Prone Positioning During Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Patients With Severe ARDS

International audienceImportance Prone positioning may improve outcomes in patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but it is unknown whether prone positioning improves clinical outcomes among patients with ARDS who are undergoing venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) compared with supine positioning. Objective To test whether prone positioning vs supine positioning decreases the time to successful ECMO weaning in patients with severe ARDS supported by VV-ECMO. Design, Setting, and Participants Randomized clinical trial of patients with severe ARDS undergoing VV-ECMO for less than 48 hours at 14 intensive care units (ICUs) in France between March 3, 2021, and December 7, 2021. Interventions Patients were randomized 1:1 to prone positioning (at least 4 sessions of 16 hours) (n = 86) or to supine positioning (n = 84). Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was time to successful ECMO weaning within 60 days following randomization. Secondary outcomes included ECMO and mechanical ventilation–free days, ICU and hospital length of stay, skin pressure injury, serious adverse events, and all-cause mortality at 90-day follow-up. Results Among 170 randomized patients (median age, 51 [IQR, 43-59] years; n = 60 women [35%]), median respiratory system compliance was 15.0 (IQR, 10.7-20.6) mL/cm H 2 O; 159 patients (94%) had COVID-19–related ARDS; and 164 (96%) were in prone position before ECMO initiation. Within 60 days of enrollment, 38 of 86 patients (44%) had successful ECMO weaning in the prone ECMO group compared with 37 of 84 (44%) in the supine ECMO group (risk difference, 0.1% [95% CI, −14.9% to 15.2%]; subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.71-1.75]; P = .64). Within 90 days, no significant difference was observed in ECMO duration (28 vs 32 days; difference, −4.9 [95% CI, −11.2 to 1.5] days; P = .13), ICU length of stay, or 90-day mortality (51% vs 48%; risk difference, 2.4% [95% CI, −13.9% to 18.6%]; P = .62). No serious adverse events were reported during the prone position procedure. Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with severe ARDS supported by VV-ECMO, prone positioning compared with supine positioning did not significantly reduce time to successful weaning of ECMO. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0460755

Low incidence of SARS-CoV-2, risk factors of mortality and the course of illness in the French national cohort of dialysis patients

International audienceThe aim of this study was to estimate the incidence of COVID-19 disease in the French national population of dialysis patients, their course of illness and to identify the risk factors associated with mortality. Our study included all patients on dialysis recorded in the French REIN Registry in April 2020. Clinical characteristics at last follow-up and the evolution of COVID-19 illness severity over time were recorded for diagnosed cases (either suspicious clinical symptoms, characteristic signs on the chest scan or a positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction) for SARS-CoV-2. A total of 1,621 infected patients were reported on the REIN registry from March 16th, 2020 to May 4th, 2020. Of these, 344 died. The prevalence of COVID-19 patients varied from less than 1% to 10% between regions. The probability of being a case was higher in males, patients with diabetes, those in need of assistance for transfer or treated at a self-care unit. Dialysis at home was associated with a lower probability of being infected as was being a smoker, a former smoker, having an active malignancy, or peripheral vascular disease. Mortality in diagnosed cases (21%) was associated with the same causes as in the general population. Higher age, hypoalbuminemia and the presence of an ischemic heart disease were statistically independently associated with a higher risk of death. Being treated at a selfcare unit was associated with a lower risk. Thus, our study showed a relatively low frequency of COVID-19 among dialysis patients contrary to what might have been assumed