Poisoning-related cardiac arrest: Why prognosis should be better?

International audienc

Factors associated with prolonged intensive care stay among self-poisoned patients

International audienc

Impact of Early Limitation of Therapeutic Effort in Elderly COVID-19 Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit—A Cohort Study

International audience(1) Background: Admission to the ICU and intensity of care provided to elderly COVID-19 patients are difficult choices guided by the expected patient-centered benefits. However, the impact of an early discussion of limitation of therapeutic effort (LTE) has been poorly investigated. (2) Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study including all ≥70-year-old COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. Factors associated with early LTE discussion (defined as before or up to 2 days post-ICU admission) and in-hospital mortality were evaluated. (3) Results: Eighty-two patients (59 M/23 F; 78 years (74–82) [median (interquartile range)]; 43/82 with LTE) were included. The in-hospital mortality rate was 55%. Early LTE was decided upon for 22/82 patients (27%), more frequently in older (p < 0.001) and frailer patients (p = 0.004). Using a multivariable logistic regression model including clinical frailty scale grade ≥4, hospital acquisition of COVID-19, ventilation support modality and SOFA score on admission, early LTE was not associated with mortality (adjusted odds ratio = 0.57 (0.15–2.00), p = 0.39). LTE resulted in less frequent invasive mechanical ventilation (23% versus 65%, p = 0.001), renal replacement therapy (5% versus 27%, p = 0.03) and norepinephrine infusion (23% versus 60%, p = 0.005), and shorter ICU stay (6 days (2–12) versus 14 days (7–24), p = 0.001). (4) Conclusions: In this small sample exploratory study, we were unable to demonstrate any increase in in-hospital mortality associated with early LTE discussion in elderly COVID-19 patients while reducing the use of organ support techniques. These findings require confirmation in larger studies

Dismal Survival in COVID-19 Patients Requiring ECMO as Rescue Therapy after Corticosteroid Failure

International audience(1) Background: COVID-19 may lead to refractory hypoxemia requiring venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Survival rate if ECMO is implemented as rescue therapy after corticosteroid failure is unknown. We aimed to investigate if ECMO implemented after failure of the full-recommended 10-day corticosteroid course can improve outcome. (2) Methods: We conducted a three-center cohort study including consecutive dexamethasone-treated COVID-19 patients requiring ECMO between 03/2020 and 05/2021. We compared survival at hospital discharge between patients implemented after (ECMO-after group) and before the end of the 10-day dexamethasone course (ECMO-before group). (3) Results: Forty patients (28M/12F; age, 57 years (51–62) (median (25th–75th percentiles)) were included, 28 (70%) in the ECMO-before and 12 (30%) in the ECMO-after group. In the ECMO-before group, 9/28 patients (32%) received the 6 mg/day dexamethasone regimen versus 12/12 (100%) in the ECMO-after group (p < 0.0001). The rest of the patients received an alternative dexamethasone regimen consisting of 20 mg/day during 5 days followed by 10 mg/day during 5 days. Patients in the ECMO-before group tended to be younger (57 years (51–59) versus 62 years (57–67), p = 0.053). In the ECMO-after group, no patient (0%) survived while 12 patients (43%) survived in the ECMO-before group (p = 0.007). (4) Conclusions: Survival is poor in COVID-19 patients requiring ECMO implemented after the full-recommended 10-day dexamethasone course. Since these patients may have developed a particularly severe presentation, new therapeutic strategies are urgently required

Outcome of Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients According to the Setting of Corticosteroid Initiation—A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study

International audience(1) Background: Corticosteroids lower 28-day all-cause mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients. However, the outcome of COVID-19 patients referred to the intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory deterioration despite corticosteroids initiated during hospitalization before ICU admission has been poorly investigated. Our objective was to determine survival according to corticosteroid initiation setting. (2) Methods: We conducted a cohort study including all successive critically ill COVID-19 patients treated with corticosteroids and managed in our ICU. We compared survival, whether corticosteroids were initiated before (Cb-group) or after ICU admission (Ca-group), using a propensity score matching. (3) Results: Overall, 228 patients (67 years (56–74); 168M/60F; invasive mechanical ventilation on admission, 17%) were included with 63 patients in the Cb-group and 165 patients in the Ca-group. Survival to hospital discharge was 43% versus 69%, respectively (p = 0.001). In a multivariable analysis, factors associated with death were age (odds ratio, 1.07; 95%-confidence interval, (1.04–1.11); p < 0.0001), the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score on ICU admission (1.30 (1.14–1.50); p = 0.0001) and corticosteroid initiation before ICU admission (2.64 (1.30–5.43); p = 0.007). No significant differences in outcome related to corticosteroid regimen were found. (4) Conclusions: Critically ill COVID-19 patients transferred to the ICU with deterioration despite corticosteroids initiated before admission have a less favorable outcome than patients receiving corticosteroids initiated after ICU admission

