Recommendations for the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Intensive Care Units

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the admission of a high number of patients to the ICU, generally due to severe respiratory failure. Since the appearance of the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, at the end of 2019, in China, a huge number of treatment recommendations for this entity have been published, not always supported by sufficient scientific evidence or with methodological rigor necessary. Thanks to the efforts of different groups of researchers, we currently have the results of clinical trials, and other types of studies, of higher quality. We consider it necessary to create a document that includes recommendations that collect this evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, but also aspects that other guidelines have not considered and that we consider essential in the management of critical patients with COVID-19. For this, a drafting committee has been created, made up of members of the SEMICYUC Working Groups more directly related to different specific aspects of the management of these patients.

[Pharmacological treatment of COVID-19: Narrative review of the Working Group in Infectious Diseases and Sepsis (GTEIS) and the Working Groups in Transfusions and Blood Products (GTTH)]

Infection by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, known as COVID-19 (COronaVIrus Disease-19) was initially detected in China in December 2019, and has subsequently spread rapidly throughout the world, to the point that on March 11 the World Health Organization (WHO) reported that the outbreak could be defined as a pandemic. COVID-19 disease ranges from mild flu-like episodes to other serious and even life-threatening conditions, mainly due to acute respiratory failure. These patients are frequently admitted to our Intensive Care Units in relation to acute respiratory distress syndrome. The lack of a treatment based on scientific evidence has led to the use of different management guidelines, in many cases with rapid changes in the applied protocols. Recent reviews in reputed journals have underscored the lack of proven therapies and the need for clinical trials to establish clear and objective treatment guidelines. The present study provides an update on the currently applied treatment, and intends to offer help in relation to daily care, without seeking to replace the protocols adopted in each individual center.

New oral anticoagulants in severe trauma patients: enemy at the gates?

The high incidence of trauma, especially in elderly people anticoagulated with new oral anticoagulants (NOAs), has become a major challenge, particularly in critical situations with life-threatening bleeding. Under these circumstances, urgent NOA reversion becomes mandatory. Prothrombin complex has become a frequent indication in critical situations in which rapid reversal of anticoagulation is needed and where the use of fresh frozen plasma is limited. This study offers our point of view regarding the usefulness of NOAs, not only in the prevention of cardioembolic events but also as regards their emergent reversion in cases of severe bleeding associated to trauma.

[Relationship between the alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient and PaO₂/FiO₂-introducing PEEP into the model]

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient (Grad[A-a]O₂) helps confirm the influence of PEEP on PaFi (PaO₂/FiO₂).

DESIGN

Observational study; we used linear regression to perform a multivariate study to improve the PaFi formula by taking PEEP into account.

SETTING

Tertiary hospital.

PATIENTS

We included all patients who were admitted to the intensive care unit, regardless of pulmonary damage.

VARIABLES

We recorded personal history, clinical judgment, intensive care data, severity scores on the first day and progression. Two calculated variables: PaFi and Grad(A-a)O₂.

RESULTS

A total of 956 patients were included: 63.9% men; median age 68 years. On the first day, 31.8% did not have mechanical ventilation (MV), 13.1% had non-invasive MV and 55.1% had invasive MV. PaFi values: 32.9% 0-200, 32.2% 201-300, and 34.8% >300. PEEP values: 0-5 69.8%, 6-10 27.5% and >10 2.6%. We observed a correlation (Pearson) between Grad(A-a)O₂ and PaFi of -0.84 (p<0.001). On performing multiple regression (dependent variable: Grad[A-a]O₂), the following variables were included in the model: PaFi, PEEP, APACHE IV and SOFA; coefficient of determination (R²) of 0.62 without PEEP and 0.72 with PEEP. We changed the PaFi formula, referring to it as PaFip (PaFi plus PEEP): Ln (PaFi/[PEEP+12]). Correlation index between PaFip and Grad(A-a)O₂: -0.9 (p<0.001). We performed linear regression (dependent variable: Grad[A-a]O₂) and used PaFip instead of PaFi. Only PaFi remained in the model, and was discretely complemented by APACHE IV; R²=0.8.

