The Efficacy of Early Additional Hemoperfusion Therapy for Severe COVID-19 Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study

Add-on hemoperfusion in SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant patients: a case series

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women are more likely to have a higher severity of illness after being infected with coronavirus disease 2019 compared with the general population, particularly in the hyperinflammatory phase. However, immunomodulatory drugs are contraindicated and have been associated with an increased risk of fetal abnormalities. Therefore, we are reporting our experience with the use of HA330 hemoperfusion in combination with standard therapy in severe to critical coronavirus disease 2019 cases among pregnant patients.

CASE PRESENTATION

From January 2020 to December 2021, four pregnant Thai women were treated with hemoperfusion using a cytokine adsorptive technique. The patients' ages ranged from 21 to 36 years old, and their gestational ages at the time of admission ranged from 18 to 38 weeks. Two patients required intubation. Extracorporeal blood purification with an adsorptive cartridge (HA330®, Jafron, China) was applied as an adjunctive strategy to standard therapy approximately one week after the onset of symptoms, and most patients received three sessions of hemoperfusion. The baseline C-reactive protein level was greater than 80 mg/dL. The results showed that hemoperfusion could decrease the C-reactive protein level by approximately 80% and improve oxygenation. The newborns were delivered by Cesarean section without complications. Neither mortality nor serious adverse events related to hemoperfusion occurred.

CONCLUSION

This report may help ensure the use of the hemoperfusion strategy in pregnant patients during a cytokine storm. However, a larger cohort is needed to confirm its safety and efficacy.

The Role of Early Hemoadsorption in Severe COVID-19 Treatment: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Hemoadsorption, an extracorporeal apheresis technique, is reportedly used in severe COVID-19 patients. However, limited evidence from randomized clinical trials supports this practice.

METHODS

In this single-center study, severe COVID-19 patients requiring ICU admission were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive HA-330 hemoadsorption in combination with standard treatment or standard therapy alone. Both groups received tocilizumab intravenously if their clinical conditions worsened within 24-48 h. The primary outcome was mortality from any cause within 28 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes included mechanical ventilator-free days, daily C-reactive protein levels, oxygenation (defined by PaO2/FiO2 ratio), daily sequential organ failure assessment score, and severity score of lung infiltration on chest X-rays (CXR RALE score).

RESULTS

A total of 28 patients underwent randomization, with 14 (50%) receiving HA-330 hemoadsorption. Only 9 out of 14 patients (64.3%) in the control group experienced clinical worsening and were subsequently administered intravenous tocilizumab. At 28 days, the mortality rate was significantly lower in the intervention group (28.57% vs. 78.57%, p = 0.021), with a hazard ratio of death of 0.26 (95% CI = 0.08-0.81; p = 0.021). All of secondary outcomes were comparable in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Based on our pilot randomized trial, the early application of HA-330 hemoadsorption in patients with severe COVID-19 may establish a favorable outcome in term of mortality. These data provide the initial proof of concept for conducting a large-scale study in the future.

Efficacy of additional hemoperfusion in hospitalized patients with severe to critical COVID-19 disease

The evidence supporting additional hemoperfusion (HP) with cytokine adsorbents for improving clinical outcomes in severe to critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients remains limited. We compared severe to critical COVID-19 patients who received additional HP with a cytokine adsorbent to matched cases receiving standard medical treatment (SMT). The primary outcome was hospital mortality. In our study, we matched 45 patients who received additional HP 1:1 with the SMT group based on key clinical parameters. The hospital mortality rates did not differ between the groups (33% vs 38%, p = 0.83). The HP group had a significantly shorter ICU stay (22 vs 32 days; p = 0.017) and reduced mechanical ventilation duration (15 vs 35 days; p < 0.001). Additionally, the incidence of pulmonary complications (20% vs 42%; p = 0.04), sepsis (38% vs 64%; p = 0.02), and disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (DIC) (13% vs 33%; p = 0.046) were significantly lower in the HP group. In conclusion, among severe to critical COVID-19 patients, additional HP with a cytokine adsorbent did not improve hospital mortality. However, it reduced ICU length of stay, mechanical ventilator days, and incidences of lung complications, sepsis, and DIC. Trial registration: TCTR20231002006. Registered 02 October 2023 (retrospectively registered).

Factors associated with refusing hemoperfusion in patients with acute paraquat poisoning

Background

Paraquat poisoning remains a critical public health issue with no established effective treatment. Hemoperfusion (HP) has been recognized for its potential to remove toxins and is widely employed in several developing countries for managing acute paraquat poisoning cases. However, the reluctance of some patients to undergo this recommended treatment has been observed but not thoroughly investigated. This study aimed to explore the factors associated with the refusal of HP in patients suffering from paraquat intoxication.

Materials and Methods

In this retrospective study, data of 358 patients with acute paraquat poisoning were analyzed in Xi'an, China. The outcome of our study was mortality, and the influential factors were age, gender, marital status, educational level, symptoms at presentation, and laboratory findings. A logistic regression model was utilized to explore the independent risk factors.

