Search

Rationale: The impact of palliative care consultation on end-of-life care has not previously been evaluated in a multi-center study.Objectives: To evaluate the impact of palliative care consultation on the incidence of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed and comfort care received at the end-of-life in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.Methods: We used the Society of Critical Care Medicine's COVID-19 registry to extract clinical data on patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 31st, 2020 to March 17th, 2021 and died during their hospitalization. The proportion of patients who received palliative care consultation was assessed in patients who did and did not receive CPR (primary outcome) and comfort care (secondary outcome). Propensity matching was used to account for potential confounding variables.Measurements and Main Results: 3,227 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in the incidence of palliative care consultation between the CPR and no-CPR groups (19.9% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.8334). Patients who received comfort care at the end-of-life were significantly more likely to have received palliative care consultation (43.3% vs. 7.7%, p < 0.0001). After propensity matching for comfort care on demographic characteristics and comorbidities, this relationship was still significant (43.2% vs. 8.5%; p < 0.0001).Conclusion: Palliative care consultation was not associated with CPR performed at the end-of-life but was associated with increased incidence of comfort care being utilized. These results suggest that utilizing palliative care consultation at the end-of-life may better align the needs and values of patients with the care they receive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A lung transplant (LT) patient developed 2 distinct episodes of COVID-19, confirmed by whole-genome sequencing, which was caused by the Delta, and then followed 6 weeks later, by the Omicron variant. The clinical course with Omicron was more severe, leading us to speculate that Omicron may not be any milder among LT patients. We discuss the potential mechanisms behind the Omicron not being any milder among LT patients and emphasize the need for outcomes data among these patients. Until such data become available, it may be prudent to maintain clinical equipoise as regards the relative virulence of the newer variants among LT patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are limited data regarding the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines among lung transplant (LT) patients. We included all LT patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and December 10, 2021 (n = 84; median age 55, range, 20-73 years; males 65.5%). The study group was divided into 3 groups based on the vaccination status (patients who did not complete the primary series for any of the vaccines: n = 58; those with 2 doses of messenger RNA (mRNA) or 1 dose of the adenoviral vector vaccine, vaccinated group: n = 16; those with at least 1 additional dose beyond the primary series, boosted group: n = 10). Pulmonary parenchymal involvement on chest computed tomography scan was less common among the boosted group (P =.009). The proportion of patients with new or worsening respiratory failure was significantly lower among the vaccinated and boosted groups and these patients were significantly more likely to achieve the composite endpoint of oxygen-dependence free survival (P =.02). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, higher body mass index, restrictive lung disease as the transplant indication, and preinfection chronic lung allograft dysfunction were independently associated with acute or acute on chronic respiratory failure while being on therapeutic dose anticoagulation and having received the booster dose had a protective effect. COVID-19 vaccines appear to have several favorable effects among LT patients with breakthrough infections including lower likelihood of allograft involvement on imaging (among boosted patients), need of hospitalization, and complications such as new or worsening respiratory failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are limited data on management strategies and outcomes among lung transplant (LT) patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We implemented management protocols based on the best available evidence and consensus among multidisciplinary teams. The current study reports our experience and outcomes using this protocol-based management strategy. We included single or bilateral LT patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 on nasopharyngeal swab between March 1, 2020, to December 15, 2020 (n = 25; median age: 60, range 20-73 years; M: F 17:8). A group of patients with Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) infection during 2016-18 were included to serve as a comparator group (n = 36). As compared to RSV, patients with COVID-19 were more likely to present with constitutional symptoms, spirometric decline, pulmonary opacities, new or worsening respiratory failure, and need for ventilator support. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were less likely to receive a multimodality treatment strategy, and they experienced worse post-infection lung function loss, functional decline, and three-month survival. A significant proportion of patients with COVID-19 needed readmission for worsening allograft function (36.4%), and chronic kidney disease at initial presentation was associated with this complication. Lower pre-morbid FEV 1 appeared to increase the risk of new or worsening respiratory failure, which was associated with worse outcomes. Overall hospital survival was 88% (n = 22). Follow-up data was available for all discharged patients (median: 43.5 days, range 15-287 days). A majority had persistent radiological opacities (19/22, 86.4%), with nearly half of the patients with available post-COVID-19 spirometry showing > 10% loss in lung function (6/13, median loss: 14.5%, range 10%-31%). Despite similar demographic characteristics and predispositions, LT patients with COVID-19 are sicker and experience worse outcomes as compared to RSV. Despite the availability of newer therapeutic agents, COVID-19 continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]