Search

We studied 83 cardiac-surgery patients with nasal S. aureus carriage who received 4 intranasal administrations of XF-73 nasal gel or placebo S. aureus nasal carriage reduction of 2.5 log10 with XF-73 compared to 0.4 log10 CFU/mL for those who received placebo (95% CI, −2.7 to −1.5; P < .0001).

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to disrupt the provision of cardiac procedural services due to overwhelming interval surges in COVID-19 cases and the associated crisis of cardiac intervention deferment. Despite the availability of widespread testing, highly efficacious vaccines, and intensive public health efforts, the pandemic is entering its third year, where new severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 variants have increased the likelihood that patients scheduled for a cardiac intervention will contract COVID-19 in the perioperative period. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Workforce on Critical Care, the STS Workforce on Adult Cardiac and Vascular Surgery, and the Canadian Society of Cardiac Surgeons have developed this document, endorsed by the STS and affirmed by the Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions and the Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology, to provide guidance for cardiac procedure deferment and intervention timing for preoperative patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This document is intended for the perioperative cardiac surgical team and outlines the present state of the pandemic, the impact of COVID-19 on intervention outcome, and offers a recommended algorithm for individualized cardiac procedure triage and timing.

We reviewed our experience with 505 patients with confirmed coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) supported with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) at 45 hospitals and estimated risk factors for mortality.A multi-institutional database was created and used to assess all patients with COVID-19 who were supported with ECMO. A Bayesian mixed-effects logistic regression model was estimated to assess the effect on survival of multiple potential risk factors for mortality, including age at cannulation for ECMO as well as days between diagnosis of COVID-19 and intubation and days between intubation and cannulation for ECMO.Median time on ECMO was 18 days (interquartile range, 10-29 days). All 505 patients separated from ECMO: 194 patients (38.4%) survived and 311 patients (61.6%) died. Survival with venovenous ECMO was 184 of 466 patients (39.5%), and survival with venoarterial ECMO was 8 of 30 patients (26.7%). Survivors had lower median age (44 vs 51 years, P.001) and shorter median time interval from diagnosis to intubation (7 vs 11 days, P = .001). Adjusting for several confounding factors, we estimated that an ECMO patient intubated on day 14 after the diagnosis of COVID-19 vs day 4 had a relative odds of survival of 0.65 (95% credible interval, 0.44-0.96; posterior probability of negative effect, 98.5%). Age was also negatively associated with survival: relative to a 38-year-old patient, we estimated that a 57-year-old patient had a relative odds of survival of 0.43 (95% credible interval, 0.30-0.61; posterior probability of negative effect,99.99%).ECMO facilitates salvage and survival of select critically ill patients with COVID-19. Survivors tend to be younger and have shorter time from diagnosis to intubation. Survival of patients supported with only venovenous ECMO was 39.5%.

BACKGROUND: The role of ECMO in the management of patients with COVID-19 continues to evolve. The purpose of this manuscript is to review a multi-institutional clinical experience in 200 consecutive patients at 29 hospitals with confirmed COVID-19 supported with ECMO. METHODS: This analysis includes our first 200 COVID-19 patients with complete data who were supported with and separated from ECMO. These patients were cannulated between March 17 and December 9, 2020. Differences by mortality group were assessed using chi-square tests for categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis rank sum tests and Welch's ANOVA for continuous variables. RESULTS: Median ECMO time was 15 days (IQR=9-28). All 200 patients have separated from ECMO: 90 patients (45%) survived and 110 patients (55%) died. Survival with veno-venous ECMO was 87 of 188 patients (46.3%), while survival with veno-arterial ECMO was 3 of 12 patients (25%). Of 90 survivors, 77 have been discharged from the hospital and 13 remain hospitalized at the ECMO-providing hospital. Survivors had lower median age (47 versus 56 years, p

Effective coping strategies are of great importance for trainees actively navigating the challenges and stresses of graduate medical education (GME). Although there is increasing emphasis on the concept of emotional intelligence (EI) in medical curricula, the range of behavioral skills learned in typical EI training may not be sufficient when dealing with extreme stress – something that healthcare students in general, and GME trainees as a subset, continue to struggle with. Under the conditions of extreme stress, multiple competing priorities and high cognitive load, even those with excellent command of EI skills may not be able to universally maintain sufficient emotional control. This, in turn, exposes a significant opportunity for further understanding and development in this dynamically evolving area of investigation. Increasing amount of research suggests that a unique skill set exists, known as ‘coping intelligence’ (CI), that may help fill the gap under the conditions of extreme stress and significantly elevated cognitive load. This chapter will discuss CI as a unique and novel concept, further exploring the possibility of introducing this new construct into the realm of GME.

