Physiologic validation of the compensatory reserve metric obtained from pulse oximetry: A step towards advanced medical monitoring on the battlefield.

BACKGROUND: The Compensatory Reserve Metric (CRM) provides a time sensitive indicator of hemodynamic decompensation. However, its in-field utility is limited due to the size and cost-intensive nature of standard vital sign monitors or photoplethysmographic volume-clamp (PPGVC) devices used to measure arterial waveforms. In this regard, photoplethysmographic measurements obtained from pulse oximetry (PPGPO) may serve as a useful, portable alternative. This study aimed to validate CRM values obtained using PPGPO. METHODS: Forty-nine healthy adults (25 females) underwent a graded lower body negative pressure (LBNP) protocol to simulate hemorrhage. Arterial waveforms were sampled using PPGPO and PPGVC. The CRM was calculated using a one-dimensional convolutional neural network. Cardiac output and stroke volume were measured using PPGVC. A brachial artery catheter was used to measure intraarterial pressure. A 3-lead ECG was used to measure heart rate. Fixed-effect linear mixed models with repeated measures were used to examine the association between CRM values and physiologic variables. Log-rank analyses were used to examine differences in shock determination during LBNP between monitored hemodynamic parameters. RESULTS: The median LBNP stage reached was 70 mmHg (Range: 45-100 mmHg). Relative to baseline, at tolerance there was a 47±12% reduction in stroke volume, 64±27% increase in heart rate, and 21±7% reduction in systolic blood pressure (P<0.001 for all). CRM values obtained with both PPGPO and PPGVC were associated with changes in heart rate (P<0.001), stroke volume (P<0.001), and pulse pressure (P<0.001). Furthermore, they provided an earlier detection of hemodynamic shock relative to the traditional metrics of shock index (P<0.001 for both), systolic blood pressure (P<0.001 for both), and heart rate (P=0.001 for both). CONCLUSION: The CRM obtained from PPGPO provides a valid, time-sensitized prediction of hemodynamic decompensation, opening the door to provide military medical personnel noninvasive in-field advanced capability for early detection of hemorrhage and imminent onset of shock. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Tests or Criteria, Level IV.

Outpatient treatment with concomitant vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma for patients with immunosuppression and COVID-19.

Although severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and hospitalization associated with COVID-19 are generally preventable among healthy vaccine recipients, patients with immunosuppression have poor immunogenic responses to COVID-19 vaccines and remain at high risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and hospitalization. In addition, monoclonal antibody therapy is limited by the emergence of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants that have serially escaped neutralization. In this context, there is interest in understanding the clinical benefit associated with COVID-19 convalescent plasma collected from persons who have been both naturally infected with SARS-CoV-2 and vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 ("vax-plasma"). Thus, we report the clinical outcome of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and who received contemporary COVID-19-specific therapeutics (standard-of-care group) and a subgroup who also received concomitant treatment with very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma (vax-plasma group) with a specific focus on hospitalization rates. The overall hospitalization rate was 2.2% (5 of 225 patients) in the vax-plasma group and 6.2% (10 of 161 patients) in the standard-of-care group, which corresponded to a relative risk reduction of 65% (P = 0.046). Evidence of efficacy in nonvaccinated patients cannot be inferred from these data because 94% (361 of 386 patients) of patients were vaccinated. In vaccinated patients with immunosuppression and COVID-19, the addition of vax-plasma or very high titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma to COVID-19-specific therapies reduced the risk of disease progression leading to hospitalization.IMPORTANCEAs SARS-CoV-2 evolves, new variants of concern (VOCs) have emerged that evade available anti-spike monoclonal antibodies, particularly among immunosuppressed patients. However, high-titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma continues to be effective against VOCs because of its broad-spectrum immunomodulatory properties. Thus, we report clinical outcomes of 386 immunocompromised outpatients who were treated with COVID-19-specific therapeutics and a subgroup also treated with vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma. We found that the administration of vaccine-boosted convalescent plasma was associated with a significantly decreased incidence of hospitalization among immunocompromised COVID-19 outpatients. Our data add to the contemporary data providing evidence to support the clinical utility of high-titer convalescent plasma as antibody replacement therapy in immunocompromised patients.

Rates Among Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 Treated With Convalescent Plasma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: To examine the association of COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion with mortality and the differences between subgroups in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Patients and Methods: On October 26, 2022, a systematic search was performed for clinical studies of COVID-19 convalescent plasma in the literature from January 1, 2020, to October 26, 2022. Randomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies investigating COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion compared with standard of care treatment or placebo among hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 were included. The electronic search yielded 3841 unique records, of which 744 were considered for full-text screening. The selection process was performed independently by a panel of 5 reviewers. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data were extracted by 5 independent reviewers in duplicate and pooled using an inverse-variance random effects model. The prespecified end point was all-cause mortality during hospitalization. Results: Thirty-nine randomized clinical trials enrolling 21,529 participants and 70 matched cohort studies enrolling 50,160 participants were included in the systematic review. Separate meta-analyses reported that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the control cohort for both randomized clinical trials (odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-1.00) and matched cohort studies (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.88). The meta-analysis of subgroups revealed 2 important findings. First, treatment with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with convalescent plasma containing low antibody levels (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.99). Second, earlier treatment with COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the later treatment cohort (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.82). Conclusion: During COVID-19 convalescent plasma use was associated with a 13% reduced risk of mortality, implying a mortality benefit for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, particularly those treated with convalescent plasma containing high antibody levels treated earlier in the disease course.

