Search

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an ongoing global crisis challenging the worldwide healthcare systems. Many patients present with a mismatch of profound hypoxemia and few signs of respiratory distress (i.e., silent hypoxemia). This particular clinical presentation is often cited, but data are limited. Main Body: We describe dyspnea sensation as assessed by using the BORG scale in pulmonary patients admitted to the emergency room during a 4-week period and transferred to the respiratory department of Siloah Hospital, Hannover, Germany. From October 1 to November 1, 2020, 82 patients with hypoxemia defined as oxygen demand to achieve an oxygen saturation (SpO2) ≥92% were included. In 45/82 (55%) patients, SARS-CoV-2 was detected by PCR on admission. Among non-COVID patients, exacerbation of COPD was the main diagnosis (15/37, 41%). All subjects rated their perceived dyspnea using the modified Borg CR10 scale. Patients in the non-COVID group suffered from more dyspnea on the modified Borg CR10 scale (median 1, IQR: 0–2 vs. median 5, IQR: 3–6, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, "silent hypoxemia" as defined by the dyspnea Borg CR10 scale ≥5 was independently associated with COVID-19 and presence of severe hypocapnia with an odds ratio of 0.221 (95% confidence interval 0.054, 0.907, p 0.036). Conclusion: Among pulmonary patients with acute hypoxemia defined as oxygen demand, patients suffering from COVID-19 experience less dyspnea compared to non-COVID patients. "Silent" hypoxemia was more common in COVID-19 patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bronchoscopy is widely used and regarded as standard of care in most intensive care units (ICUs). Data concerning recommendations for on-call bronchoscopy are lacking. Objectives: Evaluation of recommendations, complications, and outcome of on-call bronchoscopies. Method: A retrospective single-centre analysis was conducted in a large university hospital. All on-call bronchoscopies performed outside normal working hours in the year before (period 1) and after (period 2) establishing a catalogue of recommendations for indications of on-call bronchoscopy on November 1, 2016, were included. Results: Overall, 924 bronchoscopies in 538 patients were analysed. A relative reduction of 83.6% from 794 bronchoscopies in 432 patients (1.84 per patient) during period 1 to 130 in 107 patients (1.21 per patient) during period 2 was observed. Most bronchoscopies (812/924, 87.9%) were performed in ICUs, and 416 patients (77.3%) were intubated. Bronchoscopies for excessive secretions decreased significantly during period 2. Fifty-three of 130 bronchoscopies (40.8%) fulfilled the specified recommendations during period 2, in comparison with 16.8% in period 1 (p < 0.001). Complications were recorded in 58 of 924 procedures (6.3%) and were more frequent in period 2, especially moderate bleeding. In-hospital mortality of patients undergoing on-call bronchoscopy did not differ between periods and was 28.7 and 30.2% in periods 1 and 2, respectively. Conclusion: The introduction of recommendations for on-call bronchoscopy led to a significant decline of on-call bronchoscopies without negatively affecting outcome. More evidence is needed in on-call bronchoscopy, especially for ICU patients with intrinsic higher complication rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) has become an established treatment option in selected patients with end-stage lung emphysema. ELVR, however, does not always prevent disease progression, and patients may inevitably be considered for lung transplantation. Objectives: Currently, limited data exist regarding the impact of preceding ELVR on lung transplantation outcomes. Methods: A retrospective, single-center analysis of lung transplantation (LTx) waiting list candidates, who had previously undergone ELVR for emphysema between 2010 and 2014, was performed. Outcomes were compared to matched (1:2) controls who underwent LTx for emphysema without previous ELVR. The 12-month survival after LTx represented the primary end point. Results: In total 23/693 (3%) patients listed for LTx between January 2010 and May 2014 had undergone ELVR, of whom 20/23 (87%) proceeded to LTx (ELVR group). Forty matched non-ELVR emphysema patients acted as controls. Bronchiectasis on CT prior to LTx was more evident in ELVR patients [11/20 (55%) vs. 12/40 (30%); p = 0.04] as well as airway colonization after LTx [10/20 (50%) vs. 6/40 (15%); p = 0.004]. Among ELVR patients, the most prevalent colonizing organism was Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (4/10 patients, 40%). No significant differences were observed in LTx waiting list time, duration of LTx procedure, ventilatory support, ICU stay after LTx or time to hospital discharge. One ELVR patient (5%) died 189 days after LTx from pneumonia, compared to 1 non-ELVR patient (3%) who died after 269 days (p = 0.61). Conclusions: Previous ELVR treatment was not associated with differing outcomes following LTx. Increased bacterial colonization rates were evident and warrant further investigation. © 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]