The role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in the management of severely ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to evolve. The purpose of this study is to review a multi-institutional clinical experience in 100 consecutive patients, at 20 hospitals, with confirmed COVID-19 supported with ECMO. This analysis includes our first 100 patients with complete data who had confirmed COVID-19 and were supported with ECMO. The first patient in the cohort was placed on ECMO on March 17, 2020. Differences by the mortality group were assessed using χ2 tests for categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis rank-sum tests and Welch's analysis of variance for continuous variables. The median time on ECMO was 12.0 days (IQR = 8-22 days). All 100 patients have since been separated from ECMO: 50 patients survived and 50 patients died. The rate of survival with veno-venous ECMO was 49 of 96 patients (51%), whereas that with veno-arterial ECMO was 1 of 4 patients (25%). Of 50 survivors, 49 have been discharged from the hospital and 1 remains hospitalized at the ECMO-providing hospital. Survivors were generally younger, with a lower median age (47 versus 56.5 years, p = 0.014). In the 50 surviving patients, adjunctive therapies while on ECMO included intravenous steroids (26), anti-interleukin-6 receptor blockers (26), convalescent plasma (22), remdesivir (21), hydroxychloroquine (20), and prostaglandin (15). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation may facilitate salvage and survival of selected critically ill patients with COVID-19. Survivors tend to be younger. Substantial variation exists in the drug treatment of COVID-19, but ECMO offers a reasonable rescue strategy.

What started as a cluster of patients with a mysterious respiratory illness in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, was later determined to be coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The pathogen severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a novel Betacoronavirus, was subsequently isolated as the causative agent. SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted by respiratory droplets and fomites and presents clinically with fever, fatigue, myalgias, conjunctivitis, anosmia, dysgeusia, sore throat, nasal congestion, cough, dyspnea, nausea, vomiting, and/or diarrhea. In most critical cases, symptoms can escalate into acute respiratory distress syndrome accompanied by a runaway inflammatory cytokine response and multiorgan failure. As of this article's publication date, COVID-19 has spread to approximately 200 countries and territories, with over 4.3 million infections and more than 290,000 deaths as it has escalated into a global pandemic. Public health concerns mount as the situation evolves with an increasing number of infection hotspots around the globe. New information about the virus is emerging just as rapidly. This has led to the prompt development of clinical patient risk stratification tools to aid in determining the need for testing, isolation, monitoring, ventilator support, and disposition. COVID-19 spread is rapid, including imported cases in travelers, cases among close contacts of known infected individuals, and community-acquired cases without a readily identifiable source of infection. Critical shortages of personal protective equipment and ventilators are compounding the stress on overburdened healthcare systems. The continued challenges of social distancing, containment, isolation, and surge capacity in already stressed hospitals, clinics, and emergency departments have led to a swell in technologically-assisted care delivery strategies, such as telemedicine and web-based triage. As the race to develop an effective vaccine intensifies, several clinical trials of antivirals and immune modulators are underway, though no reliable COVID-19-specific therapeutics (inclusive of some potentially effective single and multi-drug regimens) have been identified as of yet. With many nations and regions declaring a state of emergency, unprecedented quarantine, social distancing, and border closing efforts are underway. Implementation of social and physical isolation measures has caused sudden and profound economic hardship, with marked decreases in global trade and local small business activity alike, and full ramifications likely yet to be felt. Current state-of-science, mitigation strategies, possible therapies, ethical considerations for healthcare workers and policymakers, as well as lessons learned for this evolving global threat and the eventual return to a 'new normal' are discussed in this article.

