Purpose Severely ill patients affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) develop circulatory failure. We aimed to report patterns of left and right ventricular dysfunction in the first echocardiography following admission to intensive care unit (ICU). Methods Retrospective, descriptive study that collected echocardiographic and clinical information from severely ill COVID-19 patients admitted to 14 ICUs in 8 countries. Patients admitted to ICU who received at least one echocardiography between 1st February 2020 and 30th June 2021 were included. Clinical and echocardiographic data were uploaded using a secured web-based electronic database (REDCap). Results Six hundred and seventy-seven patients were included and the first echo was performed 2 [1, 4] days after ICU admission. The median age was 65 [56, 73] years, and 71% were male. Left ventricle (LV) and/or right ventricle (RV) systolic dysfunction were found in 234 (34.5%) patients. 149 (22%) patients had LV systolic dysfunction (with or without RV dysfunction) without LV dilatation and no elevation in filling pressure. 152 (22.5%) had RV systolic dysfunction. In 517 patients with information on both paradoxical septal motion and quantitative RV size, 90 (17.4%) had acute cor pulmonale (ACP). ACP was associated with mechanical ventilation (OR > 4), pulmonary embolism (OR > 5) and increased PaCO 2 . Exploratory analyses showed that patients with ACP and older age were more likely to die in hospital (including ICU). Conclusion Almost one-third of this cohort of critically ill COVID-19 patients exhibited abnormal LV and/or RV systolic function in their first echocardiography assessment. While LV systolic dysfunction appears similar to septic cardiomyopathy, RV systolic dysfunction was related to pressure overload due to positive pressure ventilation, hypercapnia and pulmonary embolism. ACP and age seemed to be associated with mortality in this cohort. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-022-06685-2.

No abstract

There has been a recent explosion of education and training in echocardiography in the specialties of anesthesiology and critical care. These devices, by their impact on clinical management, are changing the way surgery is performed and critical care is delivered. A number of international bodies have made recommendations for training and developed examinations and accreditations.The challenge to medical educators in this area is to deliver the training needed to achieve competence into already over-stretched curricula.The authors found an apparent increase in the use of simulators, with proven efficacy in improving technical skills and knowledge. There is still an absence of evidence on how it should be included in training programs and in the accreditation of certain levels.There is a conviction that this form of simulation can enhance and accelerate the understanding and practice of echocardiography by the anesthesiologist and intensivists, particularly at the beginning of the learning curve.

Background: The echocardiography working group of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine recognized the need to provide structured guidance for future CCE research methodology and reporting based on a systematic appraisal of the current literature. Here is reported this systematic appraisal. Methods: We conducted a systematic review, registered on the Prospero database. A total of 43 items of common interest to all echocardiography studies were initially listed by the experts, and other "topic-specific" items were separated into five main categories of interest (left ventricular systolic function, LVSF n = 15, right ventricular function, RVF n = 18, left ventricular diastolic function, LVDF n = 15, fluid management, FM n = 7, and advanced echocardiography techniques, AET n = 17). We evaluated the percentage of items reported per study and the fraction of studies reporting a single item. Results: From January 2000 till December 2017 a total of 209 articles were included after systematic search and screening, 97 for LVSF, 48 for RVF, 51 for LVDF, 36 for FM and 24 for AET. Shock and ARDS were relatively common among LVSF articles (both around 15%) while ARDS comprised 25% of RVF articles. Transthoracic echocardiography was the main echocardiography mode, in 87% of the articles for AET topic, followed by 81% for FM, 78% for LVDF, 70% for LVSF and 63% for RVF. The percentage of items per study as well as the fraction of study reporting an item was low or very low, except for FM. As an illustration, the left ventricular size was only reported by 56% of studies in the LVSF topic, and half studies assessing RVF reported data on pulmonary artery systolic pressure. Conclusion: This analysis confirmed sub-optimal reporting of several items listed by an expert panel. The analysis will help the experts in the development of guidelines for CCE study design and reporting.

No abstract