Oscillometry Longitudinal Data on COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Syndrome Treated with Non-Invasive Respiratory Support.

Background: Oscillometry allows for the non-invasive measurements of lung mechanics. In COVID-19 ARDS patients treated with Non-Invasive Oxygen Support (NI-OS), we aimed to (1) observe lung mechanics at the patients' admission and their subsequent changes, (2) compare lung mechanics with clinical and imaging data, and (3) evaluate whether lung mechanics helps to predict clinical outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data from 37 consecutive patients with moderate-severe COVID-19 ARDS. Oscillometry was performed on their 1st, 4th, and 7th day of hospitalization. Resistance (R5), reactance (X5), within-breath reactance changes (ΔX5), and the frequency dependence of the resistance (R5-R19) were considered. Twenty-seven patients underwent computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA): collapsed, poorly aerated, and normally inflated areas were quantified. Adverse outcomes were defined as intubation or death. Results: Thirty-two patients were included in this study. At the first measurement, only 44% of them had an abnormal R5 or X5. In total, 23 patients had measurements performed on their 3rd day and 7 on their 7th day of hospitalization. In general, their R5, R5-R19, and ΔX decreased with time, while their X5 increased. Collapsed areas on the CTPA correlated with the X5 z-score (ρ = -0.38; p = 0.046), while poorly aerated areas did not. Seven patients had adverse outcomes but did not present different oscillometry parameters on their 1st day of hospitalization. Conclusions: Our study confirms the feasibility of oscillometry in critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia undergoing NI-OS. The X5 z-scores indicates collapsed but not poorly aerated lung areas in COVID-19 pneumonia. Our data, which show a severe impairment of gas exchange despite normal reactance in most patients with COVID-19 ARDS, support the hypothesis of a composite COVID-19 ARDS physiopathology.

Prolonged higher dose methylprednisolone versus conventional dexamethasone in COVID-19 pneumonia: a randomised controlled trial (MEDEAS).

BACKGROUND: Dysregulated systemic inflammation is the primary driver of mortality in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. Current guidelines favour a 7-10-day course of any glucocorticoid equivalent to dexamethasone 6 mg daily. A comparative randomised controlled trial (RCT) with a higher dose and a longer duration of intervention was lacking. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, open-label RCT to investigate methylprednisolone 80 mg as a continuous daily infusion for 8 days followed by slow tapering versus dexamethasone 6 mg once daily for up to 10 days in adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring oxygen or noninvasive respiratory support. The primary outcome was reduction in 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were mechanical ventilation-free days at 28 days, need for intensive care unit (ICU) referral, length of hospitalisation, need for tracheostomy, and changes in C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, arterial oxygen tension/inspiratory oxygen fraction (P aO2 /F IO2 ) ratio and World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale at days 3, 7 and 14. RESULTS: 677 randomised patients were included. Findings are reported as methylprednisolone (n=337) versus dexamethasone (n=340). By day 28, there were no significant differences in mortality (35 (10.4%) versus 41 (12.1%); p=0.49) nor in median mechanical ventilation-free days (median (interquartile range (IQR)) 23 (14) versus 24 (16) days; p=0.49). ICU referral was necessary in 41 (12.2%) versus 45 (13.2%) (p=0.68) and tracheostomy in 8 (2.4%) versus 9 (2.6%) (p=0.82). Survivors in the methylprednisolone group required a longer median (IQR) hospitalisation (15 (11) versus 14 (11) days; p=0.005) and experienced an improvement in CRP levels, but not in P aO2 /F IO2 ratio, at days 7 and 14. There were no differences in disease progression at the prespecified time-points. CONCLUSION: Prolonged, higher dose methylprednisolone did not reduce mortality at 28 days compared with conventional dexamethasone in COVID-19 pneumonia.

Cytokine Profiles as Potential Prognostic and Therapeutic Markers in SARS-CoV-2-Induced ARDS.

BACKGROUND: Glucocorticoids (GCs) have been shown to reduce mortality and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in SARS-CoV-2-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). It has been suggested that serum cytokines levels are markers of disease severity in ARDS, although there is only limited evidence of a relationship between the longitudinal cytokine profile and clinical outcomes in patients with SARS-CoV-2-induced ARDS treated with GC. METHODS: We conducted a single-center observational study to investigate serial plasma cytokine levels in 17 patients supported with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in order to compare the response in five patients who progressed to IMV versus 12 patients who continued with NIV alone. All patients received methylprednisolone 80 mg/day continuous infusion until clinical improvement. RESULTS: The study groups were comparable at baseline. All patients survived. Although IL-6 was higher in the NIV group at baseline, several cytokines were significantly higher in the IMV group on day 7 (IL-6, IL-8, IL-9, G-CSF, IP-10, MCP-1, MIP-1α) and 14 (IL-6, IL-8, IL-17, G-CSF, MIP-1α, RANTES). No significant differences were observed between groups on day 28. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in the IMV group had higher inflammation levels at intubation than the NIV group, which may indicate a higher resistance to glucocorticoids. Higher GC doses or a longer treatment duration in these patients might have allowed for a better control of inflammation and a better outcome. Further studies are required to define the prognostic value of cytokine patterns, in terms of both GC treatment tailoring and timely initiation of IMV.