Immunobiology of COVID-19: Mechanistic and therapeutic insights from animal models.

The distribution of the immune system throughout the body complicates in vitro assessments of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) immunobiology, often resulting in a lack of reproducibility when extrapolated to the whole organism. Consequently, developing animal models is imperative for a comprehensive understanding of the pathology and immunology of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. This review summarizes current progress related to COVID-19 animal models, including non-human primates (NHPs), mice, and hamsters, with a focus on their roles in exploring the mechanisms of immunopathology, immune protection, and long-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as their application in immunoprevention and immunotherapy of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Differences among these animal models and their specific applications are also highlighted, as no single model can fully encapsulate all aspects of COVID-19. To effectively address the challenges posed by COVID-19, it is essential to select appropriate animal models that can accurately replicate both fatal and non-fatal infections with varying courses and severities. Optimizing animal model libraries and associated research tools is key to resolving the global COVID-19 pandemic, serving as a robust resource for future emerging infectious diseases.

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for perioperative management of infective endocarditis after COVID-19 with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis (IE) is a rare cardiovascular complication in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). IE after COVID-19 can also be complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); however, the guidelines for the treatment of such cases are not clear. Here, we report a case of perioperative management of post-COVID-19 IE with ARDS using veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO). CASE PRESENTATION: The patient was a 40-year-old woman who was admitted on day 18 of COVID-19 onset and was administered oxygen therapy, remdesivir, and dexamethasone. The patient's condition improved; however, on day 24 of hospitalization, the patient developed hypoxemia and was admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) due to respiratory failure. Blood culture revealed Corynebacterium striatum, and transesophageal echocardiography revealed vegetation on the aortic and mitral valves. Valve destruction was mild, and the cause of respiratory failure was thought to be ARDS. Despite continued antimicrobial therapy, ARDS did not improve the patient's condition, and valve destruction progressed; therefore, surgical treatment was scheduled on day 13 of ICU admission. After preoperative consultation with the team, a decision was made to initiate V-V ECMO after the patient was weaned from CPB, with concerns about further worsening of her respiratory status after surgery. The patient returned to the ICU with transition to V-V ECMO, and her circulation remained stable. The patient was weaned off V-V ECMO on postoperative day 33 and discharged from the ICU on postoperative day 47. CONCLUSIONS: ARDS may occur in patients with IE after COVID-19. Owing to concerns about further exacerbation of pulmonary damage, the timing of surgery should be comprehensively considered. Preoperatively, clinicians should discuss perioperative ECMO introduction and configuration.

Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated Events, and Nosocomial Respiratory Viral Infections on the Leeside of the Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on population health and hospital operations. Over 7 million patients have been hospitalized for COVID-19 thus far in the United States alone. Mortality rates for hospitalized patients during the first wave of the pandemic were > 30%, but as we enter the fifth year of the pandemic hospitalizations have fallen and mortality rates for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 have plummeted to 5% or less. These gains reflect lessons learned about how to optimize respiratory support for different kinds of patients, targeted use of therapeutics for patients with different manifestations of COVID-19 including immunosuppressants and antivirals as appropriate, and high levels of population immunity acquired through vaccines and natural infections. At the same time, the pandemic has helped highlight some longstanding sources of harm for hospitalized patients including hospital-acquired pneumonia, ventilator-associated events (VAEs), and hospital-acquired respiratory viral infections. We are, thankfully, on the leeside of the pandemic at present; but the large increases in ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), VAEs, bacterial superinfections, and nosocomial respiratory viral infections associated with the pandemic beg the question of how best to prevent these complications moving forward. This paper reviews the burden of hospitalization for COVID-19, the intersection between COVID-19 and both VAP and VAEs, the frequency and impact of hospital-acquired respiratory viral infections, new recommendations on how best to prevent VAP and VAEs, and current insights into effective strategies to prevent nosocomial spread of respiratory viruses.

