Helmet c-PAP Versus NIPPV in Association with Early Respiratory Physiotherapy and Mobilization for Treating SARS-CoV-2 ARDS: A Case-control Prospective Single-center Study.

Introduction: Early noninvasive respiratory support (NIRS) is correlated with a success rate of 60-75% in patients experiencing SARS-CoV-2 ARDS. We conducted a prospective case-control study to assess differences in outcomes between Helmet c-PAP (H-c-PAP) and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV). Methods: All patients with SARS-CoV-2 ARDS, treated with H-c-PAP or NIPPV between October 2021 and April 2022 were sampled. We recorded: demographics, comorbidities, clinical, respiratory, sepsis, NIRS parameters, and outcomes. A "NIRS team" followed the patients in respiratory support supplying them with early and timely intensive physiotherapy i-PKT as well. The Cox's proportional hazard model was applied for multivariate analyses. Results: 368 patients were admitted to our hospital medical ward. 85 patients were treated with H-c-PAP and 145 underwent NIPPV. 138 patients needing oxygen supplementation alone were excluded. The two groups were homogeneously distributed and ICU admission rates were lower in the H-c-PAP one (9.4 vs 11% P = .001) while mortality was higher in the NIPPV group (22.7 vs 9.4%, P = .001). The two multivariate models, that had overall mortality as primary outcome, identified age, H-c-PAP daily, i-PKT and ICU admission as independent variables impacting on the outcome. Age was no longer a significant independent predictor after the inclusion of elderly patients (age >80). The third model showed daily i-PKT could prevent ICU admission whereas the length of NIRS was inversely proportional to outcome. Conclusions: A "NIRS multidisciplinary team" made it possible to adopt an early and timely combination of NIRS and i-PKT resulting in the saving of both patient lives and ICU resources.

Treating Critically Ill Patients Experiencing SARS-CoV-2 Severe Infection with Ig-M and Ig-A Enriched Ig-G Infusion.

SARS-CoV-2 in patients who need intensive care unit (ICU) is associated with a mortality rate ranging from 10 to 40-45%, with an increase in morbidity and mortality in presence of sepsis. We hypothesized that IgM and IgA enriched immunoglobulin G may support the sepsis-related phase improving patient outcome. We conducted a retrospective case-control study on 47 consecutive patients admitted to our ICU. At the time of admission, patients received anticoagulants (heparin sodium) together with the standard supportive treatment. We decided to add IgM and IgA enriched immunoglobulin G to the standard therapy. Patients receiving IgM and IgA enriched immunoglobulin G were compared with patients with similar baseline characteristics and treatment, receiving only standard therapy. The mortality resulted significantly higher in patients treated with standard therapy only (56.5 vs. 37.5%, p < 0.01) and, at day 7, the probability of dying was 3 times higher in this group. Variable life adjustment display (VLAD) was 2.4 and -2.2 (in terms of lives saved in relation with those expected and derived from Simplified Acute Physiology Score II) in the treated and not treated group, respectively. The treatment based on IgM and IgA enriched immunoglobulin G infusion seems to give an advantage on survival in SARS-CoV-2 severe infection.