RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Whether combined treatment with recombinant interferon beta-1b and lopinavir-ritonavir reduces mortality among patients hospitalized with Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, adaptive, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that enrolled patients at nine sites in Saudi Arabia. Hospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed MERS were randomly assigned to receive recombinant interferon beta-1b plus lopinavir-ritonavir (intervention) or placebo for 14 days. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality, with a one-sided P-value threshold of 0.025. Prespecified subgroup analyses and safety analyses were conducted. Because of the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019, the data and safety monitoring board requested an unplanned interim analysis and subsequently recommended the termination of enrollment and the reporting of the results. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients were enrolled; 43 patients were assigned to the intervention group and 52 to the placebo group. A total of 12 patients (28%) in the intervention group and 23 (44%) in the placebo group died by day 90. The analysis of the primary outcome, with accounting for the adaptive design, yielded a risk difference of -19 percentage points (upper boundary of the 97.5% confidence interval [CI], -3; one-sided P = 0.024). In a prespecified subgroup analysis, treatment within 7 days after symptom onset led to lower 90-day mortality than use of placebo (relative risk, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.75), whereas later treatment did not. Serious adverse events occurred in 4 patients (9%) in the intervention group and in 10 (19%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of recombinant interferon beta-1b and lopinavir-ritonavir led to lower mortality than placebo among patients who had been hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed MERS. The effect was greatest when treatment was started within 7 days after symptom onset. (Funded by the King Abdullah International Medical Research Center; MIRACLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02845843.).
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/tratamiento farmacológico , Interferon beta-1b/uso terapéutico , Lopinavir/uso terapéutico , Ritonavir/uso terapéutico , Administración Oral , Adulto , Anciano , Infecciones por Coronavirus/mortalidad , Método Doble Ciego , Combinación de Medicamentos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Hospitalización , Humanos , Inyecciones Subcutáneas , Interferon beta-1b/efectos adversos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Lopinavir/efectos adversos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ritonavir/efectos adversos , Estadísticas no Paramétricas , Tiempo de TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This study assessed the mobility levels among critically ill patients and the association of early mobility with incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the multicenter PREVENT trial, which evaluated adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h and found no effect on the primary outcome of incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis. Mobility levels were documented daily up to day 28 in the ICU using a tool with an 8-point ordinal scale. We categorized patients according to mobility levels within the first 3 ICU days into three groups: early mobility level 4-7 (at least active standing), 1-3 (passive transfer from bed to chair or active sitting), and 0 (passive range of motion). We evaluated the association of early mobility and incident lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality by Cox proportional models adjusting for randomization and other co-variables. RESULTS: Of 1708 patients, only 85 (5.0%) had early mobility level 4-7 and 356 (20.8%) level 1-3, while 1267 (74.2%) had early mobility level 0. Patients with early mobility levels 4-7 and 1-3 had less illness severity, femoral central venous catheters, and organ support compared to patients with mobility level 0. Incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis occurred in 1/85 (1.3%) patients in the early mobility 4-7 group, 7/348 (2.0%) patients in mobility 1-3 group, and 50/1230 (4.1%) patients in mobility 0 group. Compared with early mobility group 0, mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 were not associated with differences in incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16, 8.90; p = 0.87 and 0.91, 95% CI 0.39, 2.12; p = 0.83, respectively). However, early mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 had lower 90-day mortality (aHR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 1.01; p = 0.052, and 0.43, 95% CI 0.30, 0.62; p < 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Only a small proportion of critically ill patients with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h were mobilized early. Early mobility was associated with reduced mortality, but not with different incidence of deep-vein thrombosis. This association does not establish causality, and randomized controlled trials are required to assess whether and to what extent this association is modifiable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013).
Asunto(s)
Catéteres Venosos Centrales , Tromboembolia Venosa , Humanos , Anticoagulantes , Enfermedad Crítica , IncidenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Whether adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis would result in a lower incidence of deep-vein thrombosis than pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis alone is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients who were considered adults according to the local standards at the participating sites (≥14, ≥16, or ≥18 years of age) within 48 hours after admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) to receive either intermittent pneumatic compression for at least 18 hours each day in addition to pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis with unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin (pneumatic compression group) or pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis alone (control group). The primary outcome was incident (i.e., new) proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis, as detected on twice-weekly lower-limb ultrasonography after the third calendar day since randomization until ICU discharge, death, attainment of full mobility, or trial day 28, whichever occurred first. RESULTS: A total of 2003 patients underwent randomization - 991 were assigned to the pneumatic compression group and 1012 to the control group. Intermittent pneumatic compression was applied for a median of 22 hours (interquartile range, 21 to 23) daily for a median of 7 days (interquartile range, 4 to 13). The primary outcome occurred in 37 of 957 patients (3.9%) in the pneumatic compression group and in 41 of 985 patients (4.2%) in the control group (relative risk, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 1.44; P = 0.74). Venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism or any lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis) occurred in 103 of 991 patients (10.4%) in the pneumatic compression group and in 95 of 1012 patients (9.4%) in the control group (relative risk, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.44), and death from any cause at 90 days occurred in 258 of 990 patients (26.1%) and 270 of 1011 patients (26.7%), respectively (relative risk, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.13). CONCLUSIONS: Among critically ill patients who were receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression did not result in a significantly lower incidence of proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis than pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis alone. (Funded by King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology and King Abdullah International Medical Research Center; PREVENT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02040103; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN44653506.).
Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Heparina/uso terapéutico , Aparatos de Compresión Neumática Intermitente , Trombosis de la Vena/prevención & control , Adolescente , Adulto , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Terapia Combinada , Femenino , Heparina/efectos adversos , Heparina de Bajo-Peso-Molecular/uso terapéutico , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Incidencia , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Aparatos de Compresión Neumática Intermitente/efectos adversos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Extremidad Inferior/diagnóstico por imagen , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Ultrasonografía , Tromboembolia Venosa , Trombosis de la Vena/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Importance: Helmet noninvasive ventilation has been used in patients with COVID-19 with the premise that helmet interface is more effective than mask interface in delivering prolonged treatments with high positive airway pressure, but data about its effectiveness are limited. Objective: To evaluate whether helmet noninvasive ventilation compared with usual respiratory support reduces mortality in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a multicenter, pragmatic, randomized clinical trial that was conducted in 8 sites in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait between February 8, 2021, and November 16, 2021. Adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (n = 320) due to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were included. The final follow-up date for the primary outcome was December 14, 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive helmet noninvasive ventilation (n = 159) or usual respiratory support (n = 161), which included mask noninvasive ventilation, high-flow nasal oxygen, and standard oxygen. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality. There were 12 prespecified secondary outcomes, including endotracheal intubation, barotrauma, skin pressure injury, and serious adverse events. Results: Among 322 patients who were randomized, 320 were included in the primary analysis, all of whom completed the trial. Median age was 58 years, and 187 were men (58.4%). Within 28 days, 43 of 159 patients (27.0%) died in the helmet noninvasive ventilation group compared with 42 of 161 (26.1%) in the usual respiratory support group (risk difference, 1.0% [95% CI, -8.7% to 10.6%]; relative risk, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.72-1.49]; P = .85). Within 28 days, 75 of 159 patients (47.2%) required endotracheal intubation in the helmet noninvasive ventilation group compared with 81 of 161 (50.3%) in the usual respiratory support group (risk difference, -3.1% [95% CI, -14.1% to 7.8%]; relative risk, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.75-1.17]). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in any of the prespecified secondary end points. Barotrauma occurred in 30 of 159 patients (18.9%) in the helmet noninvasive ventilation group and 25 of 161 (15.5%) in the usual respiratory support group. Skin pressure injury occurred in 5 of 159 patients (3.1%) in the helmet noninvasive ventilation group and 10 of 161 (6.2%) in the usual respiratory support group. There were 2 serious adverse events in the helmet noninvasive ventilation group and 1 in the usual respiratory support group. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study suggest that helmet noninvasive ventilation did not significantly reduce 28-day mortality compared with usual respiratory support among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia. However, interpretation of the findings is limited by imprecision in the effect estimate, which does not exclude potentially clinically important benefit or harm. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04477668.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Ventilación no Invasiva , Terapia por Inhalación de Oxígeno , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Enfermedad Aguda , Barotrauma/etiología , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/terapia , Femenino , Humanos , Hipoxia/etiología , Hipoxia/mortalidad , Hipoxia/terapia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ventilación no Invasiva/efectos adversos , Ventilación no Invasiva/métodos , Oxígeno/administración & dosificación , Oxígeno/efectos adversos , Terapia por Inhalación de Oxígeno/efectos adversos , Terapia por Inhalación de Oxígeno/métodos , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/etiología , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/mortalidad , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapiaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: In this study, we evaluated the inflammatory response in patients with severe acute respiratory infection due to the Middle East respiratory syndrome and non-Middle East respiratory syndrome and assessed the presence of distinct inflammatory subphenotypes using latent class analysis. