Alteration of Lung Physiology with the Administration of Convalescent Plasma in ARDS Patients Intubated with COVID-19 Pneumonia

**Background:** It remains unknown to what degree lung physiology is altered by administration of convalescent plasma in patients intubated with ARDS due to COVID-19 pneumonia. Although no longer clinically used as treatment for COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy could be deployed again should new virus threats emerge in the future. **Aim:** To evaluate changes in ventilator physiologic variables in response to convalescent plasma transfusion using a retrospective, observational, case control study of intubated patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. **Methods:** Patients who were receiving mechanical ventilation due to COVID-19 at the time of administration of convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) were matched to control patients who did not receive convalescent plasma. Ventilatory data such as compliance, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), FiO~2~ administered, PaO~2~/FiO~2~ ratio, and tidal volume were collected pre and post administration. Panel-level random-effects linear regression models were used to assess the mean difference and interactions between CPT and cases vs controls over time. **Results:** 12 patients received CPT while intubated and were matched to 35 intubated control patients who did not receive CPT. In total, 857 separate measurements of static compliance were obtained over time. No significant difference in static compliance was seen after CPT. In cases, adjusted mean static compliance was 30.8 (95% CI (23.3, 38.4))mL/cm H~2~O before CPT and 28.2 (95% CI (20.7,35.6)) mL/cm H~2~O afterwards. Controls adjusted mean static compliance was 33.9 (95% CI (29.5, 38.4)) mL/cm H~2~O before versus 32.2 (95% CI (27.9, 36.5)) mL/cm H~2~O afterwards. Variables that had small but statistically significant differences pre vs post CPT among cases and controls were systolic and diastolic blood pressure, FiO~2~, heart rate, applied PEEP, and respiratory rate. **Conclusion:** While some statistically significant physiologic effects were seen with CPT in mechanically ventilated patients, these were deemed to be small and clinically insignificant. This is consistent with prior research on less acutely ill COVID-19 patients

Vascular pedicle width in acute lung injury: correlation with intravascular pressures and ability to discriminate fluid status

Abstract Introduction Conservative fluid management in patients with acute lung injury (ALI) increases time alive and free from mechanical ventilation. Vascular pedicle width (VPW) is a non-invasive measurement of intravascular volume status. The VPW was studied in ALI patients to determine the correlation between VPW and intravascular pressure measurements and whether VPW could predict fluid status. Methods This retrospective cohort study involved 152 patients with ALI enrolled in the Fluid and Catheter Treatment Trial (FACTT) from five NHLBI ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome) Network sites. VPW and central venous pressure (CVP) or pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (PAOP) from the first four study days were correlated. The relationships between VPW, positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP), cumulative fluid balance, and PAOP were also evaluated. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine the ability of VPW to detect PAOP <8 mmHg and PAOP ≥18 mm Hg. Results A total of 71 and 152 patients provided 118 and 276 paired VPW/PAOP and VPW/CVP measurements, respectively. VPW correlated with PAOP (r = 0.41; P < 0.001) and less well with CVP (r = 0.21; P = 0.001). In linear regression, VPW correlated with PAOP 1.5-fold better than cumulative fluid balance and 2.5-fold better than PEEP. VPW discriminated achievement of PAOP <8 mm Hg (AUC = 0.73; P = 0.04) with VPW ≤67 mm demonstrating 71% sensitivity (95% CI 30 to 95%) and 68% specificity (95% CI 59 to 75%). For discriminating a hydrostatic component of the edema (that is, PAOP ≥18 mm Hg), VPW ≥72 mm demonstrated 61.4% sensitivity (95% CI 47 to 74%) and 61% specificity (49 to 71%) (area under the curve (AUC) 0.69; P = 0.001). Conclusions VPW correlates with PAOP better than CVP in patients with ALI. Due to its only moderate sensitivity and specificity, the ability of VPW to discriminate fluid status in patients with acute lung injury is limited and should only be considered when intravascular pressures are unavailable

Update to the study protocol for an implementation-effectiveness trial comparing two education strategies for improving the uptake of noninvasive ventilation in patients with severe COPD exacerbation

