The Saudi Critical Care Society practice guidelines on the management of COVID-19 in the ICU: Therapy section

BACKGROUND: The rapid increase in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases during the subsequent waves in Saudi Arabia and other countries prompted the Saudi Critical Care Society (SCCS) to put together a panel of experts to issue evidence-based recommendations for the management of COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: The SCCS COVID-19 panel included 51 experts with expertise in critical care, respirology, infectious disease, epidemiology, emergency medicine, clinical pharmacy, nursing, respiratory therapy, methodology, and health policy. All members completed an electronic conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel addressed 9 questions that are related to the therapy of COVID-19 in the ICU. We identified relevant systematic reviews and clinical trials, then used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach as well as the evidence-to-decision framework (EtD) to assess the quality of evidence and generate recommendations. RESULTS: The SCCS COVID-19 panel issued 12 recommendations on pharmacotherapeutic interventions (immunomodulators, antiviral agents, and anticoagulants) for severe and critical COVID-19, of which 3 were strong recommendations and 9 were weak recommendations. CONCLUSION: The SCCS COVID-19 panel used the GRADE approach to formulate recommendations on therapy for COVID-19 in the ICU. The EtD framework allows adaptation of these recommendations in different contexts. The SCCS guideline committee will update recommendations as new evidence becomes available

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) coinfection: A unique case series

Introduction: The emergence of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coroanvirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had raised possibilities of coinfection with the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in countries were these two viruses were reported. In this study, we describe the clinical presentation and demographics of eight patients who were coinfected with SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. Materials and methods: This is a case series of hospitalized patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). We collected demographics, underlying conditions, presenting symptoms and clinical outcome from the patients’ medical records. Results: During the study period from March 14, 2020 to October 19, 2020, there was a total of 67 SARS-CoV-2 ICU admitted patients who underwent simultaneous SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV testing by PCR. Of those patients, 8 (12%) tested positive for both SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. There were 6 (75%) males, the mean age ± SD was 44.4 ± 11.8 years, and 7 (87.5%) were obese. Of the patients, 7 (87.5%) were non-smokers, 1 (12.5%) had diabetes mellitus, 1 (12.5%) had heart failure, and 1 (12.5%) had been on anti-platelet therapy. The mean hospital length of stay (LOS) was 21.1 ± 11.6 days and the average ICU LOS was 10.9 ± 6.03 days. All patients received supportive therapy and all were treated with corticosteroid. Of all the patients, 4 (50%) were discharged home and 3 (37.5%) died. Conclusion: This case series is an important addition to the medical knowledge as it showed the interaction of the coinfection of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV

Physicians’ Knowledge of Abdominal Compartment Syndrome and Intra-Abdominal Hypertension in Saudi Arabia: An Online Cross-Sectional Survey Study

Rayan Qutob,1,2 Alanoud Hassan A Alkhannani,1 Turki Yazeed Alassaf,1 Saad Othman Alhokail,1 Ghassan Abdullah Bagazi,1 Abdulmalak Abdullah Alsaleh,1 Mashael kamel alqarni,1 Yousef Alammari,1 Khalid Al Harbi,1 Alyaa Elhazmi,3 Abdullah Ibrahim Bukhari,1 Abdullah Alaryni,1 Abdullah Alghamdi,1 Osamah A Hakami1 1Faculty of Medicine, Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 2Adult Critical Care Department, Dr. Sulaiman Al-Habib Medical Group, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 3College of Medicine, AlFaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi ArabiaCorrespondence: Alanoud Hassan A Alkhannani, Faculty of Medicine, Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Tel +966 545436837, Email [email protected]: To determine physicians’ knowledge of abdominal compartment syndrome and intra-abdominal hypertension in Saudi Arabia.Methods: A cross-sectional online survey study was conducted on physicians in Saudi Arabia between March and August 2022. A previously developed questionnaire was adapted and used in this study. The survey instrument investigated the knowledge and management of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome among physicians. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of being knowledgeable about abdominal compartment syndrome and intra-abdominal hypertension.Results: A total of 266 physicians participated in this study. Around one-fifth (21.8%) the study participants were ICU physicians and 25.0% reported that they practice internal medicine. Intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) and the impact of increased intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) on organ function were terms that the majority of research participants (70.3%) reported they were familiar with. A similar percentage (73.7%) reported that they are familiar with abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). Around 43.0% of the study participants reported that they do not know how to measure IAP. The most frequently reported (13.5%) intervention in the treatment of IAH and ACS was the use of inotropes or vasopressors. The study participants showed a weak level of knowledge of ACS and IAH with a median score of 3.00 (IQR: 5.00– 2.00), which represents 27.3% of the maximum attainable score. Physicians working at hospitals with 20– 50 ICU beds were 41.0% (odds ratio: 0.59 (CI: 0.37– 0.96)) less likely to be knowledgeable about intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome (p≤ 0.05).Conclusion: Physicians demonstrated a low level of IAP and ACS knowledge. To increase the safety of medical practices and enhance clinical outcomes for patients, awareness should be raised about the proper diagnosis and management of IAP and ACS. Future research should focus on developing effective educational strategies to improve physicians’ understanding of IAP and ACS.Keywords: abdominal compartment syndrome, intra-abdominal hypertension, intra-abdominal pressure, knowledge, physicians, Saudi Arabi