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: A tertiary care ICU in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. PATIENTS: Consecutive critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection and non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We measured cytokines on days 1, 3, 7, and 14 of ICU stay. We included 116 patients (40 with Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection and 76 with non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection). On ICU day 1, both patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection and non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection had higher levels of interleukin-3, interleukin-4, interleukin-6, interleukin-8, interleukin-17A, eotaxin, and epidermal growth factor compared with healthy controls. There were no differences in cytokines over time between patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection and non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection. Using day 1 cytokine levels, latent class analysis categorized patients into two subphenotypes: subphenotype 1 (n = 74 [64%]) and subphenotype 2 (n = 42 [36%]); the latter had significantly higher levels of interleukin-1ß, interleukin-1ra, interleukin-2, interleukin-6, interleukin-7, interleukin-8, interleukin-10, interleukin-12p70, interleukin-15, interleukin-17A, inducible protein-10, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, macrophage inflammatory protein-1α, macrophage inflammatory protein-1ß, tumor necrosis factor-α, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, interferon-α, and interferon-γ. Although baseline characteristics were not different between the two subphenotypes, patients in the subphenotype 2 had higher ICU mortality compared with the subphenotype 1 (18/42 [43%] vs 17/74 [23%]; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: One third of critically ill patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection and non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection demonstrated a subphenotype characterized by increased proinflammatory cytokines, consistent with cytokine storm. Further research is needed to examine whether immunomodulators have differential effects based on inflammatory subphenotypes.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/inmunología , Enfermedad Crítica , Síndrome de Liberación de Citoquinas/inmunología , Citocinas/inmunología , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio/inmunología , Adulto , COVID-19/complicaciones , Síndrome de Liberación de Citoquinas/complicaciones , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Arabia SauditaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of ribavirin and recombinant interferon (RBV/rIFN) therapy on the outcomes of critically ill patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), accounting for time-varying confounders. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS from 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia diagnosed between September 2012 and January 2018. We evaluated the association of RBV/rIFN with 90-day mortality and MERS coronavirus (MERS-CoV) RNA clearance using marginal structural modeling to account for baseline and time-varying confounders. RESULTS: Of 349 MERS patients, 144 (41.3%) patients received RBV/rIFN (RBV and/or rIFN-α2a, rIFN-α2b, or rIFN-ß1a; none received rIFN-ß1b). RBV/rIFN was initiated at a median of 2 days (Q1, Q3: 1, 3 days) from intensive care unit admission. Crude 90-day mortality was higher in patients with RBV/rIFN compared to no RBV/rIFN (106/144 [73.6%] vs 126/205 [61.5%]; P = .02]. After adjusting for baseline and time-varying confounders using a marginal structural model, RBV/rIFN was not associated with changes in 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.03 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .73-1.44]; P = .87) or with more rapid MERS-CoV RNA clearance (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.65 [95% CI, .30-1.44]; P = .29). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study, RBV/rIFN (RBV and/or rIFN-α2a, rIFN-α2b, or rIFN-ß1a) therapy was commonly used in critically ill MERS patients but was not associated with reduction in 90-day mortality or in faster MERS-CoV RNA clearance.
Asunto(s)
Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Infecciones por Coronavirus/mortalidad , Infecciones por Coronavirus/terapia , Interferón alfa-2/uso terapéutico , Ribavirina/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Enfermedad Crítica , Femenino , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio , Neumonía Viral/tratamiento farmacológico , ARN Viral/sangre , Estudios Retrospectivos , Arabia Saudita , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
RATIONALE: Corticosteroid therapy is commonly used among critically ill patients with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), but its impact on outcomes is uncertain. Analyses of observational studies often do not account for patients' clinical condition at the time of corticosteroid therapy initiation. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association of corticosteroid therapy on mortality and on MERS coronavirus RNA clearance in critically ill patients with MERS. METHODS: ICU patients with MERs were included from 14 Saudi Arabian centers between September 2012 and October 2015. We performed marginal structural modeling to account for baseline and time-varying confounders. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 309 patients, 151 received corticosteroids. Corticosteroids were initiated at a median of 3.0 days (quartile 1 [Q1]-Q3, 1.0-7.0) from ICU admission. Patients who received corticosteroids were more likely to receive invasive ventilation (141 of 151 [93.4%] vs. 121 of 158 [76.6%]; P < 0.0001) and had higher 90-day crude mortality (112 of 151 [74.2%] vs. 91 of 158 [57.6%]; P = 0.002). Using marginal structural modeling, corticosteroid therapy was not significantly associated with 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.07; P = 0.12) but was associated with delay in MERS coronavirus RNA clearance (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.17-0.72; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroid therapy in patients with MERS was not associated with a difference in mortality after adjustment for time-varying confounders but was associated with delayed MERS coronavirus RNA clearance. These findings highlight the challenges and importance of adjusting for baseline and time-varying confounders when estimating clinical effects of treatments using observational studies.
