Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome associated with COVID-19: An Emulated Target Trial Analysis.

RATIONALE: Whether COVID patients may benefit from extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) compared with conventional invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the effect of ECMO on 90-Day mortality vs IMV only Methods: Among 4,244 critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 included in a multicenter cohort study, we emulated a target trial comparing the treatment strategies of initiating ECMO vs. no ECMO within 7 days of IMV in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (PaO2/FiO2 <80 or PaCO2 ≥60 mmHg). We controlled for confounding using a multivariable Cox model based on predefined variables. MAIN RESULTS: 1,235 patients met the full eligibility criteria for the emulated trial, among whom 164 patients initiated ECMO. The ECMO strategy had a higher survival probability at Day-7 from the onset of eligibility criteria (87% vs 83%, risk difference: 4%, 95% CI 0;9%) which decreased during follow-up (survival at Day-90: 63% vs 65%, risk difference: -2%, 95% CI -10;5%). However, ECMO was associated with higher survival when performed in high-volume ECMO centers or in regions where a specific ECMO network organization was set up to handle high demand, and when initiated within the first 4 days of MV and in profoundly hypoxemic patients. CONCLUSIONS: In an emulated trial based on a nationwide COVID-19 cohort, we found differential survival over time of an ECMO compared with a no-ECMO strategy. However, ECMO was consistently associated with better outcomes when performed in high-volume centers and in regions with ECMO capacities specifically organized to handle high demand. This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Association of Early Norepinephrine Administration With 24-Hour Mortality Among Patients With Blunt Trauma and Hemorrhagic Shock

International audienceImportance Hemorrhagic shock is a common cause of preventable death after injury. Vasopressor administration for patients with blunt trauma and hemorrhagic shock is often discouraged. Objective To evaluate the association of early norepinephrine administration with 24-hour mortality among patients with blunt trauma and hemorrhagic shock. Design, Setting, and Participants This retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study used data from 3 registries in the US and France on all consecutive patients with blunt trauma from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2018. Patients were alive on admission with hemorrhagic shock, defined by prehospital or admission systolic blood pressure less than 100 mm Hg and evidence of hemorrhage (ie, prehospital or resuscitation room transfusion of packed red blood cells, receipt of emergency treatment for hemorrhage control, transfusion of &amp;gt;10 units of packed red blood cells in the first 24 hours, or death from hemorrhage). Blunt trauma was defined as any exposure to nonpenetrating kinetic energy, collision, or deceleration. Statistical analysis was performed from January 15, 2021, to February 22, 2022. Exposure Continuous administration of norepinephrine in the prehospital environment or resuscitation room prior to hemorrhage control, according to European guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was 24-hour mortality, and the secondary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The average treatment effect (ATE) of early norepinephrine administration on 24-hour mortality was estimated according to the Rubin causal model. Inverse propensity score weighting and the doubly robust approach with 5 distinct analytical strategies were used to determine the ATE. Results A total of 52 568 patients were screened for inclusion, and 2164 patients (1508 men [70%]; mean [SD] age, 46 [19] years; median Injury Severity Score, 29 [IQR, 17-36]) presented with acute hemorrhage and were included. A total of 1497 patients (69.1%) required emergency hemorrhage control, 128 (5.9%) received a prehospital transfusion of packed red blood cells, and 543 (25.0%) received a massive transfusion. Norepinephrine was administered to 1498 patients (69.2%). The 24-hour mortality rate was 17.8% (385 of 2164), and the in-hospital mortality rate was 35.6% (770 of 2164). None of the 5 analytical strategies suggested any statistically significant association between norepinephrine administration and 24-hour mortality, with ATEs ranging from –4.6 (95% CI, –11.9 to 2.7) to 2.1 (95% CI, –2.1 to 6.3), or between norepinephrine administration and in-hospital mortality, with ATEs ranging from –1.3 (95% CI, –9.5 to 6.9) to 5.3 (95% CI, –2.1 to 12.8). Conclusions and Relevance The findings of this study suggest that early norepinephrine infusion was not associated with 24-hour or in-hospital mortality among patients with blunt trauma and hemorrhagic shock. Randomized clinical trials that study the effect of early norepinephrine administration among patients with trauma and hypotension are warranted to further assess whether norepinephrine is safe for patients with hemorrhagic shock

Healthcare-associated infections in patients with severe COVID-19 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a nationwide cohort study

