RESUMO
COVID-19 patients are oftentimes over- or under-treated due to a deficit in predictive management tools. This study reports derivation of an algorithm that integrates the host levels of TRAIL, IP-10, and CRP into a single numeric score that is an early indicator of severe outcome for COVID-19 patients and can identify patients at-risk to deteriorate. 394 COVID-19 patients were eligible; 29% meeting a severe outcome (intensive care unit admission/non-invasive or invasive ventilation/death). The score's area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.86, superior to IL-6 (AUC 0.77; p = 0.033) and CRP (AUC 0.78; p < 0.001). Likelihood of severe outcome increased significantly (p < 0.001) with higher scores. The score differentiated severe patients who further deteriorated from those who improved (p = 0.004) and projected 14-day survival probabilities (p < 0.001). The score accurately predicted COVID-19 patients at-risk for severe outcome, and therefore has potential to facilitate timely care escalation and de-escalation and appropriate resource allocation.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , Quimiocina CXCL10 , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Curva ROC , Estudos Retrospectivos , PrognósticoRESUMO
Critically ill patients in need of specialized diagnostic or therapeutic procedures, but are being cared for in a hospital without such equipment, have to be transferred to appropriate centers without discontinuation of current critical care (interhospital critical care transfer). These transfers are resource intensive, challenging, and require high logistical effort, which must be managed by a specialized and highly trained team, predeployment planning and efficient crew-resource management strategies. If planned adequately, interhospital critical care transfers can be performed safely without frequent adverse events. Beside routine interhospital critical care transfers, there are special missions (e.g., for patients in quarantine or supported by extracorporeal organ support) that might require adaption of the team composition or standard equipment. This article describes interhospital critical care transport missions including their different phases and special circumstances.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that COVID-19-associated severe respiratory failure (CARDS) might differ from usual acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to failing autoregulation of pulmonary vessels and higher shunt. We sought to investigate pulmonary hemodynamics and ventilation properties in patients with CARDS compared to patients with ARDS of pulmonary origin. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive adults with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 patients treated in our ICU in 04/2020 and a comparison of the data to matched controls with ARDS due to respiratory infections treated in our ICU from 01/2014 to 08/2019 for whom pulmonary artery catheter data were available. RESULTS: CARDS patients (n = 10) had ventilation characteristics similar to those of ARDS (n = 10) patients. Nevertheless, mechanical power applied by ventilation was significantly higher in CARDS patients (23.4 ± 8.9 J/min) than in ARDS (15.9 ± 4.3 J/min; P < 0.05). COVID-19 patients had similar pulmonary artery pressure but significantly lower pulmonary vascular resistance, as cardiac output was higher in CARDS vs. ARDS patients (P < 0.05). Shunt fraction and dead space were similar in CARDS compared to ARDS (P > 0.05) and were correlated with hypoxemia in both groups. The arteriovenous pCO2 difference (âµpCO2) was elevated (CARDS 5.5 ± 2.8 mmHg vs. ARDS 4.7 ± 1.1 mmHg; P > 0.05), as was the P(v-a)CO2/C(a-v)O2 ratio (CARDS mean 2.2 ± 1.5 vs. ARDS 1.7 ± 0.8; P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients seems to differ only slightly from ARDS regarding ventilation characteristics and pulmonary hemodynamics. Our data indicate microcirculatory dysfunction. More data need to be collected to assure these findings and gain more pathophysiological insights into COVID-19 and respiratory failure.