Asunto(s)
Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Infecciones por Coronavirus/tratamiento farmacológico , Cuidados Críticos/métodos , Estudios de Cohortes , Enfermedad Crítica , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Arabia Saudita , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To describe patient characteristics, clinical manifestations, disease course including viral replication patterns, and outcomes of critically ill patients with severe acute respiratory infection from the Middle East respiratory syndrome and to compare these features with patients with severe acute respiratory infection due to other etiologies. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Patients admitted to ICUs in 14 Saudi Arabian hospitals. PATIENTS: Critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection (n = 330) admitted between September 2012 and October 2015 were compared to consecutive critically ill patients with community-acquired severe acute respiratory infection of non-Middle East respiratory syndrome etiology (non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection) (n = 222). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Although Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection patients were younger than those with non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection (median [quartile 1, quartile 3] 58 yr [44, 69] vs 70 [52, 78]; p < 0.001), clinical presentations and comorbidities overlapped substantially. Patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection had more severe hypoxemic respiratory failure (PaO2/FIO2: 106 [66, 160] vs 176 [104, 252]; p < 0.001) and more frequent nonrespiratory organ failure (nonrespiratory Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score: 6 [4, 9] vs 5 [3, 7]; p = 0.002), thus required more frequently invasive mechanical ventilation (85.2% vs 73.0%; p < 0.001), oxygen rescue therapies (extracorporeal membrane oxygenation 5.8% vs 0.9%; p = 0.003), vasopressor support (79.4% vs 55.0%; p < 0.001), and renal replacement therapy (48.8% vs 22.1%; p < 0.001). After adjustment for potential confounding factors, Middle East respiratory syndrome was independently associated with death compared to non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection (adjusted odds ratio, 5.87; 95% CI, 4.02-8.56; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial overlap exists in the clinical presentation and comorbidities among patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection from other etiologies; therefore, a high index of suspicion combined with diagnostic testing is essential component of severe acute respiratory infection investigation for at-risk patients. The lack of distinguishing clinical features, the need to rely on real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction from respiratory samples, variability in viral shedding duration, lack of effective therapy, and high mortality represent substantial clinical challenges and help guide ongoing clinical research efforts.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Enfermedad Crítica , Adulto , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Alanina Transaminasa/análisis , Aspartato Aminotransferasas/análisis , Estudios de Cohortes , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/epidemiología , Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas/terapia , Infecciones por Coronavirus/terapia , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Hipoxia/epidemiología , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Leucopenia/epidemiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Insuficiencia Renal/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Renal/terapia , Terapia de Reemplazo Renal/estadística & datos numéricos , Respiración Artificial/estadística & datos numéricos , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/epidemiología , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/epidemiología , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/terapia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Arabia Saudita/epidemiología , Choque/epidemiología , Choque/terapia , Trombocitopenia/epidemiología , Vasoconstrictores/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The demand for critical care beds is increasing out of proportion to bed availability. As a result, some critically ill patients are kept in the Emergency Department (ED boarding) awaiting bed availability. The aim of our study is to examine the impact of boarding in the ED on the outcome of patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit(ICU). METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of ICU data collected prospectively at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh from ED between January 2010 and December 2012 and all patients admitted during this time were evaluated for their duration of boarding. Patients were stratified into three groups according to the duration of boarding from ED. Those admitted less than 6 h were classified as Group I, between 6 and 24 h, Group II and more than 24 h as Group III. We carried out multivariate analysis to examine the independent association of boarding time with the outcome adjusting for variables like age, sex, APACHE, Mechanical ventilation, Creatinine, Platelets, INR. RESULTS: During the study period, 940 patients were admitted from the ED to ICU, amongst whom 227 (25%) were admitted to ICU within 6 h, 358 (39%) within 6-24 h and 355 (38%) after 24 h. Patients admitted to ICU within 6 h were younger [48.7 ± 22.2(group I) years, 50.6 ± 22.6 (group II), 58.2 ± 20.9 (group III) (P = 0.04)]with less mechanical ventilation duration[5.9 ± 8.9 days (Group I), 6.5 ± 8.1 (Group II) and 10.6 ± 10.5 (Group III), P = 0.04]. There was a significant increase in hospital mortality [51(22.5), 104(29.1), 132(37.2), P = 0.0006) and the ICU length of stay(LOS) [9.55 days (Group I), 9.8 (Group II) and 10.6 (Group III), (P = 0.002)] with increase in boarding duration. In addition, the delay in admission was an independent risk factor for ICU mortality(OR for group III vs group I is 1.90, P = 0.04) and hospital mortality(OR for group III vs Group I is 2.09, P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Boarding in the ED is associated with higher mortality. This data highlights the importance of this phenomenon and suggests the need for urgent measures to reduce boarding and to improve patient flow.
Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Admisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
We explored the feasibility of collecting convalescent plasma for passive immunotherapy of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection by using ELISA to screen serum samples from 443 potential plasma donors: 196 patients with suspected or laboratory-confirmed MERS-CoV infection, 230 healthcare workers, and 17 household contacts exposed to MERS-CoV. ELISA-reactive samples were further tested by indirect fluorescent antibody and microneutralization assays. Of the 443 tested samples, 12 (2.7%) had a reactive ELISA result, and 9 of the 12 had reactive indirect fluorescent antibody and microneutralization assay titers. Undertaking clinical trials of convalescent plasma for passive immunotherapy of MERS-CoV infection may be feasible, but such trials would be challenging because of the small pool of potential donors with sufficiently high antibody titers. Alternative strategies to identify convalescent plasma donors with adequate antibody titers should be explored, including the sampling of serum from patients with more severe disease and sampling at earlier points during illness.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/terapia , Infecciones por Coronavirus/virología , Inmunoterapia , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio/inmunología , Plasma/inmunología , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes/inmunología , Anticuerpos Antivirales/inmunología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/inmunología , Ensayo de Inmunoadsorción Enzimática , Personal de Salud , Humanos , Inmunoglobulina G/inmunología , Inmunoterapia/métodos , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio/genética , Pruebas de Neutralización , ARN Viral , Reacción en Cadena de la Polimerasa de Transcriptasa Inversa , Arabia SauditaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The diagnostic performance of the available risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis is unclear. RESEARCH QUESTION: For critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, do risk assessment models predict who would develop venous thromboembolism or who could benefit from adjunctive pneumatic compression for thromboprophylaxis? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the PREVENT trial, we evaluated different risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism (ICU-VTE, Kucher, Intermountain, Caprini, Padua, and IMPROVE models). We constructed receiving operator characteristic curves and calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and positive and negative likelihood ratios. Additionally, we conducted subgroup analyses evaluating the effect of adjunctive pneumatic compression versus none on the study primary outcome. RESULTS: Among 2003 patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, 198 (9.9%) developed venous thromboembolism. With multivariable logistic regression analysis, the independent predictors of venous thromboembolism were APACHE II score, prior immobilization, femoral central venous catheter, and invasive mechanical ventilation. All risk assessment models had areas under the curve <0.60 except for the Caprini model (0.64, 95% confidence interval 0.60, 0.68). The Caprini, Padua and Intermountain models had high sensitivity (>85%) but low specificity (<20%) for predicting venous thromboembolism, whereas ICU-VTE, Kucher, and IMPROVE models had low sensitivities (<15%), but high specificities (>85%). The positive predictive value was low (<20%) for all studied cutoff scores, whereas the negative predictive value was mostly >90%. Using the risk assessment models to stratify patients into high- versus low-risk subgroups, the effect of adjunctive pneumatic compression versus pharmacologic prophylaxis alone was not different across the subgroups (p for interaction >0.05). INTERPRETATION: The risk assessment models for venous thromboembolism performed poorly in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. None of the models identified a subgroup of patients who might benefit from adjunctive pneumatic compression.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The optimal amount and timing of protein intake in critically ill patients are unknown. REPLENISH (Replacing Protein via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise Approach in Critically Ill Patients) trial evaluates whether supplemental enteral protein added to standard enteral nutrition to achieve a high amount of enteral protein given from ICU day five until ICU discharge or ICU day 90 as compared to no supplemental enteral protein to achieve a moderate amount of enteral protein would reduce all-cause 90-day mortality in adult critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized trial, critically ill patients will be randomized to receive supplemental enteral protein (1.2 g/kg/day) added to standard enteral nutrition to achieve a high amount of enteral protein (range of 2-2.4 g/kg/day) or no supplemental enteral protein to achieve a moderate amount of enteral protein (0.8-1.2 g/kg/day). The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality; other outcomes include functional and health-related quality-of-life assessments at 90 days. The study sample size of 2502 patients will have 80% power to detect a 5% absolute risk reduction in 90-day mortality from 30 to 25%. Consistent with international guidelines, this statistical analysis plan specifies the methods for evaluating primary and secondary outcomes and subgroups. Applying this statistical analysis plan to the REPLENISH trial will facilitate unbiased analyses of clinical data. CONCLUSION: Ethics approval was obtained from the institutional review board, Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (RC19/414/R). Approvals were also obtained from the institutional review boards of each participating institution. Our findings will be disseminated in an international peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences and meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04475666 . Registered on July 17, 2020.