Hospital Outcomes Among Children With Congenital Heart Disease and Adenovirus Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study is to evaluate the mortality risk factors and hospitalization outcomes of adenovirus pneumonia in pediatric patients with congenital heart disease. METHODS: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study utilizing the Pediatric Health Information System database, we analyzed congenital heart disease patients with adenovirus pneumonia from January 2004 to September 2018, categorizing them into shunts, obstructive lesions, cyanotic lesions and mixing lesions. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was employed to identify mortality risk factors with 2 distinct models to mitigate collinearity issues and the Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the hospital length of stay between survivors and nonsurvivors across these variables. RESULTS: Among 381 patients with a mean age of 3.2 years (range: 0-4 years), we observed an overall mortality rate of 12.1%, with the highest mortality of 15.1% noted in patients with shunts. Model 1 identified independent factors associated with increased mortality, including age 0-30 days (OR: 8.13, 95% CI: 2.57-25.67, P < 0.005), sepsis/shock (OR: 3.34, 95% CI: 1.42-7.83, P = 0.006), acute kidney failure (OR: 4.25, 95% CI: 2.05-13.43, P = 0.0005), shunts (OR: 2.95, 95% CI: 1.14-7.67, P = 0.03) and cardiac catheterization (OR: 6.04, 95% CI: 1.46-24.94, P = 0.01), and Model 2, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (OR: 3.26, 95% CI: 1.35-7.87, P = 0.008). Nonsurvivors had a median hospital stay of 47 days compared to 15 days for survivors. CONCLUSION: The study revealed a 12.1% mortality rate in adenoviral pneumonia among children with congenital heart disease, attributed to risk factors such as neonates, sepsis, acute kidney failure, shunts, cardiac catheterization, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use and a 3-fold longer hospital stay for nonsurvivors compared to survivors.

Mesenchymal Stem Cell-Derived Exosomes Attenuate Murine Cytomegalovirus-Infected Pneumonia via NF-κB/NLRP3 Signaling Pathway.

Reactivation and infection with cytomegalovirus (CMV) are frequently observed in recipients of solid organ transplants, bone marrow transplants, and individuals with HIV infection. This presents an increasing risk of allograft rejection, opportunistic infection, graft failure, and patient mortality. Among immunocompromised hosts, interstitial pneumonia is the most critical clinical manifestation of CMV infection. Recent studies have demonstrated the potential therapeutic benefits of exosomes derived from mesenchymal stem cells (MSC-exos) in preclinical models of acute lung injury, including pneumonia, ARDS, and sepsis. However, the role of MSC-exos in the pathogenesis of infectious viral diseases, such as CMV pneumonia, remains unclear. In a mouse model of murine CMV-induced pneumonia, we observed that intravenous administration of mouse MSC (mMSC)-exos reduced lung damage, decreased the hyperinflammatory response, and shifted macrophage polarization from the M1 to the M2 phenotype. Treatment with mMSC-exos also significantly reduced the infiltration of inflammatory cells and pulmonary fibrosis. Furthermore, in vitro studies revealed that mMSC-exos reversed the hyperinflammatory phenotype of bone marrow-derived macrophages infected with murine CMV. Mechanistically, mMSC-exos treatment decreased activation of the NF-κB/NLRP3 signaling pathway both in vivo and in vitro. In summary, our findings indicate that mMSC-exo treatment is effective in severe CMV pneumonia by reducing lung inflammation and fibrosis through the NF-κB/NLRP3 signaling pathway, thus providing promising therapeutic potential for clinical CMV infection.

Outcome of pregnant women admitted to critical care unit with confirmed severe COVID-19: A center experience.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the traits and risk factors of pregnant women admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) with COVID-19. Moreover, the study classifies outcomes based on differing levels of required respiratory support during their intensive care stay. METHODS: This retrospective and descriptive study included all pregnant women with COVID-19 admitted to the adult critical care unit at a specialized tertiary hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Between January 2020 and December 2022. A total of 38 pregnant women were identified and were eligible for our study. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 32.9 (19-45) years, and the average Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV (APACHI IV) score was 49.9 (21-106). Approximately 60.5% of the patients suffered from superimposed infections during their ICU stay. Approximately 81.6% patients were delivered by C-section, 33 of the newborns survived, and 5 died. The crude mortality rate among pregnant women in our cohort was 15.8%. Patients treated with high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) were mostly discharged or delivered normally, while the mechanical ventilation (MV) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation groups mostly underwent C-sections. Most of the surviving newborns were on HFNC and MV. Patients with multiple infections had the longest ICU stay and had the highest risk of death. CONCLUSION: The results of this study highlight the characteristics of pregnant women admitted to the ICU at a specialized tertiary healthcare center in Saudi Arabia. The APACHI IV scores accurately predicted patient's mortality, duration of MV, and length of ICU stay. In our study, we shared our experience of managing severe COVID-19 infections in pregnant patients.