Assuntos
COVID-19/complicações , COVID-19/fisiopatologia , Débito Cardíaco/fisiologia , Respiração Artificial , Insuficiência Respiratória/fisiopatologia , Resistência Vascular/fisiologia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , COVID-19/terapia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Artéria Pulmonar , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapia , Insuficiência Respiratória/virologia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is a means to support patients with acute respiratory failure. Initially, recommendations to treat severe cases of pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with ECLS have been restrained. In the meantime, ECLS has been shown to produce similar outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 compared to existing data on ARDS mortality. We performed an international email survey to assess how ECLS providers worldwide have previously used ECLS during the treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19. A questionnaire with 45 questions (covering, e.g., indication, technical aspects, benefit, and reasons for treatment discontinuation), mostly multiple choice, was distributed by email to ECLS centers. The survey was approved by the European branch of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO); 276 ECMO professionals from 98 centers in 30 different countries on four continents reported that they employed ECMO for very severe COVID-19 cases, mostly in veno-venous configuration (87%). The most common reason to establish ECLS was isolated hypoxemic respiratory failure (50%), followed by a combination of hypoxemia and hypercapnia (39%). Only a small fraction of patients required veno-arterial cannulation due to heart failure (3%). Time on ECLS varied between less than 2 and more than 4 weeks. The main reason to discontinue ECLS treatment prior to patient's recovery was lack of clinical improvement (53%), followed by major bleeding, mostly intracranially (13%). Only 4% of respondents reported that triage situations, lack of staff or lack of oxygenators, were responsible for discontinuation of ECLS support. Most ECLS physicians (51%, IQR 30%) agreed that patients with COVID-19-induced ARDS (CARDS) benefitted from ECLS. Overall mortality of COVID-19 patients on ECLS was estimated to be about 55%. ECLS has been utilized successfully during the COVID-19 pandemic to stabilize CARDS patients in hypoxemic or hypercapnic lung failure. Age and multimorbidity limited the use of ECLS. Triage situations were rarely a concern. ECLS providers stated that patients with severe COVID-19 benefitted from ECLS.
Assuntos
COVID-19/terapia , Oxigenação por Membrana Extracorpórea , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/terapia , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapia , Estado Terminal , Humanos , Internacionalidade , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/virologia , Insuficiência Respiratória/virologia , SARS-CoV-2 , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
PURPOSE: In this retrospective study, we compared inhaled sedation with isoflurane to intravenous propofol in invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients with ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome). METHODS: Charts of all 20 patients with COVID-19 ARDS admitted to the ICU of a German University Hospital during the first wave of the pandemic between 22/03/2020 and 21/04/2020 were reviewed. Among screened 333 days, isoflurane was used in 97 days, while in 187 days, propofol was used for 12 h or more. The effect and dose of these two sedatives were compared. Mixed sedation days were excluded. RESULTS: Patients' age (median [interquartile range]) was 64 (60-68) years. They were invasively ventilated for 36 [21-50] days. End-tidal isoflurane concentrations were high (0.96 ± 0.41 Vol %); multiple linear regression yielded the ratio (isoflurane infusion rate)/(minute ventilation) as the single best predictor. Infusion rates were decreased under ECMO (3.5 ± 1.4 versus 7.1 ± 3.2 mlâh-1; p < 0.001). In five patients, the maximum recommended dose of propofol of 4 mgâhour-1âkg-1ABW was exceeded on several days. On isoflurane compared to propofol days, neuro-muscular blocking agents (NMBAs) were used less frequently (11% versus 21%; p < 0.05), as were co-sedatives (7% versus 31%, p < 0.001); daily opioid doses were lower (720 [720-960] versus 1080 [720-1620] mg morphine equivalents, p < 0.001); and RASS scores indicated deeper levels of sedation (- 4.0 [- 4.0 to - 3.0] versus - 3.0 [- 3.6 to - 2.5]; p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Isoflurane provided sufficient sedation with less NMBAs, less polypharmacy and lower opioid doses compared to propofol. High doses of both drugs were needed in severely ill COVID-19 patients.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Isoflurano , Propofol , Sedação Consciente , Estado Terminal , Humanos , Hipnóticos e Sedativos/efeitos adversos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Isoflurano/efeitos adversos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Respiração Artificial , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
Critically ill patients in need of specialized diagnostic or therapeutic procedures, but are being cared for in a hospital without such equipment, have to be transferred to appropriate centers without discontinuation of current critical care (interhospital critical care transfer). These transfers are resource intensive, challenging, and require high logistical effort, which must be managed by a specialized and highly trained team, predeployment planning and efficient crew-resource management strategies. If planned adequately, interhospital critical care transfers can be performed safely without frequent adverse events. Beside routine interhospital critical care transfers, there are special missions (e.g., for patients in quarantine or supported by extracorporeal organ support) that might require adaption of the team composition or standard equipment. This article describes interhospital critical care transport missions including their different phases and special circumstances.
