Sex Differences in Use of Low Tidal Volume Ventilation in COVID-19-Insights From the PRoVENT-COVID Study

Decreased Utilization of Low Tidal Volume Ventilation Outside of the Intensive Care Unit as Compared to Inside

Background: Investigations into the use of low tidal volume ventilation (LTVV) have been performed for patients in emergency departments (EDs) or intensive care units (ICUs). Practice differences between the ICU and non-ICU care areas have not been described. We hypothesized that the initial implementation of LTVV would be better inside ICUs than outside. Methods: This is a retrospective observational study of patients initiated on invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) between January 1, 2016, and July 17, 2019. Initial recorded tidal volumes after intubation were used to compare the use of LTVV between care areas. Low tidal volume was considered 6.5 cc/kg of ideal body weight (IBW) or less. The primary outcome was the initiation of low tidal volume. Sensitivity analyses used a tidal volume of 8 cc/kg of IBW or less, and direct comparisons were performed between the ICU, ED, and wards. Results: There were 6392 initiations of IMV: 2217 (34.7%) in the ICU and 4175 (65.3%) outside. LTVV was more likely to be initiated in the ICU than outside (46.5% vs 34.2%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.71, P < .01). The ICU also had more implementation when PaO2/FiO2 ratio was less than 300, (48.0% vs 34.6%; aOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.48-0.71, P < .01). When comparing individual locations, wards had lower odds of LTVV than the ICU (aOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70-0.96, P  =  .02), the ED had lower odds than the ICU (aOR 0.55, 95% CI 0.48-0.63, P < .01), and the ED had lower odds than the wards (aOR 0.66, 95% CI 0.56-0.77, P < .01). Interpretation: Initial low tidal volumes were more likely to be initiated in the ICU than outside. This finding remained when examining only patients with a PaO2/FiO2 ratio less than 300. Care areas outside of the ICU do not employ LTVV as often as ICUs and are, therefore, a possible target for process improvement.

COVID-19 is associated with bystander polyclonal autoreactive B cell activation as reflected by a broad autoantibody production, but none is linked to disease severity

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with autoimmune features and autoantibody production in a small subset of the population. Pre-existing neutralizing antitype I interferons (IFNs) autoantibodies are related to the severity of COVID-19. Plasma levels of IgG and IgM against 12 viral antigens and 103 self-antigens were evaluated using an antibody protein array in patients with severe/critical or mild/moderate COVID-19 disease and uninfected controls. Patients exhibited increased IgGs against Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 proteins compared to controls, but no difference was observed in the two patient groups. 78% autoreactive IgGs and 93% autoreactive IgMs were increased in patients versus controls. There was no difference in the plasma levels of anti-type I IFN autoantibodies or neutralizing anti-type I IFN activity of plasma samples from the two patient groups. Increased anti-type I IFN IgGs were correlated with higher lymphocyte accounts, suggesting a role of nonpathogenic autoantibodies. Notably, among the 115 antibodies tested, only plasma levels of IgGs against human coronavirus (HCOV)-229E and HCOV-NL63 spike proteins were associated with mild disease outcome. COVID-19 was associated with a bystander polyclonal autoreactive B cell activation, but none of the autoantibody levels were linked to disease severity. Long-term humoral immunity against HCOV-22E and HCOV-NL63 spike protein was associated with mild disease outcome. Understanding the mechanism of life-threatening COVID-19 is critical to reducing mortality and morbidity.