Viral Pneumonia: From Influenza to COVID-19.

Respiratory viruses are increasingly recognized as a cause of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The implementation of new diagnostic technologies has facilitated their identification, especially in vulnerable population such as immunocompromised and elderly patients and those with severe cases of pneumonia. In terms of severity and outcomes, viral pneumonia caused by influenza viruses appears similar to that caused by non-influenza viruses. Although several respiratory viruses may cause CAP, antiviral therapy is available only in cases of CAP caused by influenza virus or respiratory syncytial virus. Currently, evidence-based supportive care is key to managing severe viral pneumonia. We discuss the evidence surrounding epidemiology, diagnosis, management, treatment, and prevention of viral pneumonia.

Influenza and Viral Pneumonia.

Influenza and other respiratory viruses are commonly identified in patients with community-acquired pneumonia, hospital-acquired pneumonia, and in immunocompromised patients with pneumonia. Clinically, it is difficult to differentiate viral from bacterial pneumonia. Similarly, the radiological findings of viral infection are in general nonspecific. The advent of polymerase chain reaction testing has enormously facilitated the identification of respiratory viruses, which has important implications for infection control measures and treatment. Currently, treatment options for patients with viral infection are limited but there is ongoing research on the development and clinical testing of new treatment regimens and strategies.

CT findings of 144 in-hospital patients with influenza pneumonia: A retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Patients with influenza infection during their period of admission may have worse computed tomography (CT) manifestation according to the clinical status. This study aimed to evaluate the CT findings of in-hospital patients due to clinically significant influenza pneumonia with correlation of clinical presentations. METHODS: In this retrospective, single center case series, 144 patients were included. All in-hospital patients were confirmed influenza infection and underwent CT scan. These patients were divided into three groups according to the clinical status of the most significant management: (1) without endotracheal tube and mechanical ventilator (ETTMV) or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO); (2) with ETTMV; (3) with ETTMV and ECMO. Pulmonary opacities were scored according to extent. Spearman rank correlation analysis was used to evaluate the correlation between clinical parameters and CT scores. RESULTS: The predominant CT manifestation of influenza infection was mixed ground-glass opacity (GGO) and consolidation with both lung involvement. The CT scores were all reach significant difference among all three groups (8.73 ± 6.29 vs 12.49 ± 6.69 vs 18.94 ± 4.57, p < 0.05). The chest CT score was correlated with age, mortality, and intensive care unit (ICU) days (all p values were less than 0.05). In addition, the CT score was correlated with peak lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level and peak C-reactive protein (CRP) level (all p values were less than 0.05). Concomitant bacterial infection had higher CT score than primary influenza pneumonia (13.02 ± 7.27 vs 8.95 ± 5.99, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Thin-section chest CT scores correlated with clinical and laboratory parameters in in-hospital patients with influenza pneumonia.

Ozanimod Therapy in Patients With COVID-19 Requiring Oxygen Support: A Randomized Open-Label Pilot Trial.