CONCLUSIONS

By adding PEEP to the PaFi model (PaFip), we clearly improve the latter, as reflected by a better goodness of fit.

[Emergency radiology: what clinicians expect from radiologists]

We review the relations between the radiology department and the clinicians that attend emergency patients, complementing our opinions with a survey conducted in the emergency departments of hospitals in the autonomous region of Madrid. A dedicated emergency radiology section is present in 63.2% of hospitals. Radiologists are readily available to consult in the emergency department in 100%. Radiologists are involved in the initial workup in 61% of hospitals, in follow-up in 22.3%, and in both the initial workup and follow-up in 16.7%. At least one common protocol is shared by radiologists and emergency clinicians in 73.7% of hospitals. Radiologists participate in deciding which imaging tests to perform in 78.9% of hospitals. Radiologists provide a written report of the examination in 83.3% of cases. Continual assessment of the relations between the emergency department and the radiology department will enable us to understand their dynamics and to know what aspects can be improved.

Factor VII activado recombinante

Recombinant activated factor VII is a drug that should be considered when there is massive bleeding. Its activation after it is bond to the tissue factor expressed triggers the coagulation cascade by action sequence of the different factors. Since its approval as treatment for bleeding episodes in patients with hemophilia, its indications have been increasing. It is a drug is indicated in non-traumatic intracranial bleeding, in patients with severe multiple traumas, and in those bleeding conditions that may affect patient viability. Although the adverse effects are well characterized, it is still a newly used drug. Thus, the potential risks of its use in each patient must be weighed.

[Sedoanalgesia with remifentanil in definitive pacemaker implant]

OBJECTIVE

Describe the use of remifentanil in definitive pacemaker implant.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational study.

SCOPE

Intensive Care Unit of two general hospitals.

PATIENTS

Ninety-four patients subjected to DPM implant under sedation with remifentanil.

INTERVENTIONS

The protocol for DPM implant was conducted: premedication with metoclopramide, remifentanil perfusion (20 micro g/ml), local infiltration with mepivacaine 2%, administration of magnesium metamizole at the end of the implant and posterior discontinuation of remifentanil. Remifentanil perfusion was initiated at 2 micro g/minute, increasing it until reaching a sedation grade 2-3 on the Ramsay scale, with a maximum of 6 micro g/minute. MAIN ENDPOINTS: Time needed to reach the desired sedation grade and duration of sedation, maximum dose of remifentanil necessary, frequency that another sedation was needed and of adverse events were recorded. Continuous quantitative endpoints were expressed as mean +/- SD.

RESULTS

A sedation grade 2-3 was achieved with a perfusion rhythm of 3.6 +/- 1.4 micro g/min, in 20 +/- 22 minutes. In 89 patients (94.6%), the implant was performed only with remifentanil. Frequency of adverse events were nauseas/vomiting 21.3%, hypotension 5.3% and respiratory depression 1%. Remifentanil perfusion was discontinued in 3 patients (3.2%) due to appearance of adverse events. Another sedoanalgesic was used in 2 patients (2.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Remifentanil is useful in the implant of DPM as a sedoanalgesia method. Serious undesired effects are rare. Future studies are necessary to completely establish its effectiveness and safety in these types of procedures.

[Efficacy of an intervention in smoking cessation in patients with myocardial infarction]

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of an structured intervention based on a medical advice versus to the ordinary anti-tobacco advice in patients with miocardial infarction who are attended in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

90 patients were randomly selected to receive either the specific intervention (intervention group) or the ordinary advice (control group). The medical advice was given during the ICU hospitalization and during the second, the third and the fourth week. One year later the smoking habit was evaluated.

RESULTS

After one year 26 patients of the intervention group and 31 patients of the control group had stopped smoking (RR = 0.88 [CI 95% RR] 0.57 to 1.37).

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of patients who stop smoking after a miocardial infarction is high. The structured medical counselling was not effective to reduce the number of smokers at one year.