Results

In a total of 358 paraquat-poisoned patients, the significant differences were found between patients who underwent HP and those who did not, particularly regarding mean age (48.02 years vs. 42.32 years; P = 0.01), mental disorders (15.6% vs. 6.1%; P = 0.01), poisoning severity score (2.36 vs. 2.57; P = 0.03), organ failure (10.9% vs. 23.5%; P = 0.02), and mechanical ventilation (18.8% vs. 33.3%; P = 0.02). Patients who refused HP exhibited a higher mortality (20.3% vs. 10.9%; P = 0.03) compared to those who received HP. Age (odds ratio (OR), 1.76; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01-3.82; P = 0.01) and history of mental disorders (OR, 2.81; 95% CI: 1.19-6.61; P = 0.02) were identified as significant independent predictors for the refusal of HP.

Conclusion

The results of this study showed that elderly individuals and those with a history of mental disorders were independently associated with refusing HP in patients with acute paraquat poisoning.

Care Bundles to Improve Hemoperfusion Performance in Patients with Severe COVID-19: A Retrospective Study

Background/Objectives: Hemoperfusion (HP) is employed to modulate cytokine storms in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, requiring careful attention for success and safety. Therefore, we investigated whether our care bundles could enhance HP performance. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study on adult patients (≥20 years old) with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. In the first wave (Phase I), we identified HP-related issues and addressed them with care bundles in the second wave (Phase II). The care bundles included early temperature control, precise hemodynamic monitoring, and clot prevention measures for the HP membrane. The HP success rate and associated adverse events (AEs) were assessed between the two phases. Results: The study included 60 HP (HA330) sessions from 27 cases (Phase I: 21 sessions from 9 cases; Phase II: 39 sessions from 18 cases). Patient characteristics and treatments for COVID-19 were similar, except for baseline body temperature (BT) and heart rate (HR). Phase II showed a higher success rate (67% vs. 89%, p = 0.19), although it did not reach statistical significance. Phase I recorded a significantly higher frequency of AEs (3 [IQR 1, 4] events/case vs. 1 [IQR 0, 2] events/case, p = 0.014). After implementing the care bundles, hypothermia significantly decreased (78% vs. 33%, p = 0.037), with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.15; 95% CI 0.02-0.95, p = 0.044 for baseline BT. Conclusions: Further exploration with a larger sample size is required to establish the advantages of care bundles. However, the bundles' implementation has significantly improved hypothermia prevention.

Efficacy of the Cytokine Adsorption Therapy in Patients with Severe COVID-19-Associated Pneumonia: Lesson Learned from a Prospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Severe COVID-19 pneumonia can activate a cytokine storm. Hemoperfusion can reduce pro-inflammatory cytokines in sepsis but is still debated in the COVID-19 setting. Thus, we sought to investigate the benefits of HA-330 cytokine adsorption through clinical and laboratory outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center prospective observational study in adults with severe COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to the intensive care unit at Chiang Mai University Hospital (Chiang Mai, Thailand). Those with cytokine storms indicated by organ injury, including acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and high inflammatory markers were included. Patients treated with the HA-330 device were classified as a hemoperfusion group, while those without cytokine adsorption were classified as a control group. We compared the outcomes on day 7 after treatment and evaluated the factors associated with 60-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 112 patients were enrolled. Thirty-eight patients received hemoperfusion, while 74 patients did not. Baseline cytokine storm parameters were comparable. In univariate analysis, there was an improvement in clinical and laboratory effects from hemoperfusion therapy. In multivariate analysis, APACHE II score, SOFA score, PaO2/FiO2, the number of hemoperfusion sessions, the amount of blood purified, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and IL-6 were associated with mortality. Using at least 3 sessions of hemoperfusion could mitigate, the 60-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.25, 95% confidence interval: 0.03-0.33, p = 0.001). By categorizing the amount of blood treated into 3 groups of <1 L/kg, 1-2 L/kg, and ≥2 L/kg, there was a linear dose-response association with survival, which was better in the higher volume purified (mortality 60% vs. 33.3% vs. 0%, respectively, p = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

The early initiation of HA-330 hemoperfusion could improve the severity score and laboratory outcomes of COVID-19 ARDS. The optimal dose of at least three sessions or the amount of blood purified greater than 1 L/kg was associated with a reduction in 60-day mortality.

AKI in Adults with COVID-19 Infection: Mechanisms of Development and Role of Blood Filtration Devices in Treatment

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, acute kidney injury (AKI) was a common sequela of COVID-19 infection and predicted disease severity and mortality. Extracorporeal blood purification techniques involving blood filtration devices are an emerging treatment for AKI in the setting of severe COVID-19 infections. In this review, we discuss potential mechanisms for the development of AKI in COVID-19 patients as well as the various available blood filtration devices and the role they may play in managing the AKI in COVID-19 patients. A total of seven blood filters currently available were compared based on their potential in treating AKI in COVID-19 patients. Blood filtration devices show potential as an emerging treatment modality for COVID-19-induced AKI, but further clinical trials are necessary before their widespread adoption and usage.

