Protocol of a randomised controlled trial of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in neonatal intensive care 'REACT'.

INTRODUCTION: Hyperglycaemia is common in the very preterm infant and has been associated with adverse outcomes. Preventing hyperglycaemia without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia has proved challenging. The development of real-time continuous glucose monitors (CGM) to inform treatment decisions provides an opportunity to reduce this risk. This study aims to assess the feasibility of CGM combined with a specifically designed paper guideline to target glucose control in the preterm infant. METHODS AND ANALYSES: The Real Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Neonatal Intensive Care (REACT) trial is an international multicentre randomised controlled trial. 200 preterm infants ≤1200 g and ≤24 hours of age will be randomly allocated to either real-time CGM or standard care (with blinded CGM data collection). The primary outcome is time in target 2.6-10 mmol/L during the study intervention assessed using CGM. Secondary outcomes include efficacy relating to glucose control, utility including staff acceptability, safety outcomes relating to incidence and prevalence of hypoglycaemia and health economic analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The REACT trial has been approved by the National Health Service Health Research Authority National Research Ethics Service Committee East of England (Cambridge Central); Medical Ethics Review Committee, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands and the Research Ethics Committee, Sant Joan de Déu Research Foundation, Barcelona, Spain. Recruitment began in July 2016 and will continue until mid-2018. The trial has been adopted by the National Institute of Health Research Clinical Research Network portfolio (ID: 18826) and is registered with anInternational Standard Randomised Control Number (ISRCTN registry ID: 12793535). Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications and efforts at stakeholder engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN12793535; Pre-results

Protocol of a randomised controlled trial of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in neonatal intensive care 'REACT'.

INTRODUCTION: Hyperglycaemia is common in the very preterm infant and has been associated with adverse outcomes. Preventing hyperglycaemia without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia has proved challenging. The development of real-time continuous glucose monitors (CGM) to inform treatment decisions provides an opportunity to reduce this risk. This study aims to assess the feasibility of CGM combined with a specifically designed paper guideline to target glucose control in the preterm infant. METHODS AND ANALYSES: The Real Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Neonatal Intensive Care (REACT) trial is an international multicentre randomised controlled trial. 200 preterm infants ≤1200 g and ≤24 hours of age will be randomly allocated to either real-time CGM or standard care (with blinded CGM data collection). The primary outcome is time in target 2.6-10 mmol/L during the study intervention assessed using CGM. Secondary outcomes include efficacy relating to glucose control, utility including staff acceptability, safety outcomes relating to incidence and prevalence of hypoglycaemia and health economic analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The REACT trial has been approved by the National Health Service Health Research Authority National Research Ethics Service Committee East of England (Cambridge Central); Medical Ethics Review Committee, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands and the Research Ethics Committee, Sant Joan de Déu Research Foundation, Barcelona, Spain. Recruitment began in July 2016 and will continue until mid-2018. The trial has been adopted by the National Institute of Health Research Clinical Research Network portfolio (ID: 18826) and is registered with anInternational Standard Randomised Control Number (ISRCTN registry ID: 12793535). Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications and efforts at stakeholder engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN12793535; Pre-results

Dynamic blood oxygen indices in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure: a cohort study

