Background: Ten months after its appearance in December 2019, SARS-CoV-2 has infected more than 25 million patients worldwide. Because children were first identified as potential spreaders of the virus, schools were closed in several countries. However, it rapidly became evident that the number of hospitalized children infected by SARS-CoV-2 was dramatically lower than that of adults. To date, only hypotheses have been raised to explain this difference, so it is of great importance to describe the presentation of this disease among children. Here, we describe a wide spectrum of COVID-19 manifestation in children in a dedicated pediatric unit in France. Methods: Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who were diagnosed on the basis of either positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR in nasopharyngeal swabs and/or typical aspects in chest-computed tomography (CT) were included between March and May 2020 in Paris. Results: Twenty-three patients were included on the basis of positive RT-PCR (n = 20) and/or typical aspects in CT (n = 4). The median age was 4.9 years [0.1–17.6]. Patients were grouped by age (<2 years old: n = 14, 61%; 2–10 years old: n = 2, 9%; >10 years old: n = 7, 30%). Overweight or obesity was reported in only three patients. At presentation, the most frequent symptom in the overall cohort was fever (n = 18, 78%), followed by acute rhinitis (n = 9, 64%) and cough (n = 7, 50%) in the under 2-year-old group and cough (n = 4, 57%), fatigue, dyspnea and abdominal pain (n = 3, 43% each) in the over 10-year-old group. Five patients required ICU treatment, four of whom were aged >10 years, two presented with acute myocarditis, and two were sickle cell disease patients who presented with acute chest syndrome. Discussion and conclusion: The youngest patients seem to present milder forms of COVID-19 without the need for ICU treatment and with a shorter length of hospitalization. More severe evolutions were observed in teenagers, with, however, favorable outcomes. Given the context of closed schools and confinement, the infection of these children suggests intra-familial transmission that needs to be further assessed. This description might help to understand the intriguing differences in COVID-19 severity across age-classes.

Background: Immunocompromised children are likely to develop a refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The usefulness of providing extracorporeal life support (ECLS) to these patients is a subject of debate. The aim of our study was to report the outcomes and to compare factors associated with mortality between immunocompromised and non-immunocompromised children supported with veno-venous ECMO. Methods:We performed a retrospective monocentric study in the French pediatric ECMO center of Armand Trousseau Hospital, including all pediatric patients aged from 1 month to 18 years requiring ECLS for ARDS.Results: Between 2007 and 2018, one hundred and eleven (111) patients underwent ECMO for respiratory failure; among them twenty-five (25) were immunocompromised. Survival rate at 6 months after intensive care discharge was significantly lower for immunocompromised patients compared to non-immunocompromised ones (41.7% vs. 62.8%; p = 0.04). ARDS severity was similar between the 2 groups. Fungal pneumonias were reported only in immunocompromised patients (12.5% versus 0% in the control group; p = 0.001). Bleeding complications were significantly more frequent in the immunocompromised group and blood product transfusions were also more frequently required in this group. Conclusion:Six months after intensive care discharge, survival rate of immunocompromised children supported with ECMO for pediatric ARDS is lower than for nonimmunocompromised patients. But, the expectation for a favorable outcome is real and it is worth it if their condition is likely to be compatible with a good long-term quality of life.

Objective: Defining the best ventilatory settings under ECMO remains a challenging question. Despite a well-defined ARDS treatment before ECMO initiation, there is no recommendation on how to ventilate a patient under ECMO for P-ARDS. Only a few descriptive studies are available on ventilatory settings during respiratory ECMO. We aim at evaluating the usefulness of a protective ventilation bundle under ECMO and its capacity to reduce the ventilatory pressure in our ECMO center.Methods: We performed a monocentric retrospective study from January 2007 to December 2018. All children aged from 1 month to 18 years old and requiring an extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for a refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome were included. A protective mechanical ventilation under ECMO bundle has been developed in 2014. We compare the period 1 (before 2014) to the period 2 (after 2014).Results: Eighty-three patient had been included during the study. We reported a significant increase of PEEP and mean pressure respectively at day 3, day 7 and day 14 of ECMO during the period 2. Conversely, the driving pressure were significantly lower in the period 2 at day 3 (p: 0.009), day 7 (p:0.001) and day 14 (p: 0.001). We also shown a strong increase in the use of prone positioning during ECMO in the period 2 (p: 0.01). There was no significant effect of our bundle on the length of mechanical ventilation, of hospitalization and on the survival rate. Conclusion:The implementation of a protective mechanical ventilation bundle during ECMO is usefulness to apply for lower ventilatory pressure and higher use of prone positioning.Nonetheless, the lack of power of our study prevents us from showing its efficacy on outcome criteria.