BACKGROUND: There is strong evidence that noninvasive ventilation (NIV) improves the outcomes of patients hospitalized with severe COPD exacerbation, and NIV is recommended as the first-line therapy for these patients. Yet, several studies have demonstrated substantial variation in NIV use across hospitals, leading to preventable morbidity and mortality. In addition, prior studies suggested that efforts to increase NIV use in COPD need to account for the complex and interdisciplinary nature of NIV delivery and the need for team coordination. Therefore, our initial project aimed to compare two educational strategies: online education (OLE) and interprofessional education (IPE), which targets complex team-based care in NIV delivery. Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on recruitment and planned intervention, we had made several changes in the study design, statistical analysis, and implementation strategies delivery as outlined in the methods. METHODS: We originally proposed a two-arm, pragmatic, cluster, randomized hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial comparing two education strategies to improve NIV uptake in patients with severe COPD exacerbation in 20 hospitals with a low baseline rate of NIV use. Due to logistical constrains and slow recruitment, we changed the study design to an opened cohort stepped-wedge design with three steps which will allow the institutions to enroll when they are ready to participate. Only the IPE strategy will be implemented, and the education will be provided in an online virtual format. Our primary outcome will be the hospital-level risk-standardized NIV proportion for the period post-IPE training, along with the change in rate from the period prior to training. Aim 1 will compare the change over time of NIV use among patients with COPD in the step-wedged design. Aim 2 will explore the mediators\u27 role (respiratory therapist autonomy and team functionality) on the relationship between the implementation strategies and effectiveness. Finally, in Aim 3, through interviews with providers, we will assess the acceptability and feasibility of the educational training. CONCLUSION: The changes in study design will result in several limitation. Most importantly, the hospitals in the three cohorts are not randomized as they enroll based on their readiness. Second, the delivery of the IPE is virtual, and it is not known if remote education is conducive to team building. However, this study will be among the first to test the impact of IPE in the inpatient setting carefully and may generalize to other interventions directed to seriously ill patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04206735 . Registered on December 20, 2019

A phase I study evaluating the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of an antibody-based tissue factor antagonist in subjects with acute lung injury or acute respiratory distress syndrome

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The tissue factor (TF)-dependent extrinsic pathway has been suggested to be a central mechanism by which the coagulation cascade is locally activated in the lungs of patients with acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ALI/ARDS) and thus represents an attractive target for therapeutic intervention. This study was designed to determine the pharmacokinetic and safety profiles of ALT-836, an anti-TF antibody, in patients with ALI/ARDS.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This was a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation Phase I clinical trial in adult patients who had suspected or proven infection, were receiving mechanical ventilation and had ALI/ARDS (PaO₂/FiO₂≤ 300 mm). Eighteen patients (6 per cohort) were randomized in a 5:1 ratio to receive ALT-836 or placebo, and were treated within 48 hours after meeting screening criteria. Cohorts of patients were administered a single intravenously dose of 0.06, 0.08 or 0.1 mg/kg ALT-836 or placebo. Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic and immunogenicity measurements. Safety was assessed by adverse events, vital signs, ECGs, laboratory, coagulation and pulmonary function parameters.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Pharmacokinetic analysis showed a dose dependent exposure to ALT-836 across the infusion range of 0.06 to 0.1 mg/kg. No anti-ALT-836 antibody response was observed in the study population during the trial. No major bleeding episodes were reported in the ALT-836 treated patients. The most frequent adverse events were anemia, observed in both placebo and ALT-836 treated patients, and ALT-836 dose dependent, self-resolved hematuria, which suggested 0.08 mg/kg as an acceptable dose level of ALT-836 in this patient population.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Overall, this study showed that ALT-836 could be safely administered to patients with sepsis-induced ALI/ARDS.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01438853">NCT01438853</a></p

Liberal Versus Restrictive Intravenous Fluid Therapy for Early Septic Shock: Rationale for a Randomized Trial

