ROX index performance to predict high-flow nasal oxygen outcome in Covid-19 related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure.

BACKGROUND: Given the pathophysiology of hypoxemia in patients with Covid-19 acute respiratory failure (ARF), it seemed necessary to evaluate whether ROX index (ratio SpO2/FiO2 to respiratory rate) could accurately predict intubation or death in these patients initially treated by high-flow nasal oxygenation (HFNO). We aimed, therefore, to assess the accuracy of ROX index to discriminate between HFNO failure (sensitivity) and HFNO success (specificity). METHODS: We designed a multicentre retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients with Covid-19 ARF. In addition to its accuracy, we assessed the usefulness of ROX index to predict HFNO failure (intubation or death) via logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 218 ARF patients screened, 99 were first treated with HFNO, including 49 HFNO failures (46 intubations, 3 deaths before intubation). At HFNO initiation (H0), ROX index sensitivity was 63% (95%CI 48-77%) and specificity 76% (95%CI 62-87%) using Youden's index. With 4.88 as ROX index cut-off at H12, sensitivity was 29% (95%CI 14-48%) and specificity 90% (95%CI 78-97%). Youden's index yielded 8.73 as ROX index cut-off at H12, with 87% sensitivity (95%CI 70-96%) and 45% specificity (95%CI 31-60%). ROX index at H0 was associated with HFNO failure (p = 0.0005) in univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis showed that SAPS II (p = 0.0003) and radiographic extension of pulmonary injuries (p = 0.0263), rather than ROX index, were predictive of HFNO failure. CONCLUSIONS: ROX index cut-off values seem population-specific and the ROX index appears to have a technically acceptable but clinically low capability to discriminate between HFNO failures and successes in Covid-19 ARF patients. In addition, SAPS II and pulmonary injuries at ICU admission appear more useful than ROX index to predict the risk of intubation.

High-flow oxygen therapy versus noninvasive ventilation: a randomised physiological crossover study of alveolar recruitment in acute respiratory failure.

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy has recently shown clinical benefits in hypoxaemic acute respiratory failure (ARF) patients, while the value of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) remains debated. The primary end-point was to compare alveolar recruitment using global end-expiratory electrical lung impedance (EELI) between HFNC and NIV. Secondary end-points compared regional EELI, lung volumes (global and regional tidal volume variation (V T)), respiratory parameters, haemodynamic tolerance, dyspnoea and patient comfort between HFNC and NIV, relative to face mask (FM). A prospective randomised crossover physiological study was conducted in patients with hypoxaemic ARF due to pneumonia. They received alternately HFNC, NIV and FM. 16 patients were included. Global EELI was 4083 with NIV and 2921 with HFNC (p=0.4). Compared to FM, NIV and HFNC significantly increased global EELI by 1810.5 (95% CI 857-2646) and 826 (95% CI 399.5-2361), respectively. Global and regional V T increased significantly with NIV compared to HFNC or FM, but not between HFNC and FM. NIV yielded a significantly higher pulse oxygen saturation/inspired oxygen fraction ratio compared to HFNC (p=0.03). No significant difference was observed between HFNC, NIV and FM for dyspnoea. Patient comfort score with FM was not significantly different than with HFNC (p=0.1), but was lower with NIV (p=0.001). This study suggests a potential benefit of HFNC and NIV on alveolar recruitment in patients with hypoxaemic ARF. In contrast with HFNC, NIV increased lung volumes, which may contribute to overdistension and its potentially deleterious effect in these patients.

Rescue stem cell allograft in intensive care unit patients during septic shock with multi-organ failure.

PURPOSE: We describe what we believe to be the first two cases of patients who received an allograft in intensive care unit (ICU) despite severe septic shock with multi-organ failure (MOF). RESULTS: One patient had aggressive large B-cell lymphoma. After allograft, the patient initially improved after withdrawing norepinephrine and renal replacement therapy but he subsequently died thirty-two days later because of a new relapse of the disease. The second patient had acute myeloid leukemia type 1 with a need for an allograft after a first complete remission. She was discharged from ICU at D23 after allograft and still alive 7 months later with complete remission. For the two patients, allograft conditioning was performed before admission to our ICU. These two cases highlight one major problem in such situations which is to find the best time to perform the allograft, particularly in ventilated patients with septic shock and MOF. We performed the allograft when we thought that the risk-benefit ratio was in favor of restoring immunity. CONCLUSION: Allograft should be considered as a rescue therapy in ICU for patients with aplasia, during septic shock with multi-organ failure, however close multidisciplinary discussion is required between intensivists and onco-hematologists.

Management of dabigatran after overdosage: two case reports and suggestions for monitoring.

: Bleeding is the main complication of anticoagulant treatments as dabigatran etexilate. In patients with atrial fibrillation, dabigatran, at certain doses, has been associated with similar rates of stroke and embolism, and a lower rate of major hemorrhage compared to warfarin. Before the recent possibility of reversing the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran with idarucizumab, prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) was the main available treatment in cases of severe bleeding or emergency surgery . We describe two different cases with very high overdosage in which PCC or idarucizumab was used to reverse the effect of dabigatran etexilate.