Long-term outcome of COVID-19 patients treated with helmet noninvasive ventilation vs. high-flow nasal oxygen: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term outcomes of patients treated with helmet noninvasive ventilation (NIV) are unknown: safety concerns regarding the risk of patient self-inflicted lung injury and delayed intubation exist when NIV is applied in hypoxemic patients. We assessed the 6-month outcome of patients who received helmet NIV or high-flow nasal oxygen for COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure. METHODS: In this prespecified analysis of a randomized trial of helmet NIV versus high-flow nasal oxygen (HENIVOT), clinical status, physical performance (6-min-walking-test and 30-s chair stand test), respiratory function and quality of life (EuroQoL five dimensions five levels questionnaire, EuroQoL VAS, SF36 and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for the DSM) were evaluated 6 months after the enrollment. RESULTS: Among 80 patients who were alive, 71 (89%) completed the follow-up: 35 had received helmet NIV, 36 high-flow oxygen. There was no inter-group difference in any item concerning vital signs (N = 4), physical performance (N = 18), respiratory function (N = 27), quality of life (N = 21) and laboratory tests (N = 15). Arthralgia was significantly lower in the helmet group (16% vs. 55%, p = 0.002). Fifty-two percent of patients in helmet group vs. 63% of patients in high-flow group had diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide < 80% of predicted (p = 0.44); 13% vs. 22% had forced vital capacity < 80% of predicted (p = 0.51). Both groups reported similar degree of pain (p = 0.81) and anxiety (p = 0.81) at the EQ-5D-5L test; the EQ-VAS score was similar in the two groups (p = 0.27). Compared to patients who successfully avoided invasive mechanical ventilation (54/71, 76%), intubated patients (17/71, 24%) had significantly worse pulmonary function (median diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide 66% [Interquartile range: 47-77] of predicted vs. 80% [71-88], p = 0.005) and decreased quality of life (EQ-VAS: 70 [53-70] vs. 80 [70-83], p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19 hypoxemic respiratory failure, treatment with helmet NIV or high-flow oxygen yielded similar quality of life and functional outcome at 6 months. The need for invasive mechanical ventilation was associated with worse outcomes. These data indicate that helmet NIV, as applied in the HENIVOT trial, can be safely used in hypoxemic patients. Trial registration Registered on clinicaltrials.gov NCT04502576 on August 6, 2020.

The impact of the secondary infections in ICU patients affected by COVID-19 during three different phases of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Microbial secondary infections can contribute to an increase in the risk of mortality in COVID-19 patients, particularly in case of severe diseases. In this study, we collected and evaluated the clinical, laboratory and microbiological data of COVID-19 critical ill patients requiring intensive care (ICU) to evaluate the significance and the prognostic value of these parameters. One hundred seventy-eight ICU patients with severe COVID-19, hospitalized at the S. Francesco Hospital of Nuoro (Italy) in the period from March 2020 to May 2021, were enrolled in this study. Clinical data and microbiological results were collected. Blood chemistry parameters, relative to three different time points, were analyzed through multivariate and univariate statistical approaches. Seventy-four percent of the ICU COVID-19 patients had a negative outcome, while 26% had a favorable prognosis. A correlation between the laboratory parameters and days of hospitalization of the patients was observed with significant differences between the two groups. Moreover, Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis, Candida spp, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumoniae were the most frequently isolated microorganisms from all clinical specimens. Secondary infections play an important role in the clinical outcome. The analysis of the blood chemistry tests was found useful in monitoring the progression of COVID-19.

Routine extra-hepatic bile duct resection in gallbladder cancer patients without bile duct infiltration: A systematic review.

AIM: The optimal treatment for advanced gallbladder cancer, in particular T2 stage cancer, is unclear. The use of "radical cholecystectomy" or more extended procedures with extra-hepatic bile duct resection are matter of debate. Due to the lack of consensus regarding the oncological significance of routine extra-hepatic bile duct (EBD) resection for gallbladder carcinoma, we decided to perform a systematic review investigating the real benefit of this procedure focusing on the primary outcomes of overall survival and disease-free survival. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and the Cochrane Library Central according to the PRISMA statement guidelines for conducting and reporting systematic reviews. Multiple primary and secondary outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: The selected articles included 424 patients who underwent routine EBD resection without bile duct infiltration. Only two papers discussed the number of dissected lymph nodes during EBD resection for gallbladder carcinoma. Four of the seven included papers reported on tumor involvement in lymph nodes at rates ranging between 39% and 83%. All of the studies included in this systematic review reported on results of overall survival. In general, 5-years OS rate of the EBD-resected patients was not significantly different than that of the EBD-preservation group, while the mobility was significantly higher in the EBD resection group. CONCLUSIONS: Routine EBD resection in gallbladder cancer patients without bile duct infiltration is not associated with improved overall survival, improved lymph-node harvesting or with minor recurrence rate, but it is associated with higher morbidity rates.