Assuntos
Ambulâncias , Transferência de Pacientes , Humanos , Cuidados Críticos/métodos , Transporte de Pacientes/métodos , Estado Terminal/terapiaRESUMO
Interhospital transport of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients bears transport-associated risks. It is unknown how interhospital extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) transfer of COVID-19 patients by mobile ECMO units affects ARDS mortality. We compared the outcome of 94 COVID-19 patients cannulated in primary care hospitals and retrieved by mobile ECMO-teams to that of 84 patients cannulated at five German ECMO centers. Patients were recruited from March 2020 to November 2021. Twenty-six transports were airborne, 68 were land-based. Age, sex, body-mass-index, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, days invasively ventilated, and P/F-Ratio before ECMO initiation were similar in both groups. Counting only regional transports (≤250 km), mean transport distance was 139.5 km ± 17.7 km for helicopter (duration 52.5 ± 10.6 minutes) and 69.8 km ± 44.1 km for ambulance or mobile intensive care unit (duration 57.6 ± 29.4 minutes). Overall time of vvECMO support (20.4 ± 15.2 ECMO days for transported patients vs. 21.0 ± 20.5 for control, p = 0.83) and days invasively ventilated (27.9 ± 18.1 days vs. 32.6 ± 25.1 days, p = 0.16) were similar. Overall mortality did not differ between transported patients and controls (57/94 [61%] vs. 51/83 [61%], p = 0.43). COVID-19 patients cannulated and retrieved by mobile ECMO-teams have no excess risk compared with patients receiving vvECMO at experienced ECMO centers. Patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS, limited comorbidities, and no contraindication for ECMO should be referred early to local ECMO centers.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Oxigenação por Membrana Extracorpórea , Pneumonia , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório , Humanos , Oxigenação por Membrana Extracorpórea/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , COVID-19/terapia , Ambulâncias , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/etiologia , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/terapiaRESUMO
Background: There is ongoing debate whether lung physiology of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) differs from ARDS of other origin. Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze and compare how critically ill patients with COVID-19 and Influenza A or B were ventilated in our tertiary care center with or without extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We ask if acute lung failure due to COVID-19 requires different intensive care management compared to conventional ARDS. Methods: 25 patients with COVID-19-associated ARDS were matched to a cohort of 25 Influenza patients treated in our center from 2011 to 2021. Subgroup analysis addressed whether patients on ECMO received different mechanical ventilation than patients without extracorporeal support. Results: Compared to Influenza-associated ARDS, COVID-19 patients had higher ventilatory system compliance (40.7 mL/mbar [31.8-46.7 mL/mbar] vs. 31.4 mL/mbar [13.7-42.8 mL/mbar], p = 0.198), higher ventilatory ratio (1.57 [1.31-1.84] vs. 0.91 [0.44-1.38], p = 0.006) and higher minute ventilation at the time of intubation (mean minute ventilation 10.7 L/min [7.2-12.2 L/min] for COVID-19 vs. 6.0 L/min [2.5-10.1 L/min] for Influenza, p = 0.013). There were no measurable differences in P/F ratio, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and driving pressures (ΔP). Respiratory system compliance deteriorated considerably in COVID-19 patients on ECMO during 2 weeks of mechanical ventilation (Crs, mean decrease over 2 weeks -23.87 mL/mbar ± 32.94 mL/mbar, p = 0.037) but not in ventilated Influenza patients on ECMO and less so in ventilated COVID-19 patients without ECMO. For COVID-19 patients, low driving pressures on ECMO were strongly correlated to a decline in compliance after 2 weeks (Pearson's R 0.80, p = 0.058). Overall mortality was insignificantly lower for COVID-19 patients compared to Influenza patients (40% vs. 48%, p = 0.31). Outcome was insignificantly worse for patients requiring veno-venous ECMO in both groups (50% mortality for COVID-19 on ECMO vs. 27% without ECMO, p = 0.30/56% vs. 34% mortality for Influenza A/B with and without ECMO, p = 0.31). Conclusion: The pathophysiology of early COVID-19-associated ARDS differs from Influenza-associated acute lung failure by sustained respiratory mechanics during the early phase of ventilation. We question whether intubated COVID-19 patients on ECMO benefit from extremely low driving pressures, as this appears to accelerate derecruitment and consecutive loss of ventilatory system compliance.
