality at day 14 and day 28, treatment safety issues and changes in respiratory tracts, and plasma viral load (as estimated by cycle threshold value) between admission and day 7. RESULTS: Eighty patients were treated during a 4-week period and included in the analysis: 22 (28%) received standard of care only, 20 (25%) patients received lopinavir/ritonavir associated to standard of care, and 38 (47%) patients received hydroxychloroquine and standard of care. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the 3 groups. Treatment escalation occurred in 9 (41%), 10 (50%), and 15 (39%) patients who received standard of care only, standard of care and lopinavir/ritonavir, and standard of care and hydroxychloroquine, respectively (p = 0.567). There was no significant difference between groups regarding the number of ventilator-free days at day 28 and mortality at day 14 and day 28. Finally, there was no significant change between groups in viral respiratory or plasma load between admission and day 7. CONCLUSION: In critically ill patients admitted for SARS-CoV-2-related pneumonia, no difference was found between hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir/ritonavir as compared to standard of care only on the proportion of patients who needed treatment escalation at day 28. Further randomized controlled trials are required to demonstrate whether these drugs may be useful in this context.

Mechanical Thrombectomy in Perioperative Strokes: A Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Perioperative strokes (POS) are rare but serious complications for which mechanical thrombectomy could be beneficial. We aimed to compare the technical results and patients outcomes in a population of POS versus non-POS (nPOS) treated by mechanical thrombectomy. METHODS: From 2010 to 2017, 25 patients with POS (ie, acute ischemic stroke occurring during or within 30 days after a procedure) who underwent mechanical thrombectomy (POS group) were enrolled and paired with 50 consecutive patients with nPOS (control group), based on the occlusion's site, National Institute of Health Stroke Scale, and age. RESULTS: Respectively, mean age was 68.3±16.6 versus 67.2±16.6 years (P=0.70), and median National Institute of Health Stroke Scale score at admission was 20 (interquartile range, 15-25) versus 19 (interquartile range, 17-25; P=0.79). Good clinical outcome (modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2 at 3 months) was achieved by 33.3% (POS) versus 56.5% (nPOS) of patients (P=0.055). Successful reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction score of ≥2b) was obtained in 76% (POS) versus 86% (nPOS) of cases (P=0.22). Mortality at 3 months was 33.3% in the POS group versus 4.2% (nPOS) (P=0.002). The rate of major procedural complications was 4% (POS) versus 6% (nPOS); none were lethal. Average time from symptoms' onset to reperfusion was 4.9 hours (±2.0) in POS versus 5.2 hours (±2.6). CONCLUSIONS: Successful reperfusion seems accessible in POS within a reasonable amount of time and with a good level of safety. However, favorable outcome was achieved with a lower rate than in nPOS, owing to a higher mortality rate.

Appropriateness of Initial Course of Action in the Management of Blunt Trauma Based on a Diagnostic Workup Including an Extended Ultrasonography Scan.

Importance: The extended Focused Assessment With Sonography for Trauma (E-FAST) has become a cornerstone of the diagnostic workup in patients with trauma. The added value of a diagnostic workup including an E-FAST to support decision-making remains unknown. Objective: To determine how often an immediate course of action adopted in the resuscitation room based on a diagnostic workup that included an E-FAST and before whole-body computed tomography scanning (WBCT) in patients with blunt trauma was appropriate. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted at 6 French level I trauma centers between November 5, 2018, and November 5, 2019. Consecutive patients treated for blunt trauma were assessed at the participating centers. Data analysis took place in February 2022. Exposures: Diagnostic workup associating E-FAST (including abdominal, thoracic, pubic, and transcranial Doppler ultrasonography scan), systematic clinical examination, and chest and pelvic radiographs. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome criterion was the appropriateness of the observed course of action (including abstention) in the resuscitation room according to evaluation by a masked expert panel. Results: Of 515 patients screened, 510 patients (99.0%) were included. Among the 510 patients included, 394 were men (77.3%), the median (IQR) age was 46 years (29-61 years), and the median (IQR) Injury Severity Score (ISS) was 24 (17-34). Based on the initial diagnostic workup, no immediate therapeutic action was deemed necessary in 233 cases (45.7%). Conversely, the following immediate therapeutic actions were initiated before WBCT: 6 emergency laparotomies (1.2%), 2 pelvic angioembolisations (0.4%), 52 pelvic binders (10.2%), 41 chest drains (8.0%) and 16 chest decompressions (3.1%), 60 osmotherapies (11.8%), and 6 thoracotomies (1.2%). To improve cerebral blood flow based on transcranial doppler recordings, norepinephrine was initiated in 108 cases (21.2%). In summary, the expert panel considered the course of action appropriate in 493 of 510 cases (96.7%; 95% CI, 94.7%-98.0%). Among the 17 cases (3.3%) with inappropriate course of action, 13 (76%) corresponded to a deviation from existing guidelines and 4 (24%) resulted from an erroneous interpretation of the E-FAST. Conclusions and Relevance: This prospective, multicenter cohort study found that a diagnostic resuscitation room workup for patients with blunt trauma that included E-FAST with clinical assessment and targeted chest and pelvic radiographs was associated with the determination of an appropriate course of action prior to WBCT.