Background: The value of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for patients suffering from novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a rescue therapy for respiratory failure remains controversial and associated with high mortality rates of 50% to 82% in early reports from Wuhan, China. We hypothesized that patient outcomes would be improved at our tertiary cardiothoracic surgery referral center with a protocolized team-approach for ECMO treatment of patients with severe COVID-19 disease. Case Presentation: A 51-year-old healthy female developed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) bilateral pneumonia while vacationing in Colorado with her family. She was transferred to our facility for a higher level of care. Her respiratory status continued to deteriorate despite maximized critical care, including prone positioning ventilation and nitric oxide inhalation therapy. Veno-venous ECMO was initiated on hospital day 7 in conjunction with a 10-day course of compassionate use antiviral treatment with remdesivir. The patient’s condition improved significantly and she was decannulated from ECMO on hospital day 17 (ECMO day 11). She was successfully extubated and eventually discharged to rehabilitation on hospital day 28.Conclusion: This case report demonstrates that the judicious application of ECMO for respiratory failure due to SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in conjunction with compassionate use antiviral treatment (remdesivir) resulted in a positive outcome in a young patient with a high predicted mortality from COVID-19. Future prospective multi-center studies are needed to validate these findings in a larger cohort of patients.

Background The concerns of the highly contagious and morbid nature of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-2019) have prompted healthcare workers to implement strict droplet and contact isolation precautions. Unfortunately, some patients who may be or presumptively or confirmed as infected with COVID-2019 may also require emergent surgical procedures. As such, given the high-risk for exposure of many healthcare workers involved the complex requirements for appropriate isolation must be adhered to. Case presentation We present our experience with a 77-year-old who required emergency cardiac surgery for a presumed acute aortic syndrome in the setting of a presumed, and eventually confirmed, COVID-2019 infection. We outline the necessary steps to maintain strict isolation precautions to limit potential exposure to the surgical Team. Conclusions We hereby provide our algorithm for emergent surgical procedures in critically-ill patients with presumptive or confirmed infection with COVID-2019. The insights from this case report can potentially be templated to other facilities in order to uphold high standards of infection prevention and patient safety in surgery during the current COVID-19 pandemic.

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, important discoveries and considerations emerge regarding the SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) pathogen; its biological and epidemiological characteristics; and the corresponding psychological, societal, and public health (PH) impacts. During the past year, the global community underwent a massive transformation, including the implementation of numerous nonpharmacological interventions; critical diversions or modifications across various spheres of our economic and public domains; and a transition from consumption-driven to conservation-based behaviors. Providing essential necessities such as food, water, health care, financial, and other services has become a formidable challenge, with significant threats to the existing supply chains and the shortage or reduction of workforce across many sectors of the global economy. Food and pharmaceutical supply chains constitute uniquely vulnerable and critically important areas that require high levels of safety and compliance. Many regional health-care systems faced at least one wave of overwhelming COVID-19 case surges, and still face the possibility of a new wave of infections on the horizon, potentially in combination with other endemic diseases such as influenza, dengue, tuberculosis, and malaria. In this context, the need for an effective and scientifically informed leadership to sustain and improve global capacity to ensure international health security is starkly apparent. Public health “blind spotting,” promulgation of pseudoscience, and academic dishonesty emerged as significant threats to population health and stability during the pandemic. The goal of this consensus statement is to provide a focused summary of such “blind spots” identified during an expert group intense analysis of “missed opportunities” during the initial wave of the pandemic.

For nearly 60 years, there have been two surgical treatment options for individuals with severe advanced heart failure: heart transplantation or implantation of a left ventricular assist device. As these fields have advanced in parallel, improvements in surgical technique, device development, and patient selection have improved outcomes for both therapies. Development of a comprehensive approach to the management of the most severe forms of advanced heart failure requires a deep understanding of both heart transplantation and durable ventricular assistance, including recent advancements in both fields. This article will review the substantial progress in the fields of heart transplantation and mechanical left ventricular assistance, including recent changes to organ allocation prioritization and left ventricular assist device evaluation, both of which have dramatically influenced practice in these fields.