RESUMO
Pneumonia is a common cause of morbidity and mortality and is most often caused by bacterial pathogens. COVID-19 is characterized by lung infection with potential progressive organ failure. The systemic consequences of both disease on the systemic blood metabolome are not fully understood. The aim of this study was to compare the blood metabolome of both diseases and we hypothesize that plasma metabolomics may help to identify the systemic effects of these diseases. Therefore, we profiled the plasma metabolome of 43 cases of COVID-19 pneumonia, 23 cases of non-COVID-19 pneumonia, and 26 controls using a non-targeted approach. Metabolic alterations differentiating the three groups were detected, with specific metabolic changes distinguishing the two types of pneumonia groups. A comparison of venous and arterial blood plasma samples from the same subjects revealed the distinct metabolic effects of pulmonary pneumonia. In addition, a machine learning signature of four metabolites was predictive of the disease outcome of COVID-19 subjects with an area under the curve (AUC) of 86 ± 10 %. Overall, the results of this study uncover systemic metabolic changes that could be linked to the etiology of COVID-19 pneumonia and non-COVID-19 pneumonia.
RESUMO
As a consequence of the continued Covid-19 lockdown in Germany, in-hospital teaching for medical students was impossible. While lectures and other theoretical training were relatively easily converted into online sessions using platforms such as Moodle, Zoom and Microsoft Teams, this was not the case for practical skills and clinical interventions, such as bronchoscopy or colonoscopy. This study describes a workaround that was implemented at the Saarland University Hospital utilizing virtual reality equipment to convey the impressions of shadowing clinical procedures to the students without physical presence. To achieve this, 3D 180° videos of key clinical interventions of various internal medicine specialities were recorded, cut, and censored. The videos were uploaded to the e-learning YouTube channel of our institution and shared with the students via the private share function. The students could choose whether to use a VR-viewer to watch the videos immersively or to watch them without a viewer on a screen non-immersively. At the end of the course after 1 week, the students completed a questionnaire anonymously focusing on learning-success regarding the presented topics, a self-assessment, and an evaluation of the course. A total of 27 students watched the videos with a VR-Viewer and 74 watched non-immersively. Although the VR-viewer group self-assessed their expertise higher, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the learning-success test score. However, students in the VR-viewer group rated the learning atmosphere, comprehensibility, and overall recommendation of the course significantly higher. They also agreed significantly more to the statement, that they gained a better conception of the presented procedures, and that virtual reality might be an appropriate tool for online teaching. Video-assisted teaching facilitates learning and might be a valuable add-on to conventional teaching.Abbreviations: Covid-19: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; 3D: three-dimensional; 2D: Two-dimensional; VR: virtual reality.