The relationship between hemoglobin and [Formula: see text]: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: There is widespread agreement about the key role of hemoglobin for oxygen transport. Both observational and interventional studies have examined the relationship between hemoglobin levels and maximal oxygen uptake ([Formula: see text]) in humans. However, there exists considerable variability in the scientific literature regarding the potential relationship between hemoglobin and [Formula: see text]. Thus, we aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis of the diverse literature and examine the relationship between hemoglobin levels (hemoglobin concentration and mass) and [Formula: see text] (absolute and relative [Formula: see text]) among both observational and interventional studies. METHODS: A systematic search was performed on December 6th, 2021. The study procedures and reporting of findings followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Article selection and data abstraction were performed in duplicate by two independent reviewers. Primary outcomes were hemoglobin levels and [Formula: see text] values (absolute and relative). For observational studies, meta-regression models were performed to examine the relationship between hemoglobin levels and [Formula: see text] values. For interventional studies, meta-analysis models were performed to determine the change in [Formula: see text] values (standard paired difference) associated with interventions designed to modify hemoglobin levels or [Formula: see text]. Meta-regression models were then performed to determine the relationship between a change in hemoglobin levels and the change in [Formula: see text] values. RESULTS: Data from 384 studies (226 observational studies and 158 interventional studies) were examined. For observational data, there was a positive association between absolute [Formula: see text] and hemoglobin levels (hemoglobin concentration, hemoglobin mass, and hematocrit (P<0.001 for all)). Prespecified subgroup analyses demonstrated no apparent sex-related differences among these relationships. For interventional data, there was a positive association between the change of absolute [Formula: see text] (standard paired difference) and the change in hemoglobin levels (hemoglobin concentration (P<0.0001) and hemoglobin mass (P = 0.006)). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that [Formula: see text] values are closely associated with hemoglobin levels among both observational and interventional studies. Although our findings suggest a lack of sex differences in these relationships, there were limited studies incorporating females or stratifying results by biological sex.

COVID-19 Convalescent Plasma for the Treatment of Immunocompromised Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Patients who are immunocompromised have increased risk for morbidity and mortality associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) because they less frequently mount antibody responses to vaccines. Although neutralizing anti-spike monoclonal-antibody treatment has been widely used to treat COVID-19, evolutions of SARS-CoV-2 have been associated with monoclonal antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants and greater virulence and transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2. Thus, the therapeutic use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma has increased on the presumption that such plasma contains potentially therapeutic antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 that can be passively transferred to the plasma recipient. Objective: To assess the growing number of reports of clinical experiences of patients with COVID-19 who are immunocompromised and treated with specific neutralizing antibodies via COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion. Data Sources: On August 12, 2022, a systematic search was performed for clinical studies of COVID-19 convalescent plasma use in patients who are immunocompromised. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials, matched cohort studies, and case report or series on COVID-19 convalescent plasma use in patients who are immunocompromised were included. The electronic search yielded 462 unique records, of which 199 were considered for full-text screening. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data were extracted by 3 independent reviewers in duplicate and pooled. Main Outcomes and Meaures: The prespecified end point was all-cause mortality after COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion; exploratory subgroup analyses were performed based on putative factors associated with the potential mortality benefit of convalescent plasma. Results: This systematic review and meta-analysis included 3 randomized clinical trials enrolling 1487 participants and 5 controlled studies. Additionally, 125 case series or reports enrolling 265 participants and 13 uncontrolled large case series enrolling 358 participants were included. Separate meta-analyses, using models both stratified and pooled by study type (ie, randomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies), demonstrated that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma was associated with a decrease in mortality compared with the control cohort for the amalgam of both randomized clinical trials and matched cohort studies (risk ratio [RR], 0.63 [95% CI, 0.50-0.79]). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that transfusion of COVID-19 convalescent plasma is associated with mortality benefit for patients who are immunocompromised and have COVID-19.

Greater central airway luminal area in people with COVID-19: a case-control series.

Respiratory epithelium in the conducting airways of the human body is one of the primary targets of SARS-CoV-2 infection, however, there is a paucity of studies describing the association between COVID-19 and physical characteristics of the conducting airways. To better understand the pathophysiology of COVID-19 on the size of larger conducting airways, we determined the luminal area of the central airways in patients with a history of COVID-19 compared to a height-matched cohort of controls using a case-control study design. Using three-dimensional reconstruction from low-dose high-resolution computed tomography, we retrospectively assessed airway luminal cross-sectional area in 114 patients with COVID-19 (66 females, 48 males) and 114 healthy, sex- and height-matched controls (66 females, 48 males). People with a history of smoking, cardiopulmonary disease, or a body mass index greater than 40 kg·m-2 were excluded. Luminal areas of seven conducting airways were analyzed, including trachea, left and right main bronchus, intermediate bronchus, left and right upper lobe, and left lower lobe. For the central conducting airways, luminal area was ~ 15% greater patients with COVID-19 compared to matched controls (p < 0.05). Among patients with COVID-19, there were generally no differences in the luminal areas of the conducting airways between hospitalized patients compared to patients who did not require COVID-19-related hospitalization. Our findings suggest that males and females with COVID-19 have pathologically larger conducting airway luminal areas than healthy, sex- and height-matched controls.