Background: acute hypoxic respiratory failure (AHRF) is a hallmark of severe COVID-19 pneumonia and often requires supplementary oxygen therapy. Critically ill COVID-19 patients may require invasive mechanical ventilation, which carries significant morbidity and mortality. Understanding of the relationship between dynamic changes in blood oxygen indices and clinical variables is lacking. We evaluated the changes in blood oxygen indices-PaO2, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, oxygen content (CaO2) and oxygen extraction ratio (O2ER) in COVID-19 patients through the first 30-days of intensive care unit admission and explored relationships with clinical outcomes.Methods and findings: we performed a retrospective observational cohort study of all adult COVID-19 patients in a single institution requiring invasive mechanical ventilation between March 2020 and March 2021. We collected baseline characteristics, clinical outcomes and blood oxygen indices. 36,383 blood gas data points were analysed from 184 patients over 30-days. Median participant age was 59.5 (IQR 51.0, 67.0), BMI 30.0 (IQR 25.2, 35.5) and the majority were men (62.5%) of white ethnicity (70.1%). Median duration of mechanical ventilation was 15-days (IQR 8, 25). Hospital survival at 30-days was 72.3%. Non-survivors exhibited significantly lower PaO2 throughout intensive care unit admission: day one to day 30 averaged mean difference -0.52 kPa (95% CI: -0.59 to -0.46, p&lt;0.01). Non-survivors exhibited a significantly lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio with an increased separation over time: day one to day 30 averaged mean difference -5.64 (95% CI: -5.85 to -5.43, p&lt;0.01). While all patients had sub-physiological CaO2, non-survivors exhibited significantly higher values. Non-survivors also exhibited significantly lower oxygen extraction ratio with an averaged mean difference of -0.08 (95% CI: -0.09 to -0.07, p&lt;0.01) across day one to day 30.Conclusions: as a novel cause of acute hypoxic respiratory failure, COVID-19 offers a unique opportunity to study a homogenous cohort of patients with hypoxaemia. In mechanically ventilated adult COVID-19 patients, blood oxygen indices are abnormal with substantial divergence in PaO2/FiO2 ratio and oxygen extraction ratio between survivors and non-survivors. Despite having higher CaO2 values, non-survivors appear to extract less oxygen implying impaired oxygen utilisation. Further exploratory studies are warranted to evaluate and improve oxygen extraction which may help to improve outcomes in severe hypoxaemic mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients.</p

Compassionate use of Pulmonary Vasodilators in Acute Severe Hypoxic Respiratory Failure due to COVID-19

Background: there have been over 200 million cases and 4.4 million deaths from COVID-19 worldwide. Despite the lack of robust evidence one potential treatment for COVID-19 associated severe hypoxaemia is inhaled pulmonary vasodilator (IPVD) therapy, using either nitric oxide (iNO) or prostaglandins. We describe the implementation of, and outcomes from, a protocol using IPVDs in a cohort of patients with severe COVID-19 associated respiratory failure receiving maximal conventional support. Methods: prospectively collected data from adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at a large teaching hospital were analysed for the period 14 th March 2020 - 11 th February 2021. An IPVD was considered if the PaO 2/FiO 2 (PF) ratio was less than 13.3kPa despite maximal conventional therapy. Nitric oxide was commenced at 20ppm and titrated to response. If oxygenation improved Iloprost nebulisers were commenced and iNO weaned. The primary outcome was percentage changes in PF ratio and Alveolar-arterial (A-a) gradient. Results: fifty-nine patients received IPVD therapy during the study period. The median PF ratio before IPVD therapy was commenced was 11.33kPa (9.93-12.91). Patients receiving an IPVD had a lower PF ratio (14.37 vs. 16.37kPa, p = 0.002) and higher APACHE-II score (17 vs. 13, p = 0.028) at ICU admission. At 72 hours after initiating an IPVD the median improvement in PF ratio was 33.9% (-4.3-84.1). At 72 hours changes in PF ratio (70.8 vs. −4.1%, p &lt; 0.001) and reduction in A-a gradient (44.7 vs. 14.8%, p &lt; 0.001) differed significantly between survivors (n = 33) and non-survivors (n = 26). Conclusions: the response to IPVDs in patients with COVID-19 associated acute hypoxic respiratory failure differed significantly between survivors and non-survivors. Both iNO and prostaglandins may offer therapeutic options for patients with severe refractory hypoxaemia due to COVID-19. The use of inhaled prostaglandins, and iNO where feasible, should be studied in adequately powered prospective randomised trials.</p

Conscious prone positioning during non-invasive ventilation in COVID-19 patients: experience from a single centre