Examining the Clinical Prognosis of Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19 Admitted to Intensive Care Units: A Nationwide Saudi Study

Backgroundand Objectives: COVID-19 is a novel infectious disease caused by a single-stranded RNA coronavirus called severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We aimed to conduct a nationwide multicenter study to determine the characteristics and the clinical prognostic outcome of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Materials and Methods: This is a nationwide cohort retrospective study conducted in twenty Saudi hospitals. Results: An analysis of 1470 critically ill COVID-19 patients demonstrated that the majority of patients were male with a mean age of 55.9 ± 15.1 years. Most of our patients presented with a shortness of breath (SOB) (81.3%), followed by a fever (73.7%) and a cough (65.1%). Diabetes and hypertension were the most common comorbidities in the study (52.4% and 46.0%, respectively). Multiple complications were observed substantially more among non-survivors. The length and frequency of mechanical ventilation use were significantly greater (83%) in the non-survivors compared with the survivors (31%). The mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was 6 ± 5. The overall mortality rate of the cohort associated with patients that had diabetes, hypertension and ischemic heart disease was 41.8%. Conclusion: Age; a pre-existing medical history of hypertension, diabetes and ischemic heart disease; smoking cigarettes; a BMI ≥ 29; a long mechanical ventilation and ICU stay; the need of ventilatory support; a high SOFA score; fungal co-infections and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use were key clinical characteristics that predicted a high mortality in our population

Implementation of new ECMO centers during the COVID-19 pandemic: experience and results from the Middle East and India

Purpose: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients has increased during the course of the pandemic. As uncertainty existed regarding patient’s outcomes, early guidelines recommended against establishing new ECMO centers. We aimed to explore the epidemiology and outcomes of ECMO for COVID-19 related cardiopulmonary failure in five countries in the Middle East and India and to evaluate the results of ECMO in 5 new centers. Methods: This is a retrospective, multicenter international, observational study conducted in 19 ECMO centers in five countries in the Middle East and India from March 1, 2020, to September 30, 2020. We included patients with COVID-19 who received ECMO for refractory hypoxemia and severe respiratory acidosis with or without circulatory failure. Data collection included demographic data, ECMO-related specific data, pre-ECMO patient condition, 24 h post-ECMO initiation data, and outcome. The primary outcome was survival to home discharge. Secondary outcomes included mortality during ECMO, survival to decannulation, and outcomes stratified by center type. Results: Three hundred and seven COVID-19 patients received ECMO support during the study period, of whom 78 (25%) were treated in the new ECMO centers. The median age was 45 years (interquartile range IQR 37–52), and 81% were men. New center patients were younger, were less frequently male, had received higher PEEP, more frequently inotropes and prone positioning before ECMO and were less frequently retrieved from a peripheral center on ECMO. Survival to home discharge was 45%. In patients treated in new and established centers, survival was 55 and 41% (p = 0.03), respectively. Multivariable analysis retained only a SOFA score < 12 at ECMO initiation as associated with survival (odds ratio, OR 1.93 (95% CI 1.05–3.58), p = 0.034), but not treatment in a new center (OR 1.65 (95% CI 0.75–3.67)). Conclusions: During pandemics, ECMO may provide favorable outcomes in highly selected patients as resources allow. Newly formed ECMO centers with appropriate supervision of regional experts may have satisfactory results.</p

An appraisal of respiratory system compliance in mechanically ventilated covid-19 patients

