Feasibility, safety and efficacy of COVID-19 severe acute respiratory distress syndrome management without invasive mechanical ventilation.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is often managed with mechanical ventilation (MV), requiring sedation and paralysis, with associated risk of complications. There is limited evidence on the use of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC). We hypothesized that management of COVID-19 ARDS without MV is feasible. METHODS: Included were all adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 ARDS, with PaO2/FiO2 ratio <100 at admission, and whose management was initially performed without MV. We evaluated need for intubation during ICU stay, mortality and hospital/ICU length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: Out of 118 patients, 41 were managed only with HFNC from hospital admission (and at least during first 24 hours in ICU) and had a PaO2/FiO2 ratio <100 (72.9±13.0). Twenty-nine out of 41 patients never required MV: 24 of them survived and were discharged home. Their median ICU LOS was 11 (7-17) days, and their hospital LOS was 29 (18-45) days. We identified PaO2/FiO2 ratio at ICU admission as the only significant predictor for need for MV during ICU stay. We also identified age, length of non-invasive respiratory support before ICU admission, mean value of PaO2/FiO2 ratio during first half and whole ICU stay as predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: It is safe to monitor in ICU and use HFNC in patients affected by COVID-19 ARDS who initially present data suggesting an early need for intubation. The 41 patients admitted with a PaO2/FiO2 ratio <100 and initially treated only with HFNC show a 22% mortality that is in the lower range of what is reported in recent literature.

A novel evidence-based algorithm to predict thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19: preliminary data from a single-center cohort.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-related disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease characterized by systemic inflammation, which might enhance baseline thrombotic risk, especially in hospitalized patients. Little is, however, known about predictors of thrombotic complications in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We prospectively followed up 180 hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Demographics, clinical and laboratory features at presentation and past medical history were tested as predictors of the first thrombotic complication through multivariate Cox regression analysis and a categorical score generated based on the results. RESULTS: Sixty-four thromboses were recorded in 54 patients, of whom seven with thrombosis on admission and 47 with thrombosis during hospitalization. Patients with thrombosis were mainly Caucasian and diabetic, had marked baseline signs of inflammation and organ damage, lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio, higher D-dimer levels and history of major hemorrhages. The latter three variables were independently associated to thrombotic complications and concurred to a 0-5 score, which accounted for 80% of the total sample variability. Patients with three or more points of the newly generated score were at higher risk for thrombotic complications (HR=4.9, P<0.001). Patients with thrombotic complications were more likely to be admitted to intensive care and/or to die (HR=1.9, P=0.036). Five of 180 patients were diagnosed with disseminated intravascular coagulation and three of them died. Eleven minor and no major bleeding events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COVID-19 are at increased risk for thrombosis and might be stratified on admission based on lower Pao2/FiO2 ratio, higher D-dimer levels and history of major hemorrhages.