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crítica , Proteínas en la Dieta , Nutrición Enteral , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Humanos , Nutrición Enteral/métodos , Proteínas en la Dieta/administración & dosificación , Interpretación Estadística de Datos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Calidad de Vida , Resultado del Tratamiento , Respiración Artificial , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To evaluate whether helmet noninvasive ventilation compared to usual respiratory support reduces 180-day mortality and improves health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: This is a pre-planned follow-up study of the Helmet-COVID trial. In this multicenter, randomized clinical trial, adults with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (n = 320) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were randomized to receive helmet noninvasive ventilation or usual respiratory support. The modified intention-to-treat population consisted of all enrolled patients except three who were lost at follow-up. The study outcomes were 180-day mortality, EuroQoL (EQ)-5D-5L index values, and EQ-visual analog scale (EQ-VAS). In the modified intention-to-treat analysis, non-survivors were assigned a value of 0 for EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS. RESULTS: Within 180 days, 63/159 patients (39.6%) died in the helmet noninvasive ventilation group compared to 65/158 patients (41.1%) in the usual respiratory support group (risk difference - 1.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] - 12.3, 9.3, p = 0.78). In the modified intention-to-treat analysis, patients in the helmet noninvasive ventilation and the usual respiratory support groups did not differ in EQ-5D-5L index values (median 0.68 [IQR 0.00, 1.00], compared to 0.67 [IQR 0.00, 1.00], median difference 0.00 [95% CI - 0.32, 0.32; p = 0.91]) or EQ-VAS scores (median 70 [IQR 0, 93], compared to 70 [IQR 0, 90], median difference 0.00 (95% CI - 31.92, 31.92; p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Helmet noninvasive ventilation did not reduce 180-day mortality or improve HRQoL compared to usual respiratory support among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Ventilación no Invasiva , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Adulto , Humanos , COVID-19/terapia , Estudios de Seguimiento , Dispositivos de Protección de la Cabeza , Calidad de Vida , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/etiología , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapiaRESUMEN
Background: Type I interferons (IFNs) are essential antiviral cytokines induced upon respiratory exposure to coronaviruses. Defects in type I IFN signaling can result in severe disease upon exposure to respiratory viral infection and are associated with worse clinical outcomes. Neutralizing autoantibodies (auto-Abs) to type I IFNs were reported as a risk factor for life-threatening COVID-19, but their presence has not been evaluated in patients with severe Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). Methods: We evaluated the prevalence of type I IFN auto-Abs in a cohort of hospitalized patients with MERS who were enrolled in a placebo-controlled clinical trial for treatment with IFN-ß1b and lopinavir-ritonavir (MIRACLE trial). Samples were tested for type I IFN auto-Abs using a multiplex particle-based assay. Results: Among the 62 enrolled patients, 15 (24.2%) were positive for immunoglobulin G auto-Abs for at least one subtype of type I IFNs. Auto-Abs positive patients were not different from auto-Abs negative patients in age, sex, or comorbidities. However, the majority (93.3%) of patients who were auto-Abs positive were critically ill and admitted to the ICU at the time of enrollment compared to 66% in the auto-Abs negative patients. The effect of treatment with IFN-ß1b and lopinavir-ritonavir did not significantly differ between the two groups. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the presence of type I IFN auto-Abs in hospitalized patients with MERS.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Interferón Tipo I , Humanos , Ritonavir/uso terapéutico , Lopinavir/uso terapéutico , Interferon beta-1b/uso terapéutico , AutoanticuerposRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Protein intake is recommended in critically ill patients to mitigate the negative effects of critical illness-induced catabolism and muscle wasting. However, the optimal dose of enteral protein remains unknown. We hypothesize that supplemental enteral protein (1.2 g/kg/day) added to standard enteral nutrition formula to achieve high amount of enteral protein (range 2-2.4 g/kg/day) given from ICU day 5 until ICU discharge or ICU day 90 as compared to no supplemental enteral protein to achieve moderate amount enteral protein (0.8-1.2 g/kg/day) would reduce all-cause 90-day mortality in adult critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: The REPLENISH (Replacing Protein Via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise Approach in Critically Ill Patients) trial is an open-label, multicenter randomized clinical trial. Patients will be randomized to the supplemental protein group or the control group. Patients in both groups will receive the primary enteral formula as per the treating team, which includes a maximum protein 1.2 g/kg/day. The supplemental protein group will receive, in addition, supplemental protein at 1.2 g/kg/day starting the fifth ICU day. The control group will receive the primary formula without supplemental protein. The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Other outcomes include functional and quality of life assessments at 90 days. The trial will enroll 2502 patients. DISCUSSION: The study has been initiated in September 2021. Interim analysis is planned at one third and two thirds of the target sample size. The study is expected to be completed by the end of 2025. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04475666 . Registered on July 17, 2020.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crítica , Calidad de Vida , Adulto , Humanos , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Nutrición Enteral/efectos adversos , Nutrición Enteral/métodos , Tiempo , Tamaño de la Muestra , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Multicéntricos como AsuntoRESUMEN
There are contradictory data regarding the effect of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) on the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and heart failure (HF) decompensation in critically ill patients. This study evaluated the effect of adjunctive use of IPC on the rate of incident DVT and ventilation-free days among critically ill patients with HF. In this pre-specified secondary analysis of the PREVENT trial (N = 2003), we compared the effect of adjunctive IPC added to pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis (IPC group), with pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis alone (control group) in critically ill patients with HF. The presence of HF was determined by the treating teams according to local practices. Patients were stratified according to preserved (≥ 40%) versus reduced (< 40%) left ventricular ejection fraction, and by the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification. The primary outcome was incident proximal lower-limb DVT, determined with twice weekly venous Doppler ultrasonography. As a co-primary outcome, we evaluated ventilation-free days as a surrogate for clinically important HF decompensation. Among 275 patients with HF, 18 (6.5%) patients had prevalent proximal lower-limb DVT (detected on trial day 1 to 3). Of 257 patients with no prevalent DVT, 11/125 (8.8%) patients in the IPC group developed incident proximal lower-limb DVT compared to 6/132 (4.5%) patients in the control group (relative risk, 1.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-5.08, p = 0.17). There was no significant difference in ventilator-free days between the IPC and control groups (median 21 days versus 25 days respectively, p = 0.17). The incidence of DVT with IPC versus control was not different across NYHA classes (p value for interaction = 0.18), nor across patients with reduced and preserved ejection fraction (p value for interaction = 0.15). Ventilator-free days with IPC versus control were also not different across NYHA classes nor across patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction. In conclsuion, the use of adjunctive IPC compared with control was associated with similar rate of incident proximal lower-limb DVT and ventilator-free days in critically ill patients with HF.Trial registration: The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02040103 ) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013).
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Tromboembolia Venosa , Trombosis de la Vena , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/tratamiento farmacológico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Humanos , Aparatos de Compresión Neumática Intermitente , Volumen Sistólico , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiología , Trombosis de la Vena/tratamiento farmacológico , Trombosis de la Vena/prevención & control , Función Ventricular IzquierdaRESUMEN
Animal and human data indicate variable effects of interferons in treating coronavirus infections according to inflammatory status and timing of therapy. In this sub-study of the MIRACLE trial (MERS-CoV Infection Treated with a Combination of Lopinavir-Ritonavir and Interferon ß-1b), we evaluated the heterogeneity of treatment effect of interferon-ß1b and lopinavir-ritonavir versus placebo among hospitalized patients with MERS on 90-day mortality, according to cytokine levels and timing of therapy. We measured plasma levels of 17 cytokines at enrollment and tested the treatment effect on 90-day mortality according to cytokine levels (higher versus lower levels using the upper tertile (67%) as a cutoff point) and time to treatment (≤ 7 days versus > 7 days of symptom onset) using interaction tests. Among 70 included patients, 32 received interferon-ß1b and lopinavir-ritonavir and 38 received placebo. Interferon-ß1b and lopinavir-ritonavir reduced mortality in patients with lower IL-2, IL-8 and IL-13 plasma concentrations but not in patients with higher levels (p-value for interaction = 0.09, 0.07, and 0.05, respectively) and with early but not late therapy (p = 0.002). There was no statistically significant heterogeneity of treatment effect according to other cytokine levels. Further work is needed to evaluate whether the assessment of inflammatory status can help in identifying patients with MERS who may benefit from interferon-ß1b and lopinavir-ritonavir. Trial registration: This is a sub-study of the MIRACLE trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02845843).