BACKGROUND: Sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor ligands (SRLs) dampen immunopathologic damages in models of viral pneumonia. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is it feasible to administer an SRL therapy, here ozanimod (OZA), to acutely ill patients infected with SARS-CoV-2? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The prospective randomized open-label COVID-19 Ozanimod Intervention (COZI) pilot trial was conducted in three Canadian hospitals. Patients admitted for COVID-19 requiring oxygen were eligible. Randomization was stratified for risk factors of poor outcome and oxygen needs at inclusion. Participants were allocated to standard of care or to standard of care plus OZA. OZA (oral, once daily, incremental dosage) was administered for a maximum of 14 days. Primary end point investigated for size effect and variance over time was the assessment of safety and efficacy, evaluated by the daily score on the World Health Organization-adapted six-point ordinal scale for clinical improvement analyzed under the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were randomized to the standard of care arm, and 20 were randomized to the OZA arm from September 2020 to February 2022. Evaluation of efficacy showed nonsignificant reductions of median (interquartile range) duration of respiratory support (6 [3-10] vs 9 [4-12] days; P = .34), median duration of hospitalization (9 [6-12] vs 10 [6-18] days; P = .20), and median time to clinical improvement (4 [3-7] vs 7 [3-11] days; P = .12) for OZA compared with standard of care, respectively. Heart rate was significantly lower with OZA (65 [ 63-67] vs 71 [69-72] beats/min; P < .0001). However, QT and PR intervals were not affected. No severe adverse drug reaction was reported. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, SRL utility in severe pneumonia has never been tested in patients. This study shows for the first time that this new pharmacologic agent may safely be administered to patients hospitalized for viral pneumonia, with potential clinical benefits. Bradycardia was frequent but well tolerated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04405102; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Histologic Characteristics and Clinical Courses of Primary Viral Pneumonia Other than COVID-19.

Objective To clarify both the histologic changes in primary viral pneumonia other than COVID-19 and whether patients with severe lung injury (SLI) on biopsy specimens progress to severe respiratory insufficiency. Methods Patients with primary viral pneumonia other than COVID-19, who underwent lung tissue biopsy, were retrospectively studied. Patients Forty-three patients (41 living patients and 2 autopsied cases) were included in the study. Results Nine patients had SLI, whereas most of patients who recovered from primary viral pneumonia showed a nonspecific epithelial injury pattern. One patient underwent a biopsy under mechanical ventilation. Two of 8 (25.0%) patients on ambient air or low-flow oxygen therapy progressed to a severe respiratory condition and then to death, while only 1 (3.1%) of 32 patients without SLI progressed to a severe respiratory condition and death (p=0.096). The proportion of patients who required O2 treatment for ≥2 weeks was higher in patients with SLI than in those without SLI (p=0.033). The 2 autopsy cases showed a typical pattern of diffuse alveolar damage, with both showing hyaline membranes. Non-specific histologic findings were present in 32 patients without SLI. Conclusion Some patients with SLI progressed to severe respiratory insufficiency, whereas those without SLI rarely progressed to severe respiratory insufficiency or death. The frequency of patients progressing to a severe respiratory condition or death did not differ significantly between those with and without SLI. The proportion of patients who required longer O2 treatment was higher in SLI group than in those without SLI.

Comparison of thrombotic and clinical outcomes in SARS-CoV-2-pneumonia versus other viral pneumonia in an urban academic medical center.

BACKGROUND: Infection with viral pneumonia (PNA) is known to offset the coagulation cascade. Recent studies assessing novel SARS-CoV-2 infection observed a high frequency of systemic thrombotic events resulting in ambiguity if severity of infection or specific viral strain drive thrombosis and worsen clinical outcomes. Furthermore, limited data exists addressing SARS-CoV-2 in underrepresented patient populations. OBJECTIVES: Assess clinical outcomes events and death in patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia compared to patients with other types of viral pneumonia. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study evaluated electronic medical records in adult patients admitted to University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System (UIHHSS) with primary diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 PNA or other viral (H1N1 or H3N2) PNA between 10/01/2017 and 09/01/2020. Primary composite outcome was the following event incidence rates: death, ICU admission, infection, thrombotic complications, mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, and major bleeding. RESULTS: Of 257 patient records, 199 and 58 patients had SARS-CoV-2 PNA and other viral PNA, respectively. There was no difference in primary composite outcome. Thrombotic events (n = 6, 3%) occurred solely in SARS-CoV-2 PNA patients in the ICU. A significantly higher incidence of renal replacement therapy (8.5% vs 0%, p=0.016) and mortality (15.6% vs 3.4%, p=0.048) occurred in the SARS-CoV-2 PNA group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed age, presence of SARS-CoV-2, and ICU admission, aOR 1.07, 11.37, and 41.95 respectively, was significantly associated with mortality risk during hospitalization; race and ethnicity were not. CONCLUSION: Low overall incidence of thrombotic events occurred only in the SARS-CoV-2 PNA group. SARS-CoV-2 PNA may lead to higher incidence of clinical events than those observed in H3N2/H1N1 viral pneumonia, and that race/ethnicity does not drive mortality outcomes.

