Inhaled antibiotics during mechanical ventilation—why it will work

International audienc

Avdoralimab (Anti-C5aR1 mAb) Versus Placebo in Patients With Severe COVID-19: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial (FOR COVID Elimination [FORCE])*

International audienceOBJECTIVES: Severe COVID-19 is associated with exaggerated complement activation. We assessed the efficacy and safety of avdoralimab (an anti-C5aR1 mAb) in severe COVID-19. DESIGN: FOR COVID Elimination (FORCE) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. SETTING: Twelve clinical sites in France (ICU and general hospitals). PATIENTS: Patients receiving greater than or equal to 5 L oxygen/min to maintain Spo 2 greater than 93% (World Health Organization scale ≥ 5). Patients received conventional oxygen therapy or high-flow oxygen (HFO)/noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in cohort 1; HFO, NIV, or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in cohort 2; and IMV in cohort 3. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive avdoralimab or placebo. The primary outcome was clinical status on the World Health Organization ordinal scale at days 14 and 28 for cohorts 1 and 3, and the number of ventilator-free days at day 28 (VFD28) for cohort 2. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We randomized 207 patients: 99 in cohort 1, 49 in cohort 2, and 59 in cohort 3. During hospitalization, 95% of patients received glucocorticoids. Avdoralimab did not improve World Health Organization clinical scale score on days 14 and 28 (between-group difference on day 28 of-0.26 (95% CI,-1.2 to 0.7; p = 0.7) in cohort 1 and-0.28 (95% CI,-1.8 to 1.2; p = 0.6) in cohort 3). Avdoralimab did not improve VFD28 in cohort 2 (between-group difference of-6.3 (95% CI,-13.2 to 0.7; p = 0.96) or secondary outcomes in any cohort. No subgroup of interest was identified. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia, avdoralimab did not significantly improve clinical status at days 14 and 28 (funded by Innate Pharma, ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04371367)

Management of renal replacement therapy among adults in French intensive care units: A bedside practice evaluation

International audienceBackgroundThis study aimed to investigate renal replacement therapy (RRT) practices in a representative nationwide sample of French intensive care units (ICUs).MethodsFrom July 1 to October 5 2021, 67 French ICUs provided data regarding their ICU and RRT implementation. We used an online questionnaire to record general data about each participating ICU, including the type of hospital, number of beds, staff ratios, and RRT implementation. Each center then prospectively recorded RRT parameters from 5 consecutive acute kidney injury (AKI) patients, namely the indication, type of dialysis catheter used, type of catheter lock used, type of RRT (continuous or intermittent), the RRT parameters initially prescribed (dose, blood flow, and duration), and the anticoagulant agent used for the circuit.ResultsA total of 303 patients from 67 ICUs were analyzed. Main indications for RRT were oligo-anuria (57.4%), metabolic acidosis (52.1%), and increased plasma urea levels (47.9%). The commonest insertion site was the right internal jugular (45.2%). In 71.0% of cases, the dialysis catheter was inserted by a resident. Ultrasound guidance was used in 97.0% and isovolumic connection in 90.1%. Citrate, unfractionated heparin, and saline were used as catheter locks in 46.9%, 24.1%, and 21.1% of cases, respectively.ConclusionsPractices in French ICUs are largely compliant with current national guidelines and international literature. The findings should be interpreted in light of the limitations inherent to this type of study