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus , Ritonavir , Animales , Humanos , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Citocinas/uso terapéutico , Interferones/uso terapéutico , Lopinavir/uso terapéutico , Ritonavir/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
The objective of this study is to examine the IgG antibody response in critically ill patients with the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and to examine the association of early antibody response with mortality and viral clearance. We collected blood samples from 40 consecutive real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) confirmed critically ill MERS patients on ICU days 1, 3, 7, 14 and 28. MERS-CoV antibodies were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), using wells coated with MERS-CoV S1 antigen. Patients were admitted to ICU after a median (Q1, Q3) of 9 (4, 13) days from onset of symptoms with an admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score of 11 (6.5, 12). Among the study cohort, 38 patients (95%) received invasive ventilation, 35 (88%) vasopressors, 21 (53%) renal replacement therapy and 17 (43%) corticosteroids. Median (Q1,Q3) ELISA optical density (OD) ratio significantly increased with time (p < 0.001) from 0.11 (0.07, 1.43) on day 1; to 0.69 (0.11, 2.08) on day 3, 2.72 (1.84, 3.54) on day 7, 2.51 (0.35, 3.35) on day 14 and 3.77 (3.70, 3.84) on day 28. Early antibody response (day 1-3) was observed in 13/39 patients (33%) and was associated with lower mortality (hazard ratio: 0.31, 95% CI 0.10, 0.96, p = 0.04) but was not associated with faster clearance of MERS-CoV RNA. In conclusion, among critically ill patients with MERS, early antibody response was associated with lower mortality but not with faster clearance of MERS-CoV RNA. These findings have important implications for understanding pathogenesis and potential immunotherapy.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Antivirales/inmunología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/inmunología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/mortalidad , Enfermedad Crítica/mortalidad , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio/inmunología , Adulto , Anciano , Anticuerpos Antivirales/sangre , Formación de Anticuerpos , Estudios de Cohortes , Infecciones por Coronavirus/terapia , Infecciones por Coronavirus/virología , Femenino , Humanos , Inmunoglobulina G/sangre , Inmunoglobulina G/inmunología , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Cinética , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Puntuaciones en la Disfunción de Órganos , Terapia de Reemplazo Renal , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The optimal amount of protein intake in critically ill patients is unclear. The objective of this pilot trial is to assess the feasibility of a large randomized controlled trial testing higher versus lower protein intake in critically ill patients. METHODS: In this pilot randomized controlled trial (REPLacing Protein via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise ApproacH in critically ill patients: A pilot randomized controlled trial (REPLENISH pilot trial), critically ill patients underwent 2-step screening for eligibility on ICU day 1 and 5. Patients with renal disease were excluded. Eligible patients were randomized into REPLENISH group (target protein 1.8-2.2 g kg/day) and Standard group (target protein 0.8-1.0 g/kg/day) from day 6-14 after ICU admission. Dietitians adjusted caloric and protein intake throughout the study period (Day 1-14) to maintain similar caloric targets of permissive underfeeding (40-60% of estimated energy expenditure) in both study groups. RESULTS: Of 704 patients screened at 3 centers in Saudi Arabia from May 2018 to May 2019, only 63 (8.9%) were eligible and 40 (5.7% of screened) were randomized with an average of 2 patients enrolled in the trial per month. Among eligible patients, the consenting rate was high at 89%. During the intervention period, patients in the REPLENISH group (N = 21) had a modestly higher protein intake (median of 1.30 g/kg/day (Q1 Q3: 1.11, 1.57)) than those in the standard group (median of 0.77 g/kg/day (Q1 Q3: 0.57, 1.00); P = 0.0004). Only 31.4% of patients in the whole cohort had >80% of prescribed protein. The duration of daily interruption of feeding was almost 4 h in both groups. The 90-day mortality for the patient study cohort was 20.5%. Anthropometric and muscle strength measurements were performed in less than 50% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial highlighted several areas for improvement in the study protocol before launching a large randomized controlled trial. The restrictive eligibility criteria, the complex adjustments of protein and energy and some of the outcome measurements were identified as targets for modifications, to improve enrollment and generalizability and to enhance adherence to study interventions and measurements. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03480555.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crítica , Nutrición Enteral , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Tiempo de Internación , Proyectos PilotoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: We examined the association between surveillance for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) among medical-surgical critically ill patients by twice-weekly ultrasonography and 90-day all-cause mortality. METHODS: This was a pre-planned sub-study of the Pneumatic Compression for Preventing Venous Thromboembolism (PREVENT) trial (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02040103) that compared addition of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) to pharmacologic prophylaxis versus pharmacologic prophylaxis alone. The surveillance group included enrolled patients in the trial, while the non-surveillance group included eligible non-enrolled patients. Using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models, we examined the association of surveillance with the primary outcome of 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were DVT and pulmonary embolism (PE). RESULTS: The surveillance group consisted of 1682 patients and the non-surveillance group included 383 patients. Using Cox proportional hazards model with bootstrapping, surveillance was associated with a decrease in 90-day mortality (adjusted HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.57, 0.98). Surveillance was associated with earlier diagnosis of DVT [(median 4 days (IQR 2, 10) vs. 20 days (IQR 16, 22)] and PE [median 4 days (IQR 2.5, 5) vs. 7.5 days (IQR 6.1, 28.9)]. There was an increase in diagnosis of DVT (adjusted HR 5.49; 95% CI 2.92, 13.02) with no change in frequency in diagnosis of PE (adjusted HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.19, 1.91). CONCLUSIONS: Twice-weekly surveillance ultrasonography was associated with an increase in DVT detection, reduction in diagnostic testing for non-lower limb DVT and PE, earlier diagnosis of DVT and PE, and lower 90-day mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103. Registered on 3 November 2013; Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506. Registered on 30 October 2013.