Differences in clinical characteristics and outcomes between COVID-19 and influenza in critically ill adult patients: A national database study.

OBJECTIVE: Prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, influenza was the most frequent cause of viral respiratory pneumonia requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Few studies have compared the characteristics and outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 and influenza. METHODS: This was a French nationwide study comparing COVID-19 (March 1, 2020-June 30, 2021) and influenza patients (January 1, 2014-December 31, 2019) admitted to an ICU during pre-vaccination era. Primary outcome was in-hospital death. Secondary outcome was need for mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: 105,979 COVID-19 patients were compared to 18,763 influenza patients. Critically ill patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be men with more comorbidities. Patients with influenza required more invasive mechanical ventilation (47 vs. 34%, p < 0·001), vasopressors (40% vs. 27, p < 0·001) and renal-replacement therapy (22 vs. 7%, p < 0·001). Hospital mortality was 25% and 21% (p < 0·001) in patients with COVID-19 and influenza, respectively. In the subgroup of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay was significantly longer in patients with COVID-19 (18 [10-32] vs. 15 [8-26] days, p < 0·001). Adjusting for age, gender, comorbidities, and modified SAPS II score, in-hospital death was higher in COVID-19 patients (adjusted sub-distribution hazard ratio [aSHR]=1.69; 95%CI=1.63-1.75) compared with influenza patients. COVID-19 was also associated with less invasive mechanical ventilation (aSHR=0.87; 95%CI=0.85-0.89) and a higher likelihood of death without invasive mechanical ventilation (aSHR=2.40; 95%CI=2.24-2.57). CONCLUSION: Despite younger age and lower SAPS II score, critically ill COVID-19 patients had a longer hospital stay and higher mortality than patients with influenza.

Valoración multidisciplinar de las secuelas al mes del alta hospitalaria por neumonía grave COVID-19, ¿existen diferencias en función de la terapia respiratoria empleada durante su ingreso en Cuidados Intensivos? / Multidisciplinary approach of the sequelae one month after hospital discharge in patients with severe bilateral COVID-19 pneumonia, are there differences depending on the respiratory therapy used during admission to intensive care?

Objetivo Describir las secuelas al mes del alta hospitalaria en pacientes que precisaron ingreso en Cuidados Intensivos por neumonía grave COVID-19 y analizar las diferencias entre los que recibieron terapia exclusivamente con oxigenoterapia con alto flujo con respecto a los que precisaron ventilación mecánica invasiva (VMI). Diseño Estudio de cohorte, prospectivo y observacional. Ámbito Consulta multidisciplinar pos Cuidados Intensivos. Pacientes o participantes Pacientes que superaron el ingreso en la Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos (UCI) por neumonía grave COVID-19 desde abril 2020 hasta octubre 2021. Intervenciones Inclusión en el programa multidisciplinar pos UCI. Variables de interés principales Secuelas motoras, sensitivas, psicológicas/psiquiátricas, respiratorias y nutricionales tras el ingreso hospitalario. Resultados Se incluyeron 104 pacientes. 48 pacientes recibieron oxigenoterapia nasal de alto flujo (ONAF) y 56 VMI. Las principales secuelas encontradas fueron la neuropatía distal (33,9% VMI vs. 10,4% ONAF); plexopatía braquial (10,7% VMI vs. 0% ONAF); disminución de fuerza de agarre: mano derecha 20,67 kg (± 8,27) en VMI vs. 31,8 kg (± 11,59) en ONAF y mano izquierda 19,39 kg (± 8,45) en VMI vs. 30,26 kg (± 12,74) en ONAF; y balance muscular limitado en miembros inferiores (28,6% VMI vs. 8,6% ONAF). Las diferencias observadas entre ambos grupos no alcanzaron significación estadística en el estudio multivariable. Conclusiones Los resultados obtenidos tras el estudio multivariable sugieren no existir diferencias en cuanto a las secuelas físicas percibidas al mes del alta hospitalaria en función de la terapia respiratoria empleada, ya fuera ONAF o ventilación mecánica prolongada, si bien son precisos más estudios para poder obtener conclusiones al respecto (AU)