EFFICACY OF SUPPLEMENTAL HEMOADSORPTION THERAPY ON SEVERE AND CRITICAL PATIENTS WITH COVID-19: AN EVIDENCE-BASED ANALYSIS

ABSTRACT

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a disproportionately high threat to the global health system and social stability. COVID-19 damage can lead to hyperinflammation and tissue damage due to a "cytokine storm," which in turn contributes to an increase in the mortality rate. Extracorporeal hemoadsorption therapy (HAT) in patients with severe COVID-19 may improve organ function and stabilize hemodynamic status; however, the effects of supplemental HAT remain controversial. Methods: The Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed databases were comprehensively searched from inception to August 20, 2022, for potential studies. Results: A total of 648 patients with severe COVID-19 in three randomized controlled trials and 11 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis indicated that supplemental HAT significantly improved the mortality rate of patients with severe COVID-19 compared with conventional therapy (relative risk [RR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.56 to 0.96, P = 0.026). In subgroup analyses, supplemental HAT significantly decreased mortality rates in patients without extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support (RR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.44-0.79, P < 0.0001), while a significant difference was not observed in patients requiring ECMO support (RR = 1.61, 95% CI = 0.63-4.09, P = 0.316). Standardized mean difference (SMD) meta-analysis showed that IL-6 removal was more significant in HAT group than conventional therapy group (SMD = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.91, P = 0.043), followed by C-reactive protein (SMD = 0.70, 95% CI = -0.04 to 1.44, P = 0.065) and IL-8 (SMD = 0.36, 95% CI = -0.34 to 1.07, P = 0.311). No evidence of substantial publication bias concerning mortality was observed. Conclusion: Given the better mortality outcomes, HAT confers clinical benefits to patients with severe COVID-19, which correlated with cytokine removal by HAT. Cytokine adsorption may not provide clinical benefits for patients with severe COVID-19 requiring ECMO and should be used with caution. However, because of the very low quality of evidence, multicenter randomized trials with large sample sizes are required to verify these findings.

Effect of extracorporeal hemoadsorption in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A narrative review

COVID-19 has been affecting the world unprecedentedly and will remain widely prevalent due to its elusive pathophysiological mechanism and the continuous emergence of new variants. Critically ill patients with COVID-19 are commonly associated with cytokine storm, multiple organ dysfunction, and high mortality. To date, growing evidence has shown that extracorporeal hemoadsorption can exert its adjuvant effect to standard of care by regulating immune homeostasis, reducing viremia, and decreasing endotoxin activity in critically ill COVID-19 cases. However, the selection of various hemofilters, timing of initiation and termination of hemoadsorption therapy, anticoagulation management of extracorporeal circuits, identification of target subgroups, and ultimate survival benefit remain controversial. The purpose of this narrative review is to comprehensively summarize the rationale for the use of hemoadsorption in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and to gather the latest clinical evidence in this field.

Apheresis and COVID-19 in intensive care unit (ICU)

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a contagious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The first known case was identified in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. The disease has since spread worldwide, and on March 2020 the World Health Organization (WHO) declared it as pandemic, causing a public health crisis. Symptoms of COVID-19 are variable, ranging from mild symptoms like fever, cough, and fatigue to severe illness. Elderly patients and those with comorbidities like cardiovascular disease, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease, or cancer are more likely to develop severe forms of the disease. Asymptomatic infections have been well documented. Accumulating evidence suggests that the severity of COVID-19 is due to high levels of circulating inflammatory mediators including cytokines and chemokines leading to cytokine storm syndrome (CSS). Patients are admitted in ICU with severe respiratory failure, but can also develop acute renal failure and multi organ failure. Advances in science and technology have permitted the development of more sophisticated therapies such as extracorporeal organ support (ECOS) therapies that includes renal replacement therapies (RRTs), venoarterial (VA) or veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane Oxygenation (ECMO), extracorporeal CO2 removal (ECCO2R), liver support systems, hemoperfusion, and various blood purification devices, for the treatment of ARDS and septic shock.

Application of Extracorporeal Apheresis in Treatment of COVID-19: a Rapid Review

Spread of a novel coronavirus infection in 2019 caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus has become a real threat to public health all around the world. The new pandemic required the mobilization of all resources for effective treatment of COVID-19 patients. Extracorporeal apheresis methods were suggested as an addition to the therapy of severe COVID-19 patients, especially when there is a threat of cytokine storm. Cytokine storm has a complex and not fully understood mechanism, and it can result in the multiple organ failure syndrome, associated with high mortality. The main cytokines that play the key role in the cytokine storm are IL-6, IL-10, and TNF-alpha. Removal of the target pro-inflammatory cytokines from the bloodstream can be beneficial in reducing the risk of complications as well as the mortality rate. We describe and compare different methods of extracorporeal apheresis: hemoadsorption, selective plasma filtration, and plasma exchange therapy in the context of their potential use in COVID-19 treatment.