Feasibility of Self-Performed Lung Ultrasound with Remote Teleguidance for Monitoring at Home COVID-19 Patients

During the COVID-19 pandemic, use of telemedicine with the aim of reducing the rate of viral transmission increased. This proof-of-concept observational study was planned to test the feasibility of a home-based lung ultrasound (LUS) follow-up performed by patients with mild COVID-19 infection on themselves. We enrolled patients presenting to the emergency department with SARS-CoV-2 infection without signs of pneumonia and indication to discharge. Each patient received a brief training on how to perform LUS and a handheld ultrasound probe. Then, patients were contacted on a daily basis, and LUS images were acquired by the patients themselves under “teleguidance” by the investigator. Twenty-one patients were enrolled with a median age of 44 years. All evaluations were of sufficient quality for a follow up. Probability of a better LUS quality was related to higher degree (odds ratio, OR, 1.42, 95% CI 0.5–3.99) and a lower quality to evaluation time (from 0.71, 95% CI 0.55–0.92 for less than 7 min, to 0.52, 95% CI 0.38–0.7, between 7 and 10 min, and to 0.29, 95% CI 0.2–0.43, for evaluations longer than 10 min). No effect related to gender or age was detected. LUS performed by patients and remotely overseen by expert providers seems to be a feasible and reliable telemedicine tool

Prognostic Value of Mid-Regional Proadrenomedullin Sampled at Presentation and after 72 Hours in Septic Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department: An Observational Two-Center Study

The prognostic value of mid-regional proADM (MR-proADM) in septic patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) is not well established. In this prospective observational study enrolling septic patients evaluated in two EDs, MR-proADM was measured at arrival (t0) and after 72 h (t72). MR-proADM(%change) was calculated as follows: (MR-proADM(t72h) − MR-proADM(t0))/MR-proADM(t0). In total, 147 patients were included in the study, including 109 with a final diagnosis of sepsis and 38 with septic shock, according to the Sepsis-3 criteria. The overall 28-day mortality (outcome) rate was 12.9%. The AUC for outcome prognostication was 0.66 (95% CI 0.51–0.80) for MR-proADM(t0), 0.77 (95% CI 0.63–0.92) for MR-proADM(t72) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.64–0.84) for MR-proADM(%change). MR-proADM(t0) ≥ 2.78 nmol/L, MR-proADM(t72) ≥ 2.7 nmol/L and MR-proADM(%change) ≥ −15.2% showed statistically significant log-rank test results and sensitivity/specificity of 81/65%, 69/80% and 75/70% respectively. In regression analysis, MR-proADM(%change) was a significant outcome predictor both in univariate and multivariate analysis, after adjustment for age, SOFA and APACHEII scores, providing up to 80% of added prognostic value. In conclusion, time trends of MR-proADM may provide additional insights for patient risk stratification over single sampling. MR-proADM levels sampled both at presentation and after 72 h predicted 28-day survival in septic patients presenting to the ED