Prompt intravenous fluid therapy is a fundamental treatment for patients with septic shock. However, the optimal approach for administering intravenous fluid in septic shock resuscitation is unknown. Two competing strategies are emerging: a liberal fluids approach, consisting of a larger volume of initial fluid (50 to 75 mL/kg [4 to 6 L in an 80-kg adult] during the first 6 hours) and later use of vasopressors, versus a restrictive fluids approach, consisting of a smaller volume of initial fluid (≤30 mL/kg [≤2 to 3 L]), with earlier reliance on vasopressor infusions to maintain blood pressure and perfusion. Early fluid therapy may enhance or maintain tissue perfusion by increasing venous return and cardiac output. However, fluid administration may also have deleterious effects by causing edema within vital organs, leading to organ dysfunction and impairment of oxygen delivery. Conversely, a restrictive fluids approach primarily relies on vasopressors to reverse hypotension and maintain perfusion while limiting the administration of fluid. Both strategies have some evidence to support their use but lack robust data to confirm the benefit of one strategy over the other, creating clinical and scientific equipoise. As part of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury Network, we designed a randomized clinical trial to compare the liberal and restrictive fluids strategies, the Crystalloid Liberal or Vasopressor Early Resuscitation in Sepsis trial. The purpose of this article is to review the current literature on approaches to early fluid resuscitation in adults with septic shock and outline the rationale for the upcoming trial

Computer clinical decision support that automates personalized clinical care: a challenging but needed healthcare delivery strategy

How to deliver best care in various clinical settings remains a vexing problem. All pertinent healthcare-related questions have not, cannot, and will not be addressable with costly time- and resource-consuming controlled clinical trials. At present, evidence-based guidelines can address only a small fraction of the types of care that clinicians deliver. Furthermore, underserved areas rarely can access state-of-the-art evidence-based guidelines in real-time, and often lack the wherewithal to implement advanced guidelines. Care providers in such settings frequently do not have sufficient training to undertake advanced guideline implementation. Nevertheless, in advanced modern healthcare delivery environments, use of eActions (validated clinical decision support systems) could help overcome the cognitive limitations of overburdened clinicians. Widespread use of eActions will require surmounting current healthcare technical and cultural barriers and installing clinical evidence/data curation systems. The authors expect that increased numbers of evidence-based guidelines will result from future comparative effectiveness clinical research carried out during routine healthcare delivery within learning healthcare systems. Keywords: automated clinical care; clinical; clinicians; closed-loop; computers; decision-support

Total and subgenomic RNA viral load in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variants

Background: SARS-CoV-2 genomic and subgenomic RNA levels are frequently used as a correlate of infectiousness. The impact of host factors and SARS-CoV-2 lineage on RNA viral load is unclear. Methods: Total nucleocapsid (N) and subgenomic N (sgN) RNA levels were measured by RT-qPCR in specimens from 3,204 individuals hospitalized with COVID-19 at 21 hospitals. RT-qPCR cycle threshold (Ct) values were used to estimate RNA viral load. The impact of time of sampling, SARS-CoV-2 variant, age, comorbidities, vaccination, and immune status on N and sgN Ct values were evaluated using multiple linear regression. Results: Ct values at presentation for N (mean ±standard deviation) were 24.14±4.53 for non-variants of concern, 25.15±4.33 for Alpha, 25.31±4.50 for Delta, and 26.26±4.42 for Omicron. N and sgN RNA levels varied with time since symptom onset and infecting variant but not with age, comorbidity, immune status, or vaccination. When normalized to total N RNA, sgN levels were similar across all variants. Conclusions: RNA viral loads were similar among hospitalized adults, irrespective of infecting variant and known risk factors for severe COVID-19. Total N and subgenomic RNA N viral loads were highly correlated, suggesting that subgenomic RNA measurements adds little information for the purposes of estimating infectivity. Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; subgenomic RNA; variants of concern; viral load

Obesity does not alter the pharmacokinetics of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in severe sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Drotrecogin alfa (activated) [DrotAA] is approved for the reduction of mortality in adults with severe sepsis (sepsis with acute organ dysfunction) and high risk of death. Patients whose actual body weight was \u3e135 kg were excluded from th