14 research outputs found

    Ultrasound to Detect Central Venous Catheter Placement Associated Complications: A Multicenter Diagnostic Accuracy Study

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Mechanical complications arising after central venous catheter placement are mostly malposition or pneumothorax. To date, to confirm correct position and detect pneumothorax, chest x-ray film has been the reference standard, while ultrasound might be an accurate alternative. The aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound to detect central venous catheter malposition and pneumothorax. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, diagnostic accuracy study conducted at the intensive care unit and postanesthesia care unit. Adult patients who underwent central venous catheterization of the internal jugular vein or subclavian vein were included. Index test consisted of venous, cardiac, and lung ultrasound. Standard reference test was chest x-ray film. Primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound to detect malposition and pneumothorax; for malposition, sensitivity, specificity, and other accuracy parameters were estimated. For pneumothorax, because chest x-ray film is an inaccurate reference standard to diagnose it, agreement and Cohen's κ-coefficient were determined. Secondary outcomes were accuracy of ultrasound to detect clinically relevant complications and feasibility of ultrasound. RESULTS: In total, 758 central venous catheterizations were included. Malposition occurred in 23 (3.3%) out of 688 cases included in the analysis. Ultrasound sensitivity was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.49 to 0.86) and specificity 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98 to 1.00). Pneumothorax occurred in 5 (0.7%) to 11 (1.5%) out of 756 cases according to chest x-ray film and ultrasound, respectively. In 748 out of 756 cases (98.9%), there was agreement between ultrasound and chest x-ray film with a Cohen's κ-coefficient of 0.50 (95% CI, 0.19 to 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study shows that the complication rate of central venous catheterization is low and that ultrasound produces a moderate sensitivity and high specificity to detect malposition. There is moderate agreement with chest x-ray film for pneumothorax. In conclusion, ultrasound is an accurate diagnostic modality to detect malposition and pneumothorax

    Ultrasound to detect central venous catheter placement associated complications: A multicenter diagnostic accuracy study

    No full text
    Background: Mechanical complications arising after central venous catheter placement are mostly malposition or pneumothorax. To date, to confirm correct position and detect pneumothorax, chest x-ray film has been the reference standard, while ultrasound might be an accurate alternative. The aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound to detect central venous catheter malposition and pneumothorax. Methods: This was a prospective, multicenter, diagnostic accuracy study conducted at the intensive care unit and postanesthesia care unit. Adult patients who underwent central venous catheterization of the internal jugular vein or subclavian vein were included. Index test consisted of venous, cardiac, and lung ultrasound. Standard reference test was chest x-ray film. Primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound to detect malposition and pneumothorax; for malposition, sensitivity, specificity, and other accuracy parameters were estimated. For pneumothorax, because chest x-ray film is an inaccurate reference standard to diagnose it, agreement and Cohen's κ-coefficient were determined. Secondary outcomes were accuracy of ultrasound to detect clinically relevant complications and feasibility of ultrasound. Results: In total, 758 central venous catheterizations were included. Malposition occurred in 23 (3.3%) out of 688 cases included in the analysis. Ultrasound sensitivity was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.49 to 0.86) and specificity 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98 to 1.00). Pneumothorax occurred in 5 (0.7%) to 11 (1.5%) out of 756 cases according to chest x-ray film and ultrasound, respectively. In 748 out of 756 cases (98.9%), there was agreement between ultrasound and chest x-ray film with a Cohen's κ-coefficient of 0.50 (95% CI, 0.19 to 0.80). Conclusions: This multicenter study shows that the complication rate of central venous catheterization is low and that ultrasound produces a moderate sensitivity and high specificity to detect malposition. There is moderate agreement with chest x-ray film for pneumothorax. In conclusion, ultrasound is an accurate diagnostic modality to detect malposition and pneumothorax

    Pharmacokinetic analysis of vilobelimab, anaphylatoxin C5a and antidrug antibodies in PANAMO: a phase 3 study in critically ill,  invasively mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients

    No full text
    Abstract Background Vilobelimab, a complement 5a (C5a)-specific monoclonal antibody, reduced mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients in a phase 3 multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. As part of the study, vilobelimab concentrations and C5a levels as well as antidrug antibodies (ADAs) to vilobelimab were analysed. Results From Oct 1, 2020 to Oct 4, 2021, 368 invasively mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients were randomized: 177 patients were randomly assigned to receive vilobelimab while 191 patients received placebo. Pharmacokinetic sampling was only performed at sites in Western Europe. Blood samples for vilobelimab measurements were available for 93 of 177 (53%) patients in the vilobelimab group and 99 of 191 (52%) patients in the placebo group. On day 8, after three infusions, mean vilobelimab (trough) concentrations ranged from 21,799.3 to 302,972.1 ng/mL (geometric mean 137,881.3 ng/mL). Blood samples for C5a measurements were available for 94 of 177 (53%) patients in the vilobelimab group and 99 of 191 (52%) patients in the placebo group. At screening, C5a levels were highly elevated and comparable between groups. In the vilobelimab group, median C5a levels were 118.3 ng/mL [IQR 71.2–168.2 ng/mL] and in the placebo group, median C5a levels were 104.6 ng/mL [IQR 77.5–156.6 ng/mL]. By day 8, median C5a levels were reduced by 87% in the vilobelimab group (median 14.5 ng/mL [IQR 9.5–21.0 ng/mL], p < 0.001) versus an 11% increase in the placebo group (median 119.2 ng/mL [IQR 85.9–152.1 ng/mL]). Beyond day 8, though plasma sampling was sparse, C5a levels did not reach screening levels in the vilobelimab group while C5a levels remained elevated in the placebo group. Treatment-emergent ADAs were observed in one patient in the vilobelimab group at hospital discharge on day 40 and in one patient in the placebo group at hospital discharge on day 25. Conclusions This analysis shows that vilobelimab efficiently inhibits C5a in critically ill COVID-19 patients. There was no evidence of immunogenicity associated with vilobelimab treatment. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04333420. Registered 3 April 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT0433342

    Aged versus fresh autologous platelet transfusion in a two-hit healthy volunteer model of transfusion-related acute lung injury

    No full text
    Background: Transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI) is a severe complication of blood transfusion that is thought of as a two-hit event: first the underlying patient condition (e.g., sepsis), and then the transfusion. Transfusion factors include human leukocyte antigen antibodies or biologic response modifiers (BRMs) accumulating during storage. Preclinical studies show an increased TRALI risk with longer stored platelets, clinical studies are conflicting. We aim to discover whether longer platelet concentrate (PC) storage time increases TRALI risk in a controlled human experiment. Study Design and Methods: In a randomized controlled trial, 18 healthy male volunteers received a first hit of experimental endotoxemia (2 ng/kg lipopolysaccharide), and a second hit of fresh (2-day old) or aged (7-day old) autologous PC, or physiological saline. After 6 h, changes in TRALI pathways were determined using spirometry, chest X-ray, and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL). Results: All subjects reacted adequately to lipopolysaccharide infusion and satisfied SIRS criteria (increased pulse [>90/min] and temperature [>38°C]). There were no differences between the saline, fresh, and aged PC groups in BAL-fluid protein (95 ± 33 μg/ml; 83 ± 21 μg/ml and 104 ± 29 μg/ml, respectively) and relative neutrophil count (1.5 ± 0.5%; 1.9 ± 0.8% and 1.3 ± 0.8%, respectively), nor in inflammatory BAL-fluid BRMs (Interleukin-6, CXCL8, TNFα (Formula presented.) and myeloperoxidase), clinical respiratory parameters, and spirometry results. All chest X-rays were normal. Conclusions: In a human endotoxemia model of autologous platelet transfusion, with an adequate first hit and platelet storage lesion, transfusion of 7-day-old PC does not increase pulmonary inflammation compared with 2-day-old PC

