Prone position versus usual care in hypoxemic COVID-19 patients in medical wards: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Benefit of early awake prone positioning for COVID-19 patients hospitalised in medical wards and who need oxygen therapy remains to be demonstrated. The question was considered at the time of COVID-19 pandemic to avoid overloading the intensive care units. We aimed to determine whether prone position plus usual care could reduce the rate of non-invasive ventilation (NIV) or intubation or death as compared to usual care alone. METHODS: In this multicentre randomised clinical trial, 268 patients were randomly assigned to awake prone position plus usual care (N = 135) or usual care alone (N = 132). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who underwent NIV or intubation or died within 28 days. Main secondary outcomes included the rates of NIV, of intubation or death, within 28 days. RESULTS: Median time spent each day in the prone position within 72 h of randomisation was 90 min (IQR 30-133). The proportion of NIV or intubation or death within 28 days was 14.1% (19/135) in the prone position group and 12.9% (17/132) in the usual care group [odds ratio adjusted for stratification (aOR) 0.43; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14-1.35]. The probability of intubation, or intubation or death (secondary outcomes) was lower in the prone position group than in the usual care group (aOR 0.11; 95% CI 0.01-0.89 and aOR 0.09; 95% CI 0.01-0.76, respectively) in the whole study population and in the prespecified subgroup of patients with SpO2 ≥ 95% on inclusion (aOR 0.11; 95% CI 0.01-0.90, and aOR 0.09; 95% CI 0.03-0.27, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Awake prone position plus usual care in COVID-19 patients in medical wards did not decrease the composite outcome of need for NIV or intubation or death. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04363463 . Registered 27 April 2020.

Does awake prone positioning prevent the use of mechanical respiratory support or death in COVID-19 patients on standard oxygen therapy hospitalised in general wards? A multicentre randomised controlled trial: the PROVID-19 protocol.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 is responsible of severe hypoxaemia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Prone positioning improves oxygenation and survival in sedated mechanically patients with ARDS not related to COVID-19. Awake prone positioning is a simple and safe technique which improves oxygenation in non-intubated COVID-19 patients. We hypothesised that early prone positioning in COVID-19 patients breathing spontaneously in medical wards could decrease the rates of intubation or need for noninvasive ventilation or death. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PROVID-19 is an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicentre randomised, controlled, superiority trial comparing awake prone positioning to standard of care in hypoxaemic COVID-19 patients in 20 medical wards in France and Monaco. Patients are randomised to receive either awake prone position plus usual care or usual care alone with stratification on centres, body mass index and severity of hypoxaemia.The study objective is to compare the rate of treatment failure defined as a composite endpoint comprising the need for non-invasive ventilation (at two pressure levels) or for intubation or death, between the intervention group (awake prone position plus usual care) and the usual care (usual care alone) group at 28 days. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol and amendments have been approved by the ethics committees (Comité de protection des personnes Ouest VI, France, no 1279 HPS2 and Comité Consultatif d'Ethique en matière de Recherche Biomédicale, Monaco, no 2020.8894 AP/jv), and patients are included after written informed consent. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04363463.

Mycobacterium tuberculosis prosthetic joint infections: A case series and literature review.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to characterize diagnosis, management, and outcome of Mycobacterium tuberculosis prosthetic joint infections (PJI). METHODS: Cases of M. tuberculosis PJI documented in 7 referral French centers were retrospectively reviewed. Data were collected from medical files on a standardized questionnaire. We performed a literature review using the keywords 'prosthetic joint', and 'tuberculosis'. RESULTS: During years 1997-2016, 13 patients (8 males, 5 females, median age 79 years [range, 60-86]) had documented M. tuberculosis PJI, involving hip (n = 6), knee (n = 6), or shoulder (n = 1). Median time from arthroplasty to diagnosis was 9 years [0.4-20]. The diagnosis was obtained on joint aspirates (n = 9), or synovial tissue (n = 4). PCR was positive in all cases tested (5/5). Median duration of antituberculosis treatment was 14 months [6-32]). Nine patients underwent surgery: debridement (n = 4), resection arthroplasty (n = 3), and revision arthroplasty (1-stage exchange, n = 2). PJI was controlled in 12 patients. Seventeen additional cases of documented M. tuberculosis PJI have been reported, with a favorable outcome in 79% (11/14) of patients with no surgery, 85% (11/13) with debridement, 86% (19/22) with revision arthroplasty, and 81% (17/21) with resection (NS). CONCLUSIONS: M. tuberculosis PJI can be controlled with prolonged antituberculosis treatment in most cases, with or without surgical treatment.