Objective To describe the sequelae one month after hospital discharge in patients who required admission to intensive care for severe COVID-19 pneumonia and to analyze the differences between those who received therapy exclusively with high-flow oxygen therapy compared to those who required invasive mechanical ventilation. Design Cohort, prospective and observational study. Setting Post-intensive care multidisciplinary program. Patients or participants Patients who survived admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) for severe COVID-19 pneumonia from April 2020 to October 2021. Interventions Inclusion in the post-ICU multidisciplinary program. Main variables of interest Motor, sensory, psychological/psychiatric, respiratory and nutritional sequelae after hospital admission. Results One hundred and four patients were included. 48 patients received high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (ONAF) and 56 invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The main sequelae found were distal neuropathy (33.9% IMV vs. 10.4% ONAF); brachial plexopathy (10.7% IMV vs. 0% ONAF); decrease in grip strength: right hand 20.67 kg (± 8.27) in VMI vs. 31.8 kg (± 11.59) in ONAF and left hand 19.39 kg (± 8.45) in VMI vs. 30.26 kg (± 12.74) in ONAF; and limited muscle balance in the lower limbs (28.6% VMI vs. 8.6% ONAF). The differences observed between both groups did not reach statistical significance in the multivariable study. Conclusions The results obtained after the multivariate study suggest that there are no differences in the perceived physical sequelae one month after hospital discharge depending on the respiratory therapy used, whether it was high-flow nasal oxygen therapy or prolonged mechanical ventilation, although more studies are needed to be able to draw conclusions (AU)

Impacts of a fraction of inspired oxygen adjustment protocol in COVID-19 patients under mechanical ventilation: A prospective cohort study / Impactos de un protocolo de ajuste de la fracción de oxígeno inspirado en pacientes con COVID-19 sometidos a ventilación mecánica: un estudio de cohorte prospectivo

Objective We examined weather a protocol for fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) adjustment can reduce hyperoxemia and excess oxygen use in COVID-19 patients mechanically ventilated. Design Prospective cohort study. Settin Two intensive care units (ICUs) dedicated to COVID-19 patients in Brazil. Patients Consecutive patients with COVID-19 mechanically ventilated. Interventions One ICU followed a FiO2 adjustment protocol based on SpO2 (conservative-oxygen ICU) and the other, which did not follow the protocol, constituted the control ICU. Main variables of interest Prevalence of hyperoxemia (PaO2>100mmHg) on day 1, sustained hyperoxemia (present on days 1 and 2), and excess oxygen use (FiO2>0.6 in patients with hyperoxemia) were compared between the two ICUs. Results Eighty two patients from the conservative-oxygen ICU and 145 from the control ICU were included. The conservative-oxygen ICU presented lower prevalence of hyperoxemia on day 1 (40.2% vs. 75.9%, p<0.001) and of sustained hyperoxemia (12.2% vs. 49.6%, p<0.001). Excess oxygen use was less frequent in the conservative-oxygen ICU on day 1 (18.3% vs. 52.4%, p<0.001). Being admitted in the control ICU was independently associated with hyperoxemia and excess oxygen use. Multivariable analyses found no independent relationship between day 1 hyperoxemia, sustained hyperoxemia, or excess FiO2 use and adverse clinical outcomes. Conclusions Following FiO2 protocol was associated with lower hyperoxemia and less excess oxygen use. Although those results were not associated with better clinical outcomes, adopting FiO2 protocol may be useful in a scenario of depleted oxygen resources, as was seen during the COVID-19 pandemic (AU)

Objetivo Evaluar si un protocolo para el ajuste de la FiO2 reduce la hiperoxemia y el uso excesivo de oxígeno en pacientes con COVID-19 en ventilación mecánica. Diseño Estudio de cohorte prospectivo. Ámbito Unidades de cuidados intensivos (UCI) dedicadas a pacientes con COVID-19 en Brasil. Pacientes Pacientes con COVID-19. Intervenciones Una UCI siguió un protocolo de ajuste de FiO2 basado en SpO2 (UCI de oxigenoterapia conservadora, N=82) y la otra no siguió el protocolo (UCI control, N=145). Principales variables de interés Prevalencia de hiperoxemia (PaO2>100mmHg) en el día 1, hiperoxemia sostenida (presente en los días 1 y 2) y exceso de uso de oxígeno (FiO2>0,6 en pacientes con hiperoxemia) entre las 2 UCI. Resultados La UCI de oxigenoterapia conservadora presentó menor prevalencia de hiperoxemia en el día 1 (40,2 vs. 75,9%; p<0,001) y de hiperoxemia sostenida (12,2 vs. 49,6%; p<0,001). El uso excesivo de oxígeno fue menos frecuente en la UCI de oxigenoterapia conservadora el día 1 (18,3 vs. 52,4%; p<0,001). El ingreso en la UCI control se asoció de forma independiente con la hiperoxemia y el uso excesivo de oxígeno. Los análisis multivariables no encontraron una relación independiente entre hiperoxemia o uso excesivo de FiO2 y resultados clínicos adversos. Conclusiones Seguir el protocolo de FiO2 se asoció con menor hiperoxemia y menor consumo de oxígeno en exceso. Aunque esos resultados no se asociaron con mejores resultados clínicos, la adopción del protocolo FiO2 puede ser útil en un escenario de recursos de oxígeno agotados, como se vio durante la pandemia de COVID-19 (AU)

Efficacy and safety of adding fluoxetine to the treatment regimen of hospitalized patients with non-critical COVID-19 pneumonia: A double-blind randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are considered the drugs, whose effectiveness in viral pandemics has been studied. The aim of this study was to evaluate of adding fluoxetine to the treatment regimen of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: This study was a double-blind randomized placebo controlled clinical trial .36 patients in the fluoxetine and 36 patients in the placebo group were enrolled. Patients in the intervention group were first treated with fluoxetine 10 mg for 4 days and then the dose of 20 mg was continued for 4 weeks. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS V. 22.0. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of clinical symptoms at the beginning of the study and also the score of anxiety and depression, oxygen saturation at the time of hospitalization, mid-hospitalization and discharge periods. The need for mechanical ventilator support (p = 1.00), the need for admission in the intensive care unit (ICU) (p = 1.00), rate for mortality (p = 1.00), and discharge with relative recovery (p = 1.00) were not significantly different between the two groups. The distribution of CRP within the study groups showed a significant decrease during different time periods (p = 0.001), and although there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups on the first day (p = 1.00) and at discharge (p = 0.585), mid-hospital CRP showed a significant decrease in the fluoxetine group (p = 0.032). CONCLUSION: Fluoxetine resulted in a faster reduction of patients' inflammation without association with depression and anxiety.

[SARS-CoV-2-Infection and Interstitial Lung Disease: Position paper of the German Respiratory Society]. / SARS-CoV-2-Infektion und interstitielle Lungenerkrankungen ­ Positionspapier der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Pneumologie und Beatmungsmedizin.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had a tremendous impact on diagnosis and treatment of interstitial lung diseases (ILD). Especially in the early phase of the pandemic, when the delta variant was prevailling, a huge number of viral pneumonias were observed, which worsened pre-existing, triggered de novo occurence or discovery of previously subclincal interstitial lung diseases. The effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection - without or with accompanying viral pneumonia - on the further development of pre-existing ILD as well of new pulmonary inflitrates and consolidiations is difficult to predict and poses a daily challenge to interdisciplinary ILD boards. This position paper of the German Respiratory Society (DGP e.V.) provides answers to the most pressing questions based on current knowledge.

Secondary infections in critically ill patients with viral pneumonia due to COVID-19 and influenza: a historical cohort study.

