Invasive mechanical has been associated with high mortality in COVID-19. Alternative therapy of high flow nasal therapy (HFNT) has been greatly debated around the world for use in COVID-19 pandemic due to concern for increased healthcare worker transmission.This was a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients admitted to Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, from 10 March 2020 to 24 April 2020 with moderate-to-severe respiratory failure treated with HFNT. Primary outcome was prevention of intubation. Of the 445 patients with COVID-19, 104 met our inclusion criteria. The average age was 60.66 (+13.50) years, 49 (47.12 %) were female, 53 (50.96%) were African-American, 23 (22.12%) Hispanic. Forty-three patients (43.43%) were smokers. Saturation to fraction ratio and chest X-ray scores had a statistically significant improvement from day 1 to day 7. 67 of 104 (64.42%) were able to avoid invasive mechanical ventilation in our cohort. Incidence of hospital-associated/ventilator-associated pneumonia was 2.9%. Overall, mortality was 14.44% (n=15) in our cohort with 13 (34.4%) in the progressed to intubation group and 2 (2.9%) in the non-intubation group. Mortality and incidence of pneumonia was statistically higher in the progressed to intubation group.ConclusionHFNT use is associated with a reduction in the rate of invasive mechanical ventilation and overall mortality in patients with COVID-19 infection.

Background Infection with the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has been associated with a hypercoagulable state. Emerging data from China and Europe have consistently shown an increased incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE). We aimed to identify the VTE incidence and early predictors of VTE at our high-volume tertiary care center. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of 147 patients who had been admitted to Temple University Hospital with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from April 1, 2020 to April 27, 2020. We first identified the VTE (pulmonary embolism [PE] and deep vein thrombosis [DVT]) incidence in our cohort. The VTE and no-VTE groups were compared by univariable analysis for demographics, comorbidities, laboratory data, and treatment outcomes. Subsequently, multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the early predictors of VTE. Results The 147 patients (20.9% of all admissions) admitted to a designated COVID-19 unit at Temple University Hospital with a high clinical suspicion of acute VTE had undergone testing for VTE using computed tomography pulmonary angiography and/or extremity venous duplex ultrasonography. The overall incidence of VTE was 17% (25 of 147). Of the 25 patients, 16 had had acute PE, 14 had had acute DVT, and 5 had had both PE and DVT. The need for invasive mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio, 3.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-9.55) and the admission D-dimer level ≥1500 ng/mL (adjusted odds ratio, 3.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-9.78) were independent markers associated with VTE. The all-cause mortality in the VTE group was greater than that in the non-VTE group (48% vs 22%; P = .007). Conclusion Our study represents one of the earliest reported from the United States on the incidence rate of VTE in patients with COVID-19. Patients with a high clinical suspicion and the identified risk factors (invasive mechanical ventilation, admission D-dimer level ≥1500 ng/mL) should be considered for early VTE testing. We did not screen all patients admitted for VTE; therefore, the true incidence of VTE could have been underestimated. Our findings require confirmation in future prospective studies.

Background and objective Virtual bronchoscopic navigation (VBN) with fused fluoroscopy and vessel mapping provides a point of entry (POE) for puncturing airway wall to biopsy lesions. The study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this technology to diagnose peripheral pulmonary lesions. Methods It was a prospective, single‐arm, multicentre study. Patients underwent lesions biopsy with the Archimedes® VBN System via a POE using one of the two techniques: (1) bronchoscopic transparenchymal nodule access (BTPNA) and (2) guided transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA). Biopsy yield, sampling yield and diagnostic yield were mainly determined in lesions biopsy attempted. Results One hundred and thirty patients underwent anaesthesia and constituted the intention‐to‐treat population. One hundred and four patients with 114 lesions had biopsy attempted. Mean lesion size was 2.4 ± 1.13 cm. Sufficient tissue samples were obtained from 86 lesions with a biopsy yield of 75.4%. Nevertheless, sufficient samples for diagnosis based on histology ± cytology were obtained from 107 lesions with a sampling yield of 93.9%. Follow‐up was conducted for more than 1 year, with a diagnostic yield of 75.4% and 72.8%, respectively, on high and low estimate with consideration of three lesions without follow‐up. Two (1.9%) pneumothoraxes and one (1.0%) mild bleeding occurred. Conclusion BTPNA and guided TBNA contribute to safe and effective sampling of peripheral pulmonary lesions. A relatively high biopsy yield was obtained independent of the presence or absence of a bronchus sign (BS), and high sampling yield and diagnostic yield were obtained independent of location, lesion size and presence or absence of a BS.