Critically ill patients admitted to hospital following SARS-CoV-2 infection often experience hypoxic respiratory failure and a proportion require invasive mechanical ventilation to maintain adequate oxygenation. The combination of prone positioning and non-invasive ventilation in conscious patients may have a role in improving oxygenation. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of prone positioning in spontaneously ventilating patients receiving non-invasive ventilation admitted to the intensive care. Clinical data of 81 patients admitted with COVID 19 pneumonia and acute hypoxic respiratory failure were retrieved from electronic medical records and examined. Patients who had received prone positioning in combination with non-invasive ventilation were identified. A total of 20 patients received prone positioning in conjunction with non-invasive ventilation. This resulted in improved oxygenation as measured by a change in PaO 2/FiO 2 (P/F) ratio of 28.7 mmHg while prone, without significant change in heart rate or respiratory rate. Patients on average underwent 5 cycles with a median duration of 3 hours. There were no reported deaths, 7 of the 20 patients (35%) failed non-invasive ventilation and subsequently required intubation and mechanical ventilation. In our cohort of 20 COVID-19 patients with moderate acute hypoxic respiratory failure, prone positioning with non-invasive ventilation resulted in improved oxygenation. Prone positioning with non-invasive ventilation may be considered as an early therapeutic intervention in COVID-19 patients with moderate acute hypoxic respiratory failure.</p

Inflammatory phenotyping predicts clinical outcome in COVID-19

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to more than 760,000 deaths worldwide (correct as of 16th August 2020). Studies suggest a hyperinflammatory response is a major cause of disease severity and death. Identitfying COVID-19 patients with hyperinflammation may identify subgroups who could benefit from targeted immunomodulatory treatments. Analysis of cytokine levels at the point of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection can identify patients at risk of deterioration. Methods: We used a multiplex cytokine assay to measure serum IL-6, IL-8, TNF, IL-1β, GM-CSF, IL-10, IL-33 and IFN-γin 100 hospitalised patients with confirmed COVID-19 at admission to University Hospital Southampton (UK). Demographic, clinical and outcome data were collected for analysis. Results: Age &gt; 70 years was the strongest predictor of death (OR 28, 95% CI 5.94, 139.45). IL-6, IL-8, TNF, IL-1β and IL-33 were significantly associated with adverse outcome. Clinical parameters were predictive of poor outcome (AUROC 0.71), addition of a combined cytokine panel significantly improved the predictability (AUROC 0.85). In those ≤70 years, IL-33 and TNF were predictive of poor outcome (AUROC 0.83 and 0.84), addition of a combined cytokine panel demonstrated greater predictability of poor outcome than clinical parameters alone (AUROC 0.92 vs 0.77). Conclusions: A combined cytokine panel improves the accuracy of the predictive value for adverse outcome beyond standard clinical data alone. Identification of specific cytokines may help to stratify patients towards trials of specific immunomodulatory treatments to improve outcomes in COVID-19.</p

Body Mass Index and clinical outcome of severe COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure: unravelling the “obesity paradox” phenomenon

Background and aimsAlthough obesity have been generally shown to be an independent risk factor for poor outcomes in COVID-19 infection, some studies demonstrate a paradoxical protective effect (“obesity paradox”). This study examines the influence of obesity categories on clinical outcomes of severe COVID-19 patients admitted to an intensive care unit with acute hypoxic respiratory failure requiring either non-invasive or invasive mechanical ventilation.MethodsThis is a single centre, retrospective study of consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit between 03/2020 to 03/2021. Patients were grouped according to the NICE Body Mass Index (BMI) category. Admission variables including age, sex, comorbidities, and ICU severity indices (APACHE-II, SOFA and PaO2/FiO2) were collected. Data were compared between BMI groups for outcomes such as need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), renal replacement therapy (RRT) and 28-day and overall hospital mortality.Results340 patients were identified and of those 333 patients had their BMI documented. Just over half of patients (53%) had obesity. Those with extreme obesity (obesity groups II and III) were younger with fewer comorbidities, but were more hypoxaemic at presentation, than the healthy BMI group. Although non-significant, obesity groups II and III paradoxically showed a lower in-hospital mortality than the healthy weight group. However, adjusted (age, sex, APACHE-II and CCI) competing risk regression analysis showed three-times higher mortality in obese category I (sub-distribution hazard ratio = 3.32 (95% CI 1.30–8.46), p = 0.01) and a trend to higher mortality across all obesity groups compared to the healthy weight group.ConclusionsIn this cohort, those with obesity were at higher risk of mortality after adjustment for confounders. We did not identify an “obesity paradox” in this cohort. The obesity paradox may be explained by confounding factors such as younger age, fewer comorbidities, and less severe organ failures. The impact of obesity on indicators of morbidity including likelihood of requirement for organ support measures was not conclusively demonstrated and requires further scrutiny.<br/