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Estudantes de Medicina , Realidade Virtual , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis , Alemanha , Hospitais , Humanos , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has drastically increased the number of patients requiring extracorporeal life support. We investigate the efficacy and safety of low-dose recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (rtPA) injection into exhausted oxygenators to delay exchange in critically ill COVID-19 patients on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO). Small doses of rtPA were injected directly into the draining section of a V-V ECMO circuit. We compared transmembrane pressure gradient, pump head efficiency, membrane arterial partial oxygen pressure, and membrane arterial partial carbon dioxide pressure before and after the procedure. Bleeding was compared with a matched control group of 20 COVID-19 patients on V-V ECMO receiving standard anticoagulation. Four patients received 16 oxygenator instillations with rtPA at 5, 10, or 20 mg per dose. Administration of rtPA significantly reduced transmembrane pressure gradient (Δ pm = 54.8 ± 18.1 mmHg before vs . 38.3 ± 13.3 mmHg after, p < 0.001) in a dose-dependent manner (Pearson's R -0.63, p = 0.023), allowing to delay oxygenator exchange, thus reducing the overall number of consumed oxygenators. rtPA increased blood flow efficiency η (1.20 ± 0.28 ml/revolution before vs . 1.24 ± 0.27 ml/r, p = 0.002). Lysis did not affect membrane blood gases or systemic coagulation. Minor bleeding occurred in 2 of 4 patients (50%) receiving oxygenator lysis as well as 19 of 20 control patients (95%). Lysis of ECMO oxygenators effectively delays oxygenator exchange, if exchange is indicated by an increase in transmembrane pressure gradient. Application of lysis did not result in higher bleeding incidences compared with anticoagulated patients on V-V ECMO for COVID-19.
Assuntos
Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Oxigenação por Membrana Extracorpórea , Oxigenadores de Membrana , Ativador de Plasminogênio Tecidual , Gasometria , Oxigenação por Membrana Extracorpórea/instrumentação , Oxigenação por Membrana Extracorpórea/métodos , Humanos , Ativador de Plasminogênio Tecidual/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Early prognostication of COVID-19 severity will potentially improve patient care. Biomarkers, such as TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL), interferon gamma-induced protein 10 (IP-10), and C-reactive protein (CRP), might represent possible tools for point-of-care testing and severity prediction. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, we analyzed serum levels of TRAIL, IP-10, and CRP in patients with COVID-19, compared them with control subjects, and investigated the association with disease severity. RESULTS: A total of 899 measurements were performed in 132 patients (mean age 64 years, 40.2% females). Among patients with COVID-19, TRAIL levels were lower (49.5 vs 87 pg/ml, P = 0.0142), whereas IP-10 and CRP showed higher levels (667.5 vs 127 pg/ml, P <0.001; 75.3 vs 1.6 mg/l, P <0.001) than healthy controls. TRAIL yielded an inverse correlation with length of hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, and National Early Warning Score, and IP-10 showed a positive correlation with disease severity. Multivariable regression revealed that obesity (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 5.434, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.005-29.38), CRP (aOR 1.014, 95% CI 1.002-1.027), and peak IP-10 (aOR 1.001, 95% CI 1.00-1.002) were independent predictors of in-ICU mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated a correlation between COVID-19 severity and TRAIL, IP-10, and CRP. Multivariable regression showed a role for IP-10 in predicting unfavourable outcomes, such as in-ICU mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04655521.