Background Heterogeneous respiratory system static compliance (CRS) values and levels of hypoxemia in patients with novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) requiring mechanical ventilation have been reported in previous small-case series or studies conducted at a national level. Methods We designed a retrospective observational cohort study with rapid data gathering from the international COVID-19 Critical Care Consortium study to comprehensively describe CRS—calculated as: tidal volume/[airway plateau pressure-positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP)]—and its association with ventilatory management and outcomes of COVID-19 patients on mechanical ventilation (MV), admitted to intensive care units (ICU) worldwide. Results We studied 745 patients from 22 countries, who required admission to the ICU and MV from January 14 to December 31, 2020, and presented at least one value of CRS within the first seven days of MV. Median (IQR) age was 62 (52–71), patients were predominantly males (68%) and from Europe/North and South America (88%). CRS, within 48 h from endotracheal intubation, was available in 649 patients and was neither associated with the duration from onset of symptoms to commencement of MV (p = 0.417) nor with PaO2/FiO2 (p = 0.100). Females presented lower CRS than males (95% CI of CRS difference between females-males: − 11.8 to − 7.4 mL/cmH2O p < 0.001), and although females presented higher body mass index (BMI), association of BMI with CRS was marginal (p = 0.139). Ventilatory management varied across CRS range, resulting in a significant association between CRS and driving pressure (estimated decrease − 0.31 cmH2O/L per mL/cmH20 of CRS, 95% CI − 0.48 to − 0.14, p < 0.001). Overall, 28-day ICU mortality, accounting for the competing risk of being discharged within the period, was 35.6% (SE 1.7). Cox proportional hazard analysis demonstrated that CRS (+ 10 mL/cm H2O) was only associated with being discharge from the ICU within 28 days (HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02–1.28, p = 0.018). Conclusions This multicentre report provides a comprehensive account of CRS in COVID-19 patients on MV. CRS measured within 48 h from commencement of MV has marginal predictive value for 28-day mortality, but was associated with being discharged from ICU within the same period. Trial documentation: Available at https://www.covid-critical.com/study. Trial registration: ACTRN12620000421932

Assessment of 28-day in-hospital mortality in mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019: an international cohort study

IMPORTANCE: Factors associated with mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 patients on invasive mechanical ventilation are still not fully elucidated. OBJECTIVES: To identify patient-level parameters, readily available at the bedside, associated with the risk of in-hospital mortality within 28 days from commencement of invasive mechanical ventilation or coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective observational cohort study by the global Coronavirus Disease 2019 Critical Care Consortium. Patients with laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation from February 2, 2020, to May 15, 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Patient characteristics and clinical data were assessed upon ICU admission, the commencement of invasive mechanical ventilation and for 28 days thereafter. We primarily aimed to identify time-independent and time-dependent risk factors for 28-day invasive mechanical ventilation mortality. RESULTS: One-thousand five-hundred eighty-seven patients were included in the survival analysis; 588 patients died in hospital within 28 days of commencing invasive mechanical ventilation (37%). Cox-regression analysis identified associations between the hazard of 28-day invasive mechanical ventilation mortality with age (hazard ratio, 1.26 per 10-yr increase in age; 95% CI, 1.16–1.37; p < 0.001), positive end-expiratory pressure upon commencement of invasive mechanical ventilation (hazard ratio, 0.81 per 5 cm H2O increase; 95% CI, 0.67–0.97; p = 0.02). Time-dependent parameters associated with 28-day invasive mechanical ventilation mortality were serum creatinine (hazard ratio, 1.28 per doubling; 95% CI, 1.15–1.41; p < 0.001), lactate (hazard ratio, 1.22 per doubling; 95% CI, 1.11–1.34; p < 0.001), Paco2 (hazard ratio, 1.63 per doubling; 95% CI, 1.19–2.25; p < 0.001), pH (hazard ratio, 0.89 per 0.1 increase; 95% CI, 0.8–14; p = 0.041), Pao2/Fio2 (hazard ratio, 0.58 per doubling; 95% CI, 0.52–0.66; p < 0.001), and mean arterial pressure (hazard ratio, 0.92 per 10 mm Hg increase; 95% CI, 0.88–0.97; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This international study suggests that in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 on invasive mechanical ventilation, older age and clinically relevant variables monitored at baseline or sequentially during the course of invasive mechanical ventilation are associated with 28-day invasive mechanical ventilation mortality hazard. Further investigation is warranted to validate any causative roles these parameters might play in influencing clinical outcomes