Search

SARS-Cov-2 (COVID-19) has become a major worldwide health concern since its appearance in China at the end of 2019.To evaluate the intrinsic mortality and burden of COVID-19 and seasonal influenza pneumonia in ICUs in the city of Lyon, France.A retrospective study.Six ICUs in a single institution in Lyon, France.Consecutive patients admitted to an ICU with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia from 27 February to 4 April 2020 (COVID-19 group) and seasonal influenza pneumonia from 1 November 2015 to 30 April 2019 (influenza group). A total of 350 patients were included in the COVID-19 group (18 refused to consent) and 325 in the influenza group (one refused to consent). Diagnosis was confirmed by RT-PCR. Follow-up was completed on 1 April 2021.Differences in 90-day adjusted-mortality between the COVID-19 and influenza groups were evaluated using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model.COVID-19 patients were younger, mostly men and had a higher median BMI, and comorbidities, including immunosuppressive condition or respiratory history were less frequent. In univariate analysis, no significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding in-ICU mortality, 30, 60 and 90-day mortality. After Cox modelling adjusted on age, sex, BMI, cancer, sepsis-related organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, simplified acute physiology score SAPS II score, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and myocardial infarction, the probability of death associated with COVID-19 was significantly higher in comparison to seasonal influenza [hazard ratio 1.57, 95% CI (1.14 to 2.17); P = 0.006]. The clinical course and morbidity profile of both groups was markedly different; COVID-19 patients had less severe illness at admission (SAPS II score, 37 [28 to 48] vs. 48 [39 to 61], P 0.001 and SOFA score, 4 [2 to 8] vs. 8 [5 to 11], P 0.001), but the disease was more severe considering ICU length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, PEEP level and prone positioning requirement.After ICU admission, COVID-19 was associated with an increased risk of death compared with seasonal influenza. Patient characteristics, clinical course and morbidity profile of these diseases is markedly different.

Epidural clonidine has been proposed as an adjunct for anaesthetic mixtures during labour. Administered as a bolus, clonidine may have side effects such as sedation and hypotension; its continuous infusion could be attractive in this respect. We, therefore, conducted a randomized, double-blind trial using patient-controlled epidural analgesia with a background infusion using a low dose of clonidine during labour.A total of 128 healthy parturients in active labour received a patient-controlled epidural analgesia solution of 0.0625% levobupivacaine and sufentanil 0.25 microg ml(-1) with or without clonidine 2 microg ml(-1). Ninety-five parturients were analysed. The pain score over time was evaluated as well as drug volume utilization; supplementation bolus and side effects were recorded. The primary endpoint was maternal satisfaction [ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT00437996)].Three patients in the control group failed to achieve satisfactory epidural analgesia owing to a technical issue. Although the primary endpoint was not statistically significant, analgesia was more pronounced and obtained earlier in the clonidine group. The area under the curve for the visual analogue pain score was significantly lower in the clonidine group. In this group, hourly doses of levobupivacaine and sufentanil were reduced (13.9 +/- 4.3 vs. 16.3 ml +/- 4.0; P = 0.005) as well as rescue supplementation and pruritus incidence (18 vs. 46%; P = 0.004). Maternal blood pressure was significantly lower, over time, in the clonidine group but remained within the normal range. Sedation was similar in both groups (4.3 vs. 2.0%; not significant).The addition of clonidine to epidural levobupivacaine and sufentanil for patient-controlled epidural analgesia in labour improved analgesia, reduced the supplementation rate and reduced pruritus without improvement in maternal satisfaction. Blood pressure was significantly lower in the clonidine group over time but without clinical consequence.

Few data are available on the efficacy of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in postoperative patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF).Seventy-two patients coming from the surgical wards with postoperative ARF were retrospectively evaluated. The major characteristics of patients who were intubated were compared with the characteristics of those who were not after a trial of NIV. Predictive factors for failure of NIV were analysed.Out of 72 patients with ARF after surgery who were treated with NIV, 42 avoided intubation (58%). On a univariate analysis, a decrease in the paO2/FiO2 ratio after 1 h of NIV (223 +/- 84 to 160 +/- 68 mmHg, P0.05) was associated with NIV failure and need for tracheal intubation because of nosocomial pneumonia and an increased simplified acute physiology score (SAPS) 2. In a multivariate analysis, nosocomial pneumonia [odds ratio (OR) 4.189; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.383-12.687] and SAPS 2 higher than 35 (OR 4.969; 95% CI 1.627-15.172) were independent predictive factors of NIV failure. NIV success was associated with a reduced ICU stay (16.8 vs. 26.1 days, P0.001).NIV could be considered in postoperative patients who presented with ARF. Nosocomial pneumonia is predictive of NIV failure.