Resurgence of common respiratory viruses in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) - a prospective multicenter study

Background Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a major global cause of death and hospitalization. Bacteria or community-acquired viruses (CARVs) cause CAP. COVID-19 associated restrictions effectively reduced the circulation of CARVs. Objectives The aim of this study was to analyze the proportion of CARVs in adult patients with CAP from mid-2020 to mid-2023. Specifically, we aimed to compare the rate of influenza virus, SARS-CoV-2, and RSV detections in patients aged 18–59 years and ≥60 years. Study design We analyze the proportion of 21 community-acquired respiratory viruses (CARVs) and three atypical bacteria (Bordetella pertussis, Legionella pneumophila, and Mycoplasma pneumoniae) in nasopharyngeal swab samples using molecular multiplex methods within the prospective, multicentre, multinational study of the German study Group CAPNETZ. We used stringent inclusion criteria throughout the study. Results We identified CARVs in 364/1,388 (26.2 %) patients. In detail, we detected SARS-CoV-2 in 210/1,388 (15.1 %), rhino-/enterovirus in 64/1,388 (4.6 %), influenza virus in 23/1,388 (1.6 %) and RSV in 17/1,388 (1.2 %) of all patients. We detected RSV and influenza more frequently in patients ≥60 years, especially in 22/23 compared to the previous season. None of the atypical bacteria were detected. Conclusions Beginning in 2023, we demonstrate a re-emergence of CARVs in CAP patients. Effective vaccines or specific antiviral therapies for more than two thirds of the detected viral infections are currently available. High detection rates of vaccine-preventable viruses in older age groups support targeted vaccination campaigns

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Quality of inter-hospital transportation in 431 transport survivor patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome referred to specialist centers

Abstract Background The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a life-threatening condition. In special situations, these critically ill patients must be transferred to specialized centers for escalating treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of inter-hospital transport (IHT) of ARDS patients. Methods We evaluated medical and organizational aspects of structural and procedural quality relating to IHT of patients with ARDS in a prospective nationwide ARDS study. The qualification of emergency staff, the organizational aspects and the occurrence of critical events during transport were analyzed. Results Out of 1234 ARDS patients, 431 (34.9%) were transported, and 52 of these (12.1%) treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. 63.1% of transferred patients were male, median age was 54 years, and 26.8% of patients were obese. All patients were mechanically ventilated during IHT. Pressure-controlled ventilation was the preferred mode (92.1%). Median duration to organize the IHT was 165 min. Median distance for IHT was 58 km, and median duration of IHT 60 min. Forty-two patient-related and 8 technology-related critical events (11.6%, 50 of 431 patients) were observed. When a critical event occurred, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio before transport was significant lower (68 vs. 80 mmHg, p = 0.017). 69.8% of physicians and 86.7% of paramedics confirmed all transfer qualifications according to requirements of the German faculty guidelines (DIVI). Conclusions The transport of critically ill patients is associated with potential risks. In our study the rate of patient- and technology-related critical events was relatively low. A severe ARDS with a PaO2/FiO2 ratio &lt; 70 mmHg seems to be a risk factor for the appearance of critical events during IHT. The majority of transport staff was well qualified. Time span for organization of IHT was relatively short. ECMO is an option to transport patients with a severe ARDS safely to specialized centers. Trial registration NCT02637011 (ClinicalTrials.gov, Registered 15 December 2015, retrospectively registered) </jats:sec

Long-term (180-Day) outcomes in critically Ill patients with COVID-19 in the REMAP-CAP randomized clinical trial

Importance The longer-term effects of therapies for the treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19 are unknown. Objective To determine the effect of multiple interventions for critically ill adults with COVID-19 on longer-term outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants Prespecified secondary analysis of an ongoing adaptive platform trial (REMAP-CAP) testing interventions within multiple therapeutic domains in which 4869 critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 were enrolled between March 9, 2020, and June 22, 2021, from 197 sites in 14 countries. The final 180-day follow-up was completed on March 2, 2022. Interventions Patients were randomized to receive 1 or more interventions within 6 treatment domains: immune modulators (n = 2274), convalescent plasma (n = 2011), antiplatelet therapy (n = 1557), anticoagulation (n = 1033), antivirals (n = 726), and corticosteroids (n = 401). Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome was survival through day 180, analyzed using a bayesian piecewise exponential model. A hazard ratio (HR) less than 1 represented improved survival (superiority), while an HR greater than 1 represented worsened survival (harm); futility was represented by a relative improvement less than 20% in outcome, shown by an HR greater than 0.83. Results Among 4869 randomized patients (mean age, 59.3 years; 1537 [32.1%] women), 4107 (84.3%) had known vital status and 2590 (63.1%) were alive at day 180. IL-6 receptor antagonists had a greater than 99.9% probability of improving 6-month survival (adjusted HR, 0.74 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.61-0.90]) and antiplatelet agents had a 95% probability of improving 6-month survival (adjusted HR, 0.85 [95% CrI, 0.71-1.03]) compared with the control, while the probability of trial-defined statistical futility (HR >0.83) was high for therapeutic anticoagulation (99.9%; HR, 1.13 [95% CrI, 0.93-1.42]), convalescent plasma (99.2%; HR, 0.99 [95% CrI, 0.86-1.14]), and lopinavir-ritonavir (96.6%; HR, 1.06 [95% CrI, 0.82-1.38]) and the probabilities of harm from hydroxychloroquine (96.9%; HR, 1.51 [95% CrI, 0.98-2.29]) and the combination of lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine (96.8%; HR, 1.61 [95% CrI, 0.97-2.67]) were high. The corticosteroid domain was stopped early prior to reaching a predefined statistical trigger; there was a 57.1% to 61.6% probability of improving 6-month survival across varying hydrocortisone dosing strategies. Conclusions and Relevance Among critically ill patients with COVID-19 randomized to receive 1 or more therapeutic interventions, treatment with an IL-6 receptor antagonist had a greater than 99.9% probability of improved 180-day mortality compared with patients randomized to the control, and treatment with an antiplatelet had a 95.0% probability of improved 180-day mortality compared with patients randomized to the control. Overall, when considered with previously reported short-term results, the findings indicate that initial in-hospital treatment effects were consistent for most therapies through 6 months

Lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine for critically ill patients with COVID-19: REMAP-CAP randomized controlled trial

International audienc