Introduction Use of high flow nasal therapy (HFNT) to treat COVID-19 pneumonia has been greatly debated around the world due to concern for increased healthcare worker transmission and delays in invasive mechanical Ventilation (IMV). Methods A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients admitted to Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, from March 10, 2020, to May 17, 2020 with moderate to severe respiratory failure treated with High Flow nasal therapy (HFNT). HFNT patients were divided into two groups: HFNT only and HFNT progressed to IMV. The primary outcome was the ability of the ROX index to predict the need of IMV. Results Of the 837 patients with COVID-19, 129 met inclusion criteria. The mean age was 60.8 (±13.6) years, BMI 32.6 (±8), 58 (45 %) were female, 72 (55.8%) were African American, 40 (31%) Hispanic. 48 (37.2%) were smokers. Mean time to intubation was 2.5 days (± 3.3). ROX index of less than 5 at HFNT initiation was predictive of progression to IMV (OR = 2.137, p = 0,052). Any decrease in ROX index after HFNT initiation was predictive of intubation (OR= 14.67, p <0.0001). ΔROX (<=0 versus >0), peak D-dimer >4000 and admission GFR < 60 ml/min were very strongly predictive of need for IMV (ROC = 0.86, p=). Mortality was 11.2% in HFNT only group versus 47.5% in the HFNT progressed to IMV group (p,0.0001). Mortality and need for pulmonary vasodilators were higher in the HNFT progressed to IMV group. Conclusion ROX index is a valuable, noninvasive tool to evaluate patients with moderate to severe hypoxemic respiratory failure in COVID-19 treated with HFNT. ROX helps predicts need for IMV and thus limiting morbidity and mortality associated with IMV.

BackgroundBeta-blockers are commonly prescribed for patients with cardiovascular disease. Providers have been wary of treating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with beta-blockers due to concern for bronchospasm, but retrospective studies have shown that cardio-selective beta-blockers are safe in COPD and possibly beneficial. However, these benefits may reflect symptom improvements due to the cardiac effects of the medication. The purpose of this study is to evaluate associations between beta-blocker use and both exacerbation rates and longitudinal measures of lung function in two well-characterized COPD cohorts.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 1219 participants with over 180 days of follow up from the STATCOPE trial, which excluded most cardiac comorbidities, and from the placebo arm of the MACRO trial. Primary endpoints were exacerbation rates per person-year and change in spirometry over time in association with beta blocker use.ResultsOverall 13.9% (170/1219) of participants reported taking beta-blockers at enrollment. We found no statistically significant differences in exacerbation rates with respect to beta-blocker use regardless of the prevalence of cardiac comorbidities. In the MACRO cohort, patients taking beta-blockers had an exacerbation rate of 1.72/person-year versus a rate of 1.71/person-year in patients not taking beta-blockers. In the STATCOPE cohort, patients taking beta-blockers had an exacerbation rate of 1.14/person-year. Patients without beta-blockers had an exacerbation rate of 1.34/person-year. We found no detrimental effect of beta blockers with respect to change in lung function over time.ConclusionWe found no evidence that beta-blocker use was unsafe or associated with worse pulmonary outcomes in study participants with moderate to severe COPD.