    Anti-C5a antibody (vilobelimab) therapy for critically ill, invasively mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 (PANAMO): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Vilobelimab, an anti-C5a monoclonal antibody, was shown to be safe in a phase 2 trial of invasively mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. Here, we aimed to determine whether vilobelimab in addition to standard of care improves survival outcomes in this patient population. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial was performed at 46 hospitals in the Netherlands, Germany, France, Belgium, Russia, Brazil, Peru, Mexico, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years or older who were receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, but not more than 48 h after intubation at time of first infusion, had a PaO2/FiO2 ratio of 60-200 mm Hg, and a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection with any variant in the past 14 days were eligible for this study. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive standard of care and vilobelimab at a dose of 800 mg intravenously for a maximum of six doses (days 1, 2, 4, 8, 15, and 22) or standard of care and a matching placebo using permuted block randomisation. Treatment was not continued after hospital discharge. Participants, caregivers, and assessors were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was defined as all-cause mortality at 28 days in the full analysis set (defined as all randomly assigned participants regardless of whether a patient started treatment, excluding patients randomly assigned in error) and measured using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Safety analyses included all patients who had received at least one infusion of either vilobelimab or placebo. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04333420. FINDINGS: From Oct 1, 2020, to Oct 4, 2021, we included 368 patients in the ITT analysis (full analysis set; 177 in the vilobelimab group and 191 in the placebo group). One patient in the vilobelimab group was excluded from the primary analysis due to random assignment in error without treatment. At least one dose of study treatment was given to 364 (99%) patients (safety analysis set). 54 patients (31%) of 177 in the vilobelimab group and 77 patients (40%) of 191 in the placebo group died in the first 28 days. The all-cause mortality rate at 28 days was 32% (95% CI 25-39) in the vilobelimab group and 42% (35-49) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·73, 95% CI 0·50-1·06; p=0·094). In the predefined analysis without site-stratification, vilobelimab significantly reduced all-cause mortality at 28 days (HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·48-0·96; p=0·027). The most common TEAEs were acute kidney injury (35 [20%] of 175 in the vilobelimab group vs 40 [21%] of 189 in the placebo), pneumonia (38 [22%] vs 26 [14%]), and septic shock (24 [14%] vs 31 [16%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 103 (59%) of 175 patients in the vilobelimab group versus 120 (63%) of 189 in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: In addition to standard of care, vilobelimab improves survival of invasive mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 and leads to a significant decrease in mortality. Vilobelimab could be considered as an additional therapy for patients in this setting and further research is needed on the role of vilobelimab and C5a in other acute respiratory distress syndrome-causing viral infections. FUNDING: InflaRx and the German Federal Government

    Anti-C5a antibody (vilobelimab) therapy for critically ill, invasively mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 (PANAMO): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Vilobelimab, an anti-C5a monoclonal antibody, was shown to be safe in a phase 2 trial of invasively mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19. Here, we aimed to determine whether vilobelimab in addition to standard of care improves survival outcomes in this patient population. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial was performed at 46 hospitals in the Netherlands, Germany, France, Belgium, Russia, Brazil, Peru, Mexico, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years or older who were receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, but not more than 48 h after intubation at time of first infusion, had a PaO2/FiO2 ratio of 60-200 mm Hg, and a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection with any variant in the past 14 days were eligible for this study. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive standard of care and vilobelimab at a dose of 800 mg intravenously for a maximum of six doses (days 1, 2, 4, 8, 15, and 22) or standard of care and a matching placebo using permuted block randomisation. Treatment was not continued after hospital discharge. Participants, caregivers, and assessors were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was defined as all-cause mortality at 28 days in the full analysis set (defined as all randomly assigned participants regardless of whether a patient started treatment, excluding patients randomly assigned in error) and measured using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Safety analyses included all patients who had received at least one infusion of either vilobelimab or placebo. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04333420. FINDINGS: From Oct 1, 2020, to Oct 4, 2021, we included 368 patients in the ITT analysis (full analysis set; 177 in the vilobelimab group and 191 in the placebo group). One patient in the vilobelimab group was excluded from the primary analysis due to random assignment in error without treatment. At least one dose of study treatment was given to 364 (99%) patients (safety analysis set). 54 patients (31%) of 177 in the vilobelimab group and 77 patients (40%) of 191 in the placebo group died in the first 28 days. The all-cause mortality rate at 28 days was 32% (95% CI 25-39) in the vilobelimab group and 42% (35-49) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% CI 0.50-1.06; p=0.094). In the predefined analysis without site-stratification, vilobelimab significantly reduced all-cause mortality at 28 days (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48-0.96; p=0.027). The most common TEAEs were acute kidney injury (35 [20%] of 175 in the vilobelimab group vs 40 [21%] of 189 in the placebo), pneumonia (38 [22%] vs 26 [14%]), and septic shock (24 [14%] vs 31 [16%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 103 (59%) of 175 patients in the vilobelimab group versus 120 (63%) of 189 in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: In addition to standard of care, vilobelimab improves survival of invasive mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 and leads to a significant decrease in mortality. Vilobelimab could be considered as an additional therapy for patients in this setting and further research is needed on the role of vilobelimab and C5a in other acute respiratory distress syndrome-causing viral infections. FUNDING: InflaRx and the German Federal Government
    corecore