Mechanically Ventilated Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Had a Higher Chance of In-Hospital Death If Treated With High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Before Intubation

Improved survival in COVID-19 related sepsis and ARDS treated with a unique "triple therapy" including therapeutic plasma exchange: A single center retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the mortality of critically ill patients remained high. Our group developed a treatment regimen targeting sepsis and ARDS which we labeled "triple therapy" consisting of (1) corticosteroids, (2) therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE), and (3) timely intubation with lung protective ventilation. Our propensity analysis assesses the impact of triple therapy on survival in COVID-19 patients with sepsis and ARDS.

METHODS

Retrospective propensity analysis comparing triple therapy to no triple therapy in adult critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit at Lexington Medical Center from 1 March 2020 through 31 October 2021.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and fifty-one patients were admitted with COVID-19 and 53 clinical and laboratory variables were analyzed. Multivariable analysis revealed that triple therapy was associated with increased survival (OR: 1.91; P = .008). Two propensity score-adjusted models demonstrated an increased likelihood of survival in patients receiving triple therapy. Patients with thrombocytopenia were among those most likely to experience increased survival if they received early triple therapy. Decreased survival was observed with endotracheal intubation ≥7 days from hospital admission (P < .001) and there was a trend toward decreased survival if TPE was initiated ≥6 days from hospital admission (P = .091).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis shows that early triple therapy, defined as high-dose methylprednisolone, TPE, and timely invasive mechanical ventilation within the first 96 hours of admission, may improve survival in critically ill septic patients with ARDS secondary to COVID-19 infection. Further studies are needed to define specific phenotypes and characteristics that will identify those patients most likely to benefit.

Continuous positive airway pressure versus high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The relative effectiveness of initial non-invasive respiratory strategies for acute respiratory failure using continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is unclear.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, open-label, parallel-group randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy of CPAP and HFNC on reducing the risk of meeting the prespecified criteria for intubation and improving clinical outcomes of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. The primary endpoint was the time taken to meet the prespecified criteria for intubation within 28 days.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients were randomly assigned to the CPAP or HFNC group. Eleven (28.9%) in the CPAP group and twenty (42.6%) in the HFNC group met the criteria for intubation within 28 days. Compared with HFNC, CPAP reduced the risk of meeting the intubation criteria (hazard ratio [HR], 0.327; 95% CI, 0.148-0.724; p = 0.006). There were no significant between-group differences in the intubation rates, in-hospital and 28-day mortality rates, ventilator-free days, duration of the need for respiratory support, or duration of hospitalization for respiratory illness. Pulmonary oxygenation was significantly better in the CPAP group, with significantly lower pH and higher partial pressure of carbon dioxide, but there were no differences in the respiratory rate between groups. CPAP and HFNC were associated with few possibly causal adverse events.

CONCLUSION

CPAP is more effective than HFNC at reducing the risk of meeting the intubation criteria in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.