Assuntos
Proteína C-Reativa , COVID-19 , Proteína C-Reativa/metabolismo , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Quimiocina CXCL10 , Feminino , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Interferon gama , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Ligante Indutor de Apoptose Relacionado a TNFRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In 2020, a novel coronavirus caused a global pandemic with a clinical picture termed COVID-19, accounting for numerous cases of ARDS. However, there are still other infectious causes of ARDS that should be considered, especially as the majority of these pathogens are specifically treatable. Case Presentation. We present the case of a 36-year-old gentleman who was admitted to the hospital with flu-like symptoms, after completing a half-marathon one week before admission. As infection with SARS-CoV-2 was suspected based on radiologic imaging, the hypoxemic patient was immediately transferred to the ICU, where he developed ARDS. Empiric antimicrobial chemotherapy was initiated, the patient deteriorated further, therapy was changed, and the patient was transferred to a tertiary care ARDS center. As cold agglutinins were present, the hypothesis of an infection with SARS-CoV-2 was then questioned. Bronchoscopic sampling revealed Mycoplasma (M.) pneumoniae. When antimicrobial chemotherapy was adjusted, the patient recovered quickly. CONCLUSION: Usually, M. pneumoniae causes mild disease. When antimicrobial chemotherapy was adjusted, the patient recovered quickly. The case underlines the importance to adhere to established treatment guidelines, scrutinize treatment modalities, and not to forget other potential causes of severe pneumonia or ARDS.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Despite numerous advances in the identification of risk factors for the development of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), factors that promote recovery from COVID-19 remain unknown. Natural killer (NK) cells provide innate immune defense against viral infections and are known to be activated during moderate and severe COVID-19. Killer immunoglobulin-like receptors (KIR) mediate NK cell cytotoxicity through recognition of an altered MHC-I expression on infected target cells. However, the influence of KIR genotype on outcome of patients with COVID-19 has not been investigated so far. We retrospectively analyzed the outcome associations of NK cell count and KIR genotype of patients with COVID-19 related severe ARDS treated on our tertiary intensive care unit (ICU) between February and June 2020 and validated our findings in an independent validation cohort of patients with moderate COVID-19 admitted to our tertiary medical center. RESULTS: Median age of all patients in the discovery cohort (n = 16) was 61 years (range 50-71 years). All patients received invasive mechanical ventilation; 11 patients (68%) required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Patients who recovered from COVID-19 had significantly higher median NK cell counts during the whole observational period compared to patients who died (121 cells/µL, range 16-602 cells/µL vs 81 cells/µL, range 6-227 cells/µL, p-value = 0.01). KIR2DS5 positivity was significantly associated with shorter time to recovery (21.6 ± 2.8 days vs. 44.6 ± 2.2 days, p-value = 0.01). KIR2DS5 positivity was significantly associated with freedom from transfer to ICU (0% vs 9%, p-value = 0.04) in the validation cohort which consisted of 65 patients with moderate COVID-19. CONCLUSION: NK cells and KIR genotype might have an impact on recovery from COVID-19.
RESUMO
This correspondence argues that data presented previously cannot justify a novel approach for treating hypoxic patients with severe #COVID19 https://bit.ly/3dLaPlk.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 comprises several severity stages ranging from oligosymptomatic disease to multi-organ failure and fatal outcomes. The mechanisms why COVID-19 is a mild disease in some patients and progresses to a severe multi-organ and often fatal disease with respiratory failure are not known. Biomarkers that predict the course of disease are urgently needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate a large spectrum of established laboratory measurements. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients from the prospective PULMPOHOM and CORSAAR studies were recruited and comprised 35 patients with COVID-19, 23 with conventional pneumonia, and 28 control patients undergoing elective non-pulmonary surgery. Venous blood was used to measure the serum concentrations of 79 proteins by Luminex multiplex immunoassay technology. Distribution of biomarkers between groups and association with disease severity and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: The biomarker profiles between the three groups differed significantly with elevation of specific proteins specific for the respective conditions. Several biomarkers correlated significantly with disease severity and death. Uniform manifold approximation and projection (UMAP) analysis revealed a significant separation of the three disease groups and separated between survivors and deceased patients. Different models were developed to predict mortality based on the baseline measurements of several protein markers. A score combining IL-1ra, IL-8, IL-10, MCP-1, SCF and CA-9 was associated with significantly higher mortality (AUC 0.929). DISCUSSION: Several newly identified blood markers were significantly increased in patients with severe COVID-19 (AAT, EN-RAGE, myoglobin, SAP, TIMP-1, vWF, decorin) or in patients that died (IL-1ra, IL-8, IL-10, MCP-1, SCF, CA-9). The use of established assay technologies allows for rapid translation into clinical practice.