[Risk factors for the early development of septic shock in patients with severe COVID-19].

AIM: In a retrospective study, we evaluated factors associated with the early development of septic shock in patients with severe COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected medical records of the intensive care unit patients submitted by the local COVID-19 hospitals across Russia to the Federal Center for the Critical Care at the Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University). Septic shock in crticially ill patients requiring mechanical ventilation was defined as a need in vasopressors to maintain blood pressure. RESULTS: We studied 1078 patients with severe COVID-19 who were admitted to the intensive care units for respiratory support. There were 611 males and 467 females. The mean age was 61.013.7 years. Five hundred twenty five medical records (48.7%) were received from the Moscow hospitals, 159 (14.7%) from the Moscow region, and 394 (36.5%) from the hospitals located in 58 regions of the Russian Federation. In 613 (56.9%) patients, diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed by PCR, and in the other cases it was established on the basis of the clinical picture and the results of the chest CT scan. Septic shock developed in 214 (19.9%) of 1078 patients. In the logistic regression model, the risk of septic shock in patients older than 50 years was higher than in patients of a younger age (OR 2.34; 95% CI 1.533.67; p0.0001). In patients with more severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, there was an increase in the prevalence of cardiovascular diseases, including coronary heart disease and atrial fibrillation, type 2 diabetes and malignant tumors. The risk of septic shock in patients with three or more concomitant diseases was higher than in patients without any concomitant chronic diseases (OR 1.76; 95% CI 1.762.70). CONCLUSION: The risk of septic shock in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome induced by SARS-CoV-2 is higher in patients older than 50 years with concomitant diseases, although a severe course of the disease is also possible in younger patients without any concomitant disorders.

[PHARMACOLOGICAL POSTCONDITIONING BY SEVOFLURANE DURING CARDIAC SURGERY.]

BACKGROUND: Optimization of myocardial protection during cardiac surgery with a long period of anoxia infarction using sevoflurane postconditioning of myocardium. THE AIM: to develop the optimal pharmacological postconditioning protocol with sevoflurane for infarction patients ,undergoing cardiac surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two groups were formedfor this study: CON] 00 (n-32) with aortic cross-clamping time 114±15 min and SEV100 group (n-34), where the myocardium anoxia was 119±22 minutes. According to previously developed in the pilot study Protocol, we added sevofturane in the circuit of extracorporeal circulation in a dose of 2.0 vol. % 20 minutes before removing the clamp from the aorta and the first 20 min of reperfusion in the group SE V100. In the group CON1 00 pharnacological postconditioning wasn't conducted. To assess the adequacy of the cardioprotection against ischemic damage in operated patients, we used the following clinical and laboratory parameters: changing the level of troponin T; the concentration of lactate and glucose as a marker of severity of anaerobic metabolism; concentration of proinflammatory cytokines IL-6, IL-8, TNF-alpha in blood serum as reperfusion injury markers. Also we used the registration of central hemodynamics data: measuring the mean invasive blood pressure; central venous pressure; Cardiac output was measured by the method of transesophageal echocardiography TEEcho-CG, calculated left ventricular ejection fraction by Simpson. We evaluated the clinical course of the perioperative period: incidence ofperioperative myocardial ischemia; the need and the duration ofuse of cardiotonic drugs in the perioperative period; the incidence of reperfusion arrhythmias; the frequency of self-recovery heart rate. RESULTS: According to the results of anaerobic metabolism markers, we can conclude that the period of the myocardium anoxia ofpatients in both groups experienced no significant difference. However; a completely different pattern was observed when comparing the proinflammatory cytokines, such as IL-6, IL-8, TNF-a. This confirms that the group SEV] 00 survived the reperfusion is much better than the group CON100. Instrumental examination also showed that the group ofpatients in which pharmacological postconditioning with sevofturane was held signficantly better suffered ischemia and reperfiision injury compared to control group. Self-recovery heart rate after removing the aorta clamp in the group CON100 was observed in 81%, in group SEV100 same - 93%. Similarly, the frequency of myocardial ischemia episodes on the ECG in reperfusion period was two times lower in the group SEV100 compared with group CON100 - 5.8% and 12.5% respectively. Reperfusion arrhythmia is almost 3 times more frequent in the group CON100 - 21,8%, in the group SEV100, where he conducted pharmacological postconditioning with sevoflurane is 8.8%.. CONCLUSION: Combined with sevoflurane cardioprotection FPC has a much better resistance to myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury in patients with myocardial infarction time over 100 minutes than monoprotection with cardioplegic solution "Console ". This method can be recommended as an additional method ofprotection against myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury.