Search

Background: The reviews on the risk factors with ARDS and the worse outcomes concluded lacking robust data of risk factors to prevent COVID-19 and identified an urgent need for large sample and high-quality research in this area, as well as the features of the ARDS.Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 333 COVID-19 inpatients at two hospitals in Hubei of China in 2020. The COVID-19-related ARDS was diagnosed according to the Berlin criteria. The outcomes were ARDS development and the intubation or in-hospital death. The cox proportional hazard ratio (HR) models were employed to determine the significant risk factors. Results: The median number of days from symptom onset to ARDS diagnosis was 11.0 (IQR, 8.0–13.0). Up to 84.1% COVID-19-related ARDS patients demonstrated multiple organ injuries. The mortality rates were 41.9% and 85.7% in moderate and severe ARDS. The survival patients on invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) had been intubated earlier since ARDS diagnosis than those who had not survived (5.5 median days, IQR 4.0-7.0 days versus 11.5 median days, IQR 6.0-14.0 days, P < 0.001). Males and all abnormal laboratory indices associated with the higher risk of ARDS (P0.05). The sensitivity analyses found that lymphocyte count of < 1000 per mm3 at hospital admission were still significantly associated with developing ARDS when adjusting for age and male gender (HR, 4.10; 95% CI, 2.40-7.10), and oxygenation index (OI) ratio < 150 were more likely to predict the intubation/death after age adjustment (HR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.17-5.30). Conclusion: The SARS-CoV-2-caused ARDS was not the typical ARDS according to Berlin criteria. The alive patients with IMV had been intubated earlier since ARDS diagnosis than those who had not survived. We identified male gender and abnormal laboratory indices associated with the ARDS but were not linked with the intubation/death. Sensitivity analysis concluded lymphocyte count of < 1000 per mm3 could predict ARDS while OI ratio less than 150 could predict intubation/death.

Background: More evidence in understanding the heterogeneity of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and in improving strategy to increase the survival from the critical patients intubated is always needed. The study aimed to comprehensively explore the features of COVID-19-associated ARDS and the features and outcomes between the early and late intubation groups. Methods: This retrospective cohort included 65 adult COVID-19 inpatients with ARDS at two hospitals in Hubei, China. The ARDS in these patients was diagnosed according to the Berlin criteria. We defined intubation within 7 days of ARDS diagnosis as ‘early’ intubation and that performed from the eighth day as ‘late’ intubation based on literatures. The outcomes were invasive mechanical ventilation and in-hospital death. The log-binomial regression models were used to explore the risk factors and the Kaplan-Meier statistic was used to estimate the risk of mortality. Results: The median number of days from symptom onset to ARDS diagnosis was 11.0 (IQR, 8.0–13.0). Up to 84.1% COVID-19-related ARDS patients demonstrated multiple organ injuries. The mortality rates were 41.9% and 85.7% in moderate and severe ARDS. The early intubation and the late intubation had the differences in days from symptom onset/hospital admission/ARDS diagnosis to intubation (P = 0.023, P = 0.011, P < 0.001). Compared with the early-intubation group, the late-intubation group showed less severity at admission (median oxygenation index 159.0 95% CI 134.0-203.0 vs. 133.9 95% CI 98.3-183.2), but required more aggressive therapies (ICU 80% vs. 70%, CRRT 50% vs. 10%, prone-position 50% vs. 30%, and ECMO 50% vs. 10%) and had higher risk to die at hospital (RR, 3.18; 95% CI 1.98-5.12). Conclusion: The ARDS caused by COVID-19 was not typical ARDS due to prolonged onset time, multiple organ injuries, and higher mortalities. The late-intubation group showed less severity at admission but higher risk of in-hospital death than the early-intubation group.

