No contraindication to internal jugular central venous catheter insertion in patients at increased risk of bleeding: Results from a prospective observational study in a internal medicine department.

Implantation of centrally inserted central venous catheter (CICC) may be complicated by bleedings particularly in patients with severe coagulopathy or taking antithrombotic drugs. It has been shown that the application of the Italian Group for Venous Access Devices (GAVeCeLT) bundle reduces the incidence of bleeding in patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU), but its effectiveness has never been demonstrated in different contexts. In this study we evaluated the incidence of bleeding after urgent internal jugular CICC (J-CICC) implantation in patients with increased or no risk of bleeding complications when recommended preventive strategies are applied systematically. We included 185 patients admitted to Internal Medicine Units who underwent urgent J-CICC implantation from April 2016 to December 2018. The incidence of major and minor bleeding immediately after the procedure and in the following 30 days was recorded. None of the enrolled patients showed major bleeding. The incidence of minor bleedings was 2.1% (95% IC: 0.03-4.2) with two patients requiring line removal and repositioning (1.1%; 95% IC: -0.45 to 2.6). Bleeds were not correlated with age or sex, although they all occurred in female subjects. The incidence of bleeds was not increased in patients with increased risk of bleeding compared with those without (5.0% vs 1.3%; p = 0.16). The use of anti-thrombotic medications was significantly associated with increased risk of minor bleedings (p = 0.03). In this study we demonstrated that the application of the GAVeCeLT suggested bundle can minimize the number of bleeding complications even in patients hospitalized in Internal Medicine Units. Further data are needed in patients taking antithrombotic drugs who appear to be more prone to minor bleeding, however the benefit of completing the procedure appears to significantly outweigh the risk of mechanical complications.

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in COVID-19: Incidence and correlated risk factors in a cohort of non-ICU patients.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism is a frequent complication of COVID-19 infection. Less than 50% of pulmonary embolism (PE) is associated with the evidence of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) of the lower extremities. DVT may also occur in the venous system of the upper limbs especially if provoking conditions are present such as continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of UEDVT in patients affected by moderate-severe COVID-19 infection and to identify potential associated risk factors for its occurrence. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients affected by moderate-severe COVID-19 infection admitted to our unit. In accordance with the local protocol, all patients had undergone a systematic screening for the diagnosis of UEDVT, by vein compression ultrasonography (CUS). All the patients were receiving pharmacological thromboprophylaxis according to international guidelines recommendations. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify risk factors associated with UEDVT. RESULTS: 257 patients were included in the study, 28 patients were affected by UEDVT with an incidence of 10.9% (95% CI, 7.1-14.7). At univariate analysis UEDVT appeared to be significantly associated (p< 0.05) with pneumonia, ARDS, PaO2/FiO2, D-dimer value higher than the age adjusted cut off value and need for CPAP ventilation. Multivariate analysis showed a significant association between UEDVT and the need for CPAP ventilation (OR 5.95; 95% IC 1.33-26.58). Increased mortality was found in patients affected by UEDVT compared to those who were not (OR 3.71; 95% CI, 1.41-9.78). CONCLUSIONS: UEDVT can occur in COVID-19 patients despite adequate prophylaxis especially in patients undergoing helmet CPAP ventilation. Further studies are needed to identify the correct strategy to prevent DVT in these patients.

Suspected myocarditis in patients with COVID-19: A multicenter case series.

ABSTRACT: Although myocarditis can be a severe cardiac complication of COVID-19 patients, few data are available in the literature about the incidence and clinical significance in patients affected by SARS-CoV-2. This study aims to describe the prevalence and the clinical features of suspected myocarditis in 3 cohorts of patients hospitalized for COVID-19. We retrospectively evaluated all the consecutive patients admitted for COVID-19 without exclusion criteria. Suspect myocarditis was defined according to current guidelines. Age, sex, in-hospital death, length of stay, comorbidities, serum cardiac markers, interleukin-6, electrocardiogram, echocardiogram, and therapy were recorded. Between March 4 to May 20, 2020, 1169 patients with COVID-19 were admitted in 3 Italian Medicine wards. 12 patients (1%) had suspected acute myocarditis; 5 (41.7%) were men, mean age was 76 (SD 11.34; median 78.5 years); length of stay was 38 days on average (SD 8, median value 37.5); 3 (25%) patients died. 8 (66.7%) had a history of cardiac disease; 7 (58.33%) patients had other comorbidities like diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or renal insufficiency. Myocarditis patients had no difference in sex prevalence, rate of death, comorbidities, elevations in serum cardiac markers as compared with patients without myocardial involvement. Otherwise, there was a significantly higher need for oxygen-support and a higher prevalence of cardiac disease in the myocarditis group. Patients with suspected myocarditis were older, had a higher frequency of previous cardiac disease, and significantly more prolonged hospitalization and a lower value of interleukin-6 than other COVID-19 patients. Further studies, specifically designed on this issue, are warranted.

Bedside Abdominal Ultrasound in Evaluating Nasogastric Tube Placement: A Multicenter, Prospective, Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Chest radiography is universally accepted as the method of choice to confirm correct positioning of a nasogastric tube (NGT). Considering also that radiation exposure could increase with multiple insertions in a single patient, bedside abdominal ultrasound (BAU) may be a potentially useful alternative to chest radiography in the management of NGTs. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the accuracy of BAU in confirming the correct positioning of an NGT? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: After a specific course consisting of 10 h of training, the authors studied, in a prospective multicenter cohort, the validity of BAU to confirm correct NGT placement. All patients were also evaluated by auscultation (whoosh test) and by chest radiography. Every involved operator was blind to each other. Interobserver agreement and accuracy analyses were calculated. RESULTS: This study evaluated 606 consecutive inpatients with an indication for NGT insertion. Eighty patients were excluded for protocol violation or incomplete examinations and 526 were analyzed. BAU was positive, negative, and inconclusive in 415 (78.9%), 71 (13.5%), and 40 (7.6%), respectively. The agreement between BAU and chest radiography was excellent. Excluding inconclusive results, BAU had a sensitivity of 99.8% (99.3%-100%), a specificity of 91.0% (88.5%-93.6%), a positive predictive value of 98.3% (97.2%-99.5%), and a negative predictive value of 98.6% (97.6%-99.7%). The accuracy of BAU slightly changed according to the different assignments of the uncertain cases and was improved by the exclusion of patients with an altered level of consciousness. INTERPRETATION: These results suggest that BAU has a good positive predictive value and may confirm the correct placement of NGTs when compared with chest radiography. However, considering its suboptimal specificity, caution is necessary before implementing this technique in clinical practice.