International audienceBackground Both critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support exhibit a high incidence of healthcare-associated infections (HAI). However, data on incidence, microbiology, resistance patterns, and the impact of HAI on outcomes in patients receiving ECMO for severe COVID-19 remain limited. We aimed to report HAI incidence and microbiology in patients receiving ECMO for severe COVID-19 and to evaluate the impact of ECMO-associated infections (ECMO-AI) on in-hospital mortality. Methods For this study, we analyzed data from 701 patients included in the ECMOSARS registry which included COVID-19 patients supported by ECMO in France. Results Among 602 analyzed patients for whom HAI and hospital mortality data were available, 214 (36%) had ECMO-AI, resulting in an incidence rate of 27 ECMO-AI per 1000 ECMO days at risk. Of these, 154 patients had bloodstream infection (BSI) and 117 patients had ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). The responsible microorganisms were Enterobacteriaceae (34% for BSI and 48% for VAP), Enterococcus species (25% and 6%, respectively) and non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli (13% and 20%, respectively). Fungal infections were also observed (10% for BSI and 3% for VAP), as were multidrug-resistant organisms (21% and 15%, respectively). Using a Cox multistate model, ECMO-AI were not found associated with hospital death (HR = 1.00 95% CI [0.79–1.26], p = 0.986). Conclusions In a nationwide cohort of COVID-19 patients receiving ECMO support, we observed a high incidence of ECMO-AI. ECMO-AI were not found associated with hospital death. Trial registration number NCT04397588 (May 21, 2020)

Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Circulatory Failure in COVID-19 Patients: Insights from the ECMOSARS Registry

International audienceObjectives: The clinical profile and outcomes of patients with Covid-19 who require veno-arterial or veno-venous-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO - VAV-ECMO) are poorly understood. We aimed to describe the characteristics and outcomes of these patients and to identify predictors of both favorable and unfavorable outcomes.Methods: ECMOSARS is a multicenter, prospective, nationwide French registry enrolling patients who require VV/VA-ECMO in the context of Covid-19 infection (652 patients at 41 centers). We focused on 47 patients supported with VA- or VAV-ECMO for refractory cardiogenic shock.Results: Median age was 49. 14% of patients had a prior diagnosis of heart failure. The most common etiologies of cardiogenic shock were acute pulmonary embolism (30%), myocarditis (28%), and acute coronary syndrome (4%). E-CPR (Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) occurred in 38%. In-hospital survival was 28% in the whole cohort, and 43% when E-CPR patients were excluded. ECMO cannulation was associated with significant improvements in pH and FiO2 on day one, but non-survivors showed significantly more severe acidosis and higher FiO2 than survivors at this point (p = 0.030 and p = 0.006). Other factors associated with death were greater age (p = 0.02), higher BMI (p = 0.03), E-CPR (p = 0.001), non-myocarditis etiology (p = 0.02), higher serum lactates (p = 0.004), epinephrine (but not noradrenaline) use before initiation of ECMO (p = 0.003), hemorrhagic complications (p = 0.001), greater transfusion requirements (p = 0.001), and more severe SAVE and SAFE scores (p = 0.01 and p = 0.03).Conclusions: We report the largest focused analysis of VA- and VAV-ECMO recipients in Covid-19. Although relatively rare, the need for temporary mechanical circulatory support in these patients is associated with poor prognosis. However, VA-ECMO remains a viable solution to rescue carefully selected patients. We identified factors associated with poor prognosis and suggest that E-CPR is not a reasonable indication for VA-ECMO in this population

Bleeding and thrombotic events in patients with severe COVID-19 supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a nationwide cohort study

International audiencePurpose: To describe bleeding and thrombotic events and their risk factors in patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to evaluate their impact on in-hospital mortality.Methods: The ECMOSARS registry included COVID-19 patients supported by ECMO in France. We analyzed all patients included up to March 31, 2022 without missing data regarding bleeding and thrombotic events. The association of bleeding and thrombotic events with in-hospital mortality and pre-ECMO variables was assessed using multivariable logistic regression models.Results: Among 620 patients supported by ECMO, 29% had only bleeding events, 16% only thrombotic events and 20% both bleeding and thrombosis. Cannulation site (18% of patients), ear nose and throat (12%), pulmonary bleeding (9%) and intracranial hemorrhage (8%) were the most frequent bleeding types. Device-related thrombosis and pulmonary embolism/thrombosis accounted for most of thrombotic events. In-hospital mortality was 55.7%. Bleeding events were associated with in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio (adjOR) = 2.91[1.94-4.4]) but not thrombotic events (adjOR = 1.02[0.68-1.53]). Intracranial hemorrhage was strongly associated with in-hospital mortality (adjOR = 13.5[4.4-41.5]). Ventilation duration before ECMO ≥ 7 days and length of ECMO support were associated with bleeding. Thrombosis-associated factors were fibrinogen ≥ 6 g/L and length of ECMO support.Conclusions: In a nationwide cohort of COVID-19 patients supported by ECMO, bleeding incidence was high and associated with mortality. Intracranial hemorrhage incidence was higher than reported for non-COVID patients and carried the highest risk of death. Thrombotic events were less frequent and not associated with mortality. Length of ECMO support was associated with a higher risk of both bleeding and thrombosis, supporting the development of strategies to minimize ECMO duration

Characteristics, management, and prognosis of elderly patients with COVID-19 admitted in the ICU during the first wave: insights from the COVID-ICU study