Association between Leflunomide and Pulmonary Hypertension

International audienceRationale: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) has been described in patients treated with leflunomide. Objectives: To assess the association between leflunomide and PH. Methods: We identified incident cases of PH in patients treated with leflunomide from the French PH Registry and through the pharmacoVIGIlAnce in Pulmonary ArTerial Hypertension (VIGIAPATH) program between September 1999 to December 2019. PH etiology, clinical, functional, radiologic, and hemodynamic characteristics were reviewed at baseline and follow-up. A pharmacovigilance disproportionality analysis using the World Health Organization's global database was conducted. We then investigated the effect of leflunomide on human pulmonary endothelial cells. Data are expressed as median (min-max). Results: Twenty-eight patients treated with leflunomide before PH diagnosis was identified. A total of 21 (75%) had another risk factor for PH and 2 had two risk factors. The median time between leflunomide initiation and PH diagnosis was 32 months (1-120). Right heart catheterization confirmed precapillary PH with a cardiac index of 2.37 L⋅min-1 ⋅m-2 (1.19-3.1) and elevated pulmonary vascular resistance at 9.63 Wood Units (3.6-22.1) without nitric oxide reversibility. Five patients (17.9%) had no other risk factor for PH besides exposure to leflunomide. No significant hemodynamic improvement was observed after leflunomide withdrawal. The pharmacovigilance disproportionality analysis using the World Health Organization's database revealed a significant overrepresentation of leflunomide among reported pulmonary arterial hypertension-adverse drug reactions. In vitro studies showed the dose-dependent toxicity of leflunomide on human pulmonary endothelial cells. Conclusions: PH associated with leflunomide is rare and usually associated with other risk factors. The pharmacovigilance analysis suggests an association reinforced by experimental data

Effects of Standard-Dose Prophylactic, High-Dose Prophylactic, and Therapeutic Anticoagulation in Patients With Hypoxemic COVID-19 Pneumonia The ANTICOVID Randomized Clinical Trial

International audienceIMPORTANCE Given the high risk of thrombosis and anticoagulation-related bleeding in patients with hypoxemic COVID-19 pneumonia, identifying the lowest effective dose of anticoagulation therapy for these patients is imperative. OBJECTIVES To determine whether therapeutic anticoagulation (TA) or high-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (HD-PA) decreases mortality and/or disease duration compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (SD-PA), and whether TA outperforms HD-PA; and to compare the net clinical outcomes among the 3 strategies. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS The ANTICOVID randomized clinical open-label trial included patients with hypoxemic COVID-19 pneumonia requiring supplemental oxygen and having no initial thrombosis on chest computer tomography with pulmonary angiogram at 23 health centers in France from April 14 to December 13, 2021. Of 339 patients randomized, 334 were included in the primary analysis-114 patients in the SD-PA group, 110 in the HD-PA, and 110 in the TA. At randomization, 90% of the patients were in the intensive care unit. Data analyses were performed from April 13, 2022, to January 3, 2023. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive either SD-PA, HD-PA, or TA with low-molecular-weight or unfractionated heparin for 14 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES A hierarchical criterion of all-cause mortality followed by time to clinical improvement at day 28. Main secondary outcome was net clinical outcome at day 28 (composite of thrombosis, major bleeding, and all-cause death). RESULTS Among the study population of 334 individuals (mean [SD] age, 58.3 [13.0] years; 226 [67.7%] men and 108 [32.3%] women), use of HD-PA and SD-PA had similar probabilities of favorable outcome (47.3% [95%CI, 39.9% to 54.8%] vs 52.7%[95%CI, 45.2%to 60.1%]; P = .48), as did TA compared with SD-PA (50.9% [95%CI, 43.4%to 58.3%] vs 49.1% [95%CI, 41.7%to 56.6%]; P = .82) and TA compared with HD-PA (53.5%[95%CI 45.8% to 60.9%] vs 46.5% [95%CI, 39.1% to 54.2%]; P = .37). Net clinical outcome was met in 29.8% of patients receiving SD-PA (20.2%thrombosis, 2.6%bleeding, 14.0% death), 16.4% receiving HD-PA (5.5%thrombosis, 3.6%bleeding, 11.8%death), and 20.0% receiving TA (5.5% thrombosis, 3.6% bleeding, 12.7%death). Moreover, HD-PA and TA use significantly reduced thrombosis compared with SD-PA (absolute difference, -14.7 [95%CI -6.2 to -23.2] and -14.7 [95%CI -6.2 to -23.2], respectively). Use of HD-PA significantly reduced net clinical outcome compared with SD-PA (absolute difference, -13.5; 95%CI -2.6 to -24.3). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This randomized clinical trial found that compared with SD-PA, neither HD-PAnor TAuse improved the primary hierarchical outcome of all-cause mortality or time to clinical improvement in patients with hypoxemicCOVID-19 pneumonia; however, HD-PA resulted in significantly better net clinical outcome by decreasing the risk of de novo thrombosis