Background Dexamethasone decreases mortality in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has become the standard of care during the second wave of pandemic. Dexamethasone is an immunosuppressive treatment potentially increasing the risk of secondary hospital acquired infections in critically ill patients. We conducted an observational retrospective study in three French intensive care units (ICUs) comparing the first and second waves of pandemic to investigate the role of dexamethasone in the occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and blood stream infections (BSI). Patients admitted from March to November 2020 with a documented COVID-19 and requiring mechanical ventilation (MV) for ≥ 48 h were included. The main study outcomes were the incidence of VAP and BSI according to the use of dexamethasone. Secondary outcomes were the ventilator-free days (VFD) at day-28 and day-60, ICU and hospital length of stay and mortality. Results Among the 151 patients included, 84 received dexamethasone, all but one during the second wave. VAP occurred in 63% of patients treated with dexamethasone (DEXA+) and 57% in those not receiving dexamethasone (DEXA−) (p = 0.43). The cumulative incidence of VAP, considering death, duration of MV and late immunosuppression as competing factors was not different between groups (p = 0.59). A multivariate analysis did not identify dexamethasone as an independent risk factor for VAP occurrence. The occurrence of BSI was not different between groups (29 vs. 30%; p = 0.86). DEXA+ patients had more VFD at day-28 (9 (0–21) vs. 0 (0–11) days; p = 0.009) and a reduced ICU length of stay (20 (11–44) vs. 32 (17–46) days; p = 0.01). Mortality did not differ between groups. Conclusions In this cohort of COVID-19 patients requiring invasive MV, dexamethasone was not associated with an increased incidence of VAP or BSI. Dexamethasone might not explain the high rates of VAP and BSI observed in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

Background Since March 2020, health care systems were importantly affected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak, with some patients presenting severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), requiring extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We designed an ambispective observational cohort study including all consecutive adult patients admitted to 5 different ICUs from a university hospital. The main objective was to identify the risk factors of severe COVID-19 ARDS patients supported by ECMO associated with 90-day survival. Results Between March 1st and November 30th 2020, 76 patients with severe COVID-19 ARDS were supported by ECMO. Median (interquartile range IQR) duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) prior to ECMO was of 6 (3–10) days. At ECMO initiation, patients had a median PaO2:FiO2 of 71 mmHg (IQR 62–81), median PaCO2 of 58 mmHg (IQR 51–66) and a median arterial pH of 7.33 (IQR 7.25–7.38). Forty-five patients (59%) were weaned from ECMO. Twenty-eight day, 60-day and 90-day survival rates were, respectively, 92, 62 and 51%. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, with 2 models, one with the RESP score and one with the PRESERVE score, we found that higher BMI was associated with higher 90-day survival [odds ratio (OR): 0.775 (0.644–0.934), p = 0.007) and 0.631 (0.462–0.862), respectively]. Younger age was also associated with 90-day survival in both models [OR: 1.1354 (1.004–1.285), p = 0.044 and 1.187 (1.035–1.362), p = 0.014 respectively]. Obese patients were ventilated with higher PEEP than non-obese patients and presented slightly higher respiratory system compliance. Conclusion In this ambispective observational cohort of COVID-19 severe ARDS supported by ECMO, obesity was an independent factor associated with improved survival at 90-day.

Background Ultra-lung-protective ventilation may be useful during veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) to minimize ventilator-induced lung injury and to facilitate lung recovery. The objective was to compare pulmonary and systemic biotrauma evaluated by numerous biomarkers of inflammation, epithelial, endothelial injuries, and lung repair according to two ventilator strategies on vv-ECMO. Methods This is a prospective randomized controlled study. Patients were randomized to receive during 48 h either ultra-lung-protective ventilation combining very low tidal volume (1–2 mL/kg of predicted body weight), low respiratory rate (5–10 cycles per minute), positive expiratory transpulmonary pressure, and 16 h of prone position or lung-protective-ventilation which followed the ECMO arm of the EOLIA trial (control group). Results The primary outcome was the alveolar concentrations of interleukin-1-beta, interleukin-6, interleukin-8, surfactant protein D, and blood concentrations of serum advanced glycation end products and angiopoietin-2 48 h after randomization. Enrollment was stopped for futility after the inclusion of 39 patients. Tidal volume, respiratory rate, minute ventilation, plateau pressure, and mechanical power were significantly lower in the ultra-lung-protective group. None of the concentrations of the pre-specified biomarkers differed between the two groups 48 h after randomization. However, a trend to higher 60-day mortality was observed in the ultra-lung-protective group compared to the control group (45 vs 17%, p = 0.06). Conclusions Despite a significant reduction in the mechanical power, ultra-lung-protective ventilation during 48 h did not reduce biotrauma in patients with vv-ECMO-supported ARDS. The impact of this ventilation strategy on clinical outcomes warrants further investigation. Trial registration Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03918603). Registered 17 April 2019.