Objective The purpose of the study was to evaluate the association between motor subtypes of postoperative delirium in the intensive care unit and fast-track failure (a composite outcome of prolonged stay in the intensive care unit >48 hours, intensive care unit readmission, and 30-day mortality) after cardiac surgery. Methods This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of 600 consecutive adults undergoing cardiac surgery at a university hospital in Hong Kong (July 2013 to July 2015). The motor subtypes of delirium were classified using the Richmond Agitation Sedation Score and Confusion Assessment Method intensive care unit assessments performed by trained bedside nurses. A generalized estimating equation was used to estimate a common relative risk of fast-track failure associated with motor subtypes. Results The incidences of hypoactive, hyperactive, and mixed motor subtypes were 4.3% (n = 26), 4.0% (n = 24), and 5.5% (n = 33), respectively. Fast-track failure occurred in 88 patients (14.7%). There was an association between delirium (all subtypes) and fast-track failure ( P = .048); hyperactive delirium (relative risk, 1.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-3.94); hypoactive delirium (relative risk, 2.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-5.84); and mixed delirium (relative risk, 2.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-5.88). Hypoactive and mixed subtypes were associated with prolonged intensive care unit stay (both P = .001). Conclusions Patients with pure hypoactive delirium had a similar risk of developing fast-track failure as other motor subtypes. Differentiation of motor subtypes is unlikely to be clinically important for prognostication of fast-track failure. However, because delirium is associated with poor outcomes, potential treatment strategies should address all subtypes equally.

Numerous risk prediction models are available for predicting delirium after cardiac surgery, but few have been directly compared with one another or been validated in an independent data set. We conducted a systematic review to identify validated risk prediction models of delirium (using the Confusion Assessment Method-Intensive Care Unit tool) after cardiac surgery and assessed the transportability of the risk prediction models on a prospective cohort of 600 consecutive patients undergoing cardiac surgery at a university hospital in Hong Kong from July 2013 to July 2015. The discrimination (c-statistic), calibration (GiViTI calibration belt), and clinical usefulness (decision curve analysis) of the risk prediction models were examined in a stepwise manner. Three published high-quality intensive care unit delirium risk prediction models (n=5939) were identified: Katznelson, the original PRE-DELIRIC, and the international recalibrated PRE-DELIRIC model. Delirium occurred in 83 patients (13.8%, 95% CI: 11.2-16.9%). After updating the intercept and regression coefficients in the Katznelson model, there was fair discrimination (0.62, 95% CI: 0.58-0.66) and good calibration. As the original PRE-DELIRIC model was already validated externally and recalibrated in six countries, we performed a logistic calibration on the recalibrated model and found acceptable discrimination (0.75, 95% CI: 0.72-0.79) and good calibration. Decision curve analysis demonstrated that the recalibrated PRE-DELIRIC risk model was marginally more clinically useful than the Katznelson model. Current models predict delirium risk in the intensive care unit after cardiac surgery with only fair to moderate accuracy and are insufficient for routine clinical use.

Postcardiac surgery delirium is associated with increased risks of morbidity, cognitive decline, poor health-related quality of life and mortality, and higher healthcare costs. We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to examine the effect of pharmacologic agents for the prevention and the treatment of delirium after cardiac surgery.Electronic search on PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ISI Web of Science, and CINAHL up to December 2013.Randomized controlled trials of pharmacologic agents used for the prevention and the treatment of delirium after emergency or elective cardiac surgery in adults.We extracted data on patient population, pharmacologic agents, delirium characteristics, rescue treatment, length of stays in the ICU and hospital, and mortality. For each trial, we assessed the risk of bias domains and rated the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.Of the 13 studies (10 prevention and three treatment) involving 5,848 patients, one multicentered randomized controlled trial on prophylactic dexamethasone made up 77% of the total sample size. The use of pharmacologic agents (dexamethasone, rivastigmine, risperidone, ketamine, dexmedetomidine, propofol, and clonidine) reduced the risk of delirium (relative risk, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.40-0.80) with quality of evidence rated as moderate. There was high quality of evidence for no increased risk of mortality (relative risk, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.57-1.38) associated with the use of prophylactic pharmacologic agents. Metaanalysis of treatment trials was not undertaken because of high heterogeneity. In two small trials (total number of patients = 133), haloperidol did not appear to be effective in treating delirium.Moderate to high-quality evidence supports the use of pharmacologic agents for the prevention of delirium, but results are based largely on one randomized controlled trial. The evidence for treating postcardiac surgery delirium with pharmacologic agents is inconclusive.