International audienceBackground: The COVID-19 pandemic is a heavy burden in terms of health care resources. Future decision-making policies require consistent data on the management and prognosis of the older patients (&gt; 70 years old) with COVID-19 admitted in the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: Characteristics, management, and prognosis of critically ill old patients (&gt; 70 years) were extracted from the international prospective COVID-ICU database. A propensity score weighted-comparison evaluated the impact of intubation upon admission on Day-90 mortality. Results: The analysis included 1199 (28% of the COVID-ICU cohort) patients (median [interquartile] age 74 [72–78] years). Fifty-three percent, 31%, and 16% were 70–74, 75–79, and over 80 years old, respectively. The most frequent comorbidities were chronic hypertension (62%), diabetes (30%), and chronic respiratory disease (25%). Median Clinical Frailty Scale was 3 (2–3). Upon admission, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio was 154 (105–222). 740 (62%) patients were intubated on Day-1 and eventually 938 (78%) during their ICU stay. Overall Day-90 mortality was 46% and reached 67% among the 193 patients over 80 years old. Mortality was higher in older patients, diabetics, and those with a lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio upon admission, cardiovascular dysfunction, and a shorter time between first symptoms and ICU admission. In propensity analysis, early intubation at ICU admission was associated with a significantly higher Day-90 mortality (42% vs 28%; hazard ratio 1.68; 95% CI 1.24–2.27; p &lt; 0·001). Conclusion: Patients over 70 years old represented more than a quarter of the COVID-19 population admitted in the participating ICUs during the first wave. Day-90 mortality was 46%, with dismal outcomes reported for patients older than 80 years or those intubated upon ICU admission

Correction to: Characteristics and prognosis of bloodstream infection in patients with COVID‑19 admitted in the ICU: an ancillary study of the COVID‑ICU study

International audienc

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Associated with COVID-19: An Emulated Target Trial Analysis

International audienc

Benefits and risks of noninvasive oxygenation strategy in COVID-19: a multicenter, prospective cohort study (COVID-ICU) in 137 hospitals

International audienceAbstract Rational To evaluate the respective impact of standard oxygen, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) on oxygenation failure rate and mortality in COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Methods Multicenter, prospective cohort study (COVID-ICU) in 137 hospitals in France, Belgium, and Switzerland. Demographic, clinical, respiratory support, oxygenation failure, and survival data were collected. Oxygenation failure was defined as either intubation or death in the ICU without intubation. Variables independently associated with oxygenation failure and Day-90 mortality were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. Results From February 25 to May 4, 2020, 4754 patients were admitted in ICU. Of these, 1491 patients were not intubated on the day of ICU admission and received standard oxygen therapy (51%), HFNC (38%), or NIV (11%) ( P < 0.001). Oxygenation failure occurred in 739 (50%) patients (678 intubation and 61 death). For standard oxygen, HFNC, and NIV, oxygenation failure rate was 49%, 48%, and 60% ( P < 0.001). By multivariate analysis, HFNC (odds ratio [OR] 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36–0.99, P = 0.013) but not NIV (OR 1.57, 95% CI 0.78–3.21) was associated with a reduction in oxygenation failure). Overall 90-day mortality was 21%. By multivariable analysis, HFNC was not associated with a change in mortality (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.61–1.33), while NIV was associated with increased mortality (OR 2.75, 95% CI 1.79–4.21, P < 0.001). Conclusion In patients with COVID-19, HFNC was associated with a reduction in oxygenation failure without improvement in 90-day mortality, whereas NIV was associated with a higher mortality in these patients. Randomized controlled trials are needed

Predicting 90-day survival of patients with COVID-19: Survival of Severely Ill COVID (SOSIC) scores

International audienceBackground Predicting outcomes of critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients with coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19) is a major challenge to avoid futile, and prolonged ICU stays. Methods The objective was to develop predictive survival models for patients with COVID-19 after 1-to-2 weeks in ICU. Based on the COVID–ICU cohort, which prospectively collected characteristics, management, and outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19. Machine learning was used to develop dynamic, clinically useful models able to predict 90-day mortality using ICU data collected on day (D) 1, D7 or D14. Results Survival of Severely Ill COVID (SOSIC)-1, SOSIC-7, and SOSIC-14 scores were constructed with 4244, 2877, and 1349 patients, respectively, randomly assigned to development or test datasets. The three models selected 15 ICU-entry variables recorded on D1, D7, or D14. Cardiovascular, renal, and pulmonary functions on prediction D7 or D14 were among the most heavily weighted inputs for both models. For the test dataset, SOSIC-7’s area under the ROC curve was slightly higher (0.80 [0.74–0.86]) than those for SOSIC-1 (0.76 [0.71–0.81]) and SOSIC-14 (0.76 [0.68–0.83]). Similarly, SOSIC-1 and SOSIC-7 had excellent calibration curves, with similar Brier scores for the three models. Conclusion The SOSIC scores showed that entering 15 to 27 baseline and dynamic clinical parameters into an automatable XGBoost algorithm can potentially accurately predict the likely 90-day mortality post-ICU admission (sosic.shinyapps.io/shiny). Although external SOSIC-score validation is still needed, it is an additional tool to strengthen decisions about life-sustaining treatments and informing family members of likely prognosis