PURPOSE: To compare the incidence and nature of secondary infections (SI) between critically ill patients with viral pneumonia due to COVID-19 and seasonal influenza and explore the association between SI and clinical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a historical cohort study of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at two tertiary care centers during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and patients admitted with influenza during the 2018-2019 season. The primary outcome was the rate of SI. Secondary outcomes included rates of ICU and in-hospital mortality, organ-support-dependent disease, and length of ICU and hospital stay. RESULTS: Secondary infections developed in 55% of 95 COVID-19 patients and 51% of 47 influenza patients (unadjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57 to 2.33). After adjusting for baseline differences between cohorts, there were no significant differences between the COVID-19 cohort and the influenza cohort (adjusted OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.41 to 2.44). COVID-19 patients with SI had longer ICU and hospital stays and duration of mechanical ventilation. The SI incidence was higher in COVID-19 patients treated with steroids than in those not treated with steroids (15/20, 75% vs 37/75, 49%). CONCLUSION: Secondary infections were common among critically ill patients with viral pneumonia including COVID-19. We found no difference in the incidence of SI between COVID-19 and influenza in our cohort study, but SI in patients with COVID-19 were associated with worse clinical outcomes and increased healthcare resource use. The small cohort size precludes any causal inferences but may provide a basis for future research.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Comparer l'incidence et la nature des infections secondaires entre les patients gravement malades atteints de pneumonie virale due à la COVID-19 et ceux atteints de la grippe saisonnière et explorer l'association entre les infections secondaires et les issues cliniques. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude de cohorte historique de patients admis à l'unité de soins intensifs (USI) dans deux centres de soins tertiaires pendant la première vague de la pandémie de COVID-19 et de patients admis pour la grippe au cours de la saison 2018-2019. Le critère d'évaluation principal était le taux d'infections secondaires. Les critères d'évaluation secondaires comprenaient les taux de mortalité à l'USI et à l'hôpital, les maladies nécessitant un support d'organes et la durée du séjour à l'USI et à l'hôpital. RéSULTATS: Des infections secondaires se sont développées chez 55 % des 95 patients atteints de COVID-19 et 51 % des 47 patients grippaux (rapport des cotes [RC] non ajusté, 1,16; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 0,57 à 2,33). Après ajustement pour tenir compte des différences initiales entre les cohortes, aucune différence significative n'a été observée entre la cohorte de COVID-19 et la cohorte de grippe (RC ajusté, 1,00; IC 95 %, 0,41 à 2,44). Les patients atteints de COVID-19 atteints d'infections secondaires ont séjourné plus longtemps aux soins intensifs et à l'hôpital et la durée de la ventilation mécanique était plus longue pour ces patients. L'incidence d'infections secondaires était plus élevée chez les patients atteints de COVID-19 traités par stéroïdes que chez ceux non traités par stéroïdes (15/20, 75 % vs 37/75, 49 %). CONCLUSION: Les infections secondaires étaient fréquentes chez les patients gravement malades atteints de pneumonie virale, y compris de COVID-19. Nous n'avons observé aucune différence dans l'incidence d'infections secondaires entre les patients atteints de COVID-19 et ceux atteints de grippe dans notre étude de cohorte, mais les infections secondaires chez les patients atteints de COVID-19 étaient associées à de moins bonnes issues cliniques et à une utilisation accrue des ressources de soins de santé. La petite taille de la cohorte exclut toute inférence causale, mais peut fournir une base pour les recherches futures.

[Community-acquired pneumonia]. / Ambulant erworbene Pneumonie.

RISK FACTORS FOR SEVERE COURSES: The CRB-65 score is recommended as a risk predictor, as well as consideration of unstable comorbidities and oxygenation. GROUPING OF COMMUNITY-ACQUIRED PNEUMONIA: Community-acquired pneumonia is divided into 3 groups: mild pneumonia, moderate pneumonia, severe pneumonia. Whether there is a curative vs palliative treatment goal should be determined early. DIAGNOSTIC RECOMMENDATION: An X-ray chest radiograph is recommended to confirm the diagnosis, also in the outpatient setting if possible. Sonography of the thorax is an alternative, asking for additional imaging if negative. Streptococcus pneumoniae remains the most common bacterial pathogen. THERAPY: Community-acquired pneumonia continues to be associated with high morbidity and lethality. Prompt diagnosis and prompt initiation of risk-adapted antimicrobial therapy are essential measures. However, in times of COVID-19, as well as the current influenza and RSV epidemic, purely viral pneumonias must also be expected. At least with COVID-19, antibiotics can often be avoided. Antiviral and anti-inflammatory drugs are used here. POST-ACUTE COURSE: Patients after community-acquired pneumonia have increased acute and long-term mortality due to cardiovascular events in particular. The focus of research is on improved pathogen identification, a better understanding of the host response with the potential of developing specific therapeutics, the role of comorbidities, and the long-term consequences of the acute illness.