Background Few small studies have described hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) during COVID-19. Research Question What patient characteristics in critically ill patients with COVID-19 are associated with HAIs and how do HAIs associate with outcomes in these patients? Study Design and Methods Multicenter retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data including adult patients with severe COVID-19, admitted to 8 Italian hub hospitals from February 20, 2020, to May 20, 2020. Descriptive statistics, univariable and multivariable Weibull regression models were used to assess incidence, microbial etiology, resistance patterns, risk factors (i.e., demographics, comorbidities, exposure to medication), and impact on outcomes (i.e., ICU survival, length of ICU and hospital stay and duration of mechanical ventilation) of microbiologically-confirmed HAIs. Results Of the 774 included patients, 359 (46%) patients developed 759 HAIs (44.7 infections/1000 ICU patient-days, 35% multi-drug resistant (MDR) bacteria). Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) (389, 50%), bloodstream infections (183, 34%), and catheter related blood stream infections (74, 10%) were the most frequent HAIs, with 26.0 (23.6-28.8) VAPs/1000 patient intubation-days, 11.7(10.1-13.5) BSIs/1000 ICU patient-days, and 4.7 (3.8-5.9) CRBSIs/1000 patient-days. Gram-negative bacteria (especially Enterobacterales ) and Staphylococcus aureus caused 64% and 28% of VAPs. Variables independently associated with infection were age, PEEP and treatment with broad-spectrum antibiotic at admission. 234 patients (30%) died in ICU (15.3 deaths/1000 ICU patient-days). Patients with HAIs complicated by septic shock had almost doubled mortality (52% vs. 29%), while non-complicated infections did not affect mortality. HAIs prolonged mechanical ventilation (24(14-39) vs. 9(5-13) days; p<0.001), ICU and hospital stay (24(16-41) vs. 9(6-14) days, p=0.003; and (42(25-59) vs. 23(13-34) days, p<0.001). Interpretation Critically-ill COVID-19 patients are at high risk for HAIs, especially VAPs and BSIs due to MDR organisms. HAIs prolong mechanical ventilation and hospitalization, and HAIs complicated by septic-shock almost doubled mortality.

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) improves gas exchange and allows lung rest, thus minimizing ventilation-induced lung injury. In the last forty years, a major technological and clinical improvement allowed to dramatically improve the outcome of patients treated with V-V ECMO. However, many aspects of the care of patients on V-V ECMO remain debated. In this review, we will focus on main issues and controversies on caring of ARDS patients on V-V ECMO support. Particularly, the indications to V-V ECMO and the feasibility of a less invasive extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal will be discussed. Moreover, the controversies on management of mechanical ventilation, prone position and sedation will be explored. In conclusion, we will discuss evidences on transfusions and management of anticoagulation, also focusing on patients who undergo simultaneous treatment with ECMO and renal replacement therapy. This review aims to discuss all these clinical aspects with an eye on future directions and perspectives.

No abstract

Background Previous studies linked a high intensity of ventilation, measured as mechanical power, to mortality in patients suffering from “classic” ARDS. By contrast, mechanically ventilated patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 may present with intact pulmonary mechanics while undergoing mechanical ventilation for longer periods of time. We investigated whether an association between higher mechanical power and mortality is modified by a diagnosis of COVID-19. Methods This retrospective study included critically ill, adult patients who were mechanically ventilated for at least 24 h between March 2020 and December 2021 at a tertiary healthcare facility in Boston, Massachusetts. The primary exposure was median mechanical power during the first 24 h of mechanical ventilation, calculated using a previously validated formula. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. As co-primary analysis, we investigated whether a diagnosis of COVID-19 modified the primary association. We further investigated the association between mechanical power and days being alive and ventilator free and effect modification of this by a diagnosis of COVID-19. Multivariable logistic regression, effect modification and negative binomial regression analyses adjusted for baseline patient characteristics, severity of disease and in-hospital factors, were applied. Results 1,737 mechanically ventilated patients were included, 411 (23.7%) suffered from COVID-19. 509 (29.3%) died within 30 days. The median mechanical power during the first 24 h of ventilation was 19.3 [14.6–24.0] J/min in patients with and 13.2 [10.2–18.0] J/min in patients without COVID-19. A higher mechanical power was associated with 30-day mortality (ORadj 1.26 per 1-SD, 7.1J/min increase; 95% CI 1.09–1.46; p = 0.002). Effect modification and interaction analysis did not support that this association was modified by a diagnosis of COVID-19 (95% CI, 0.81–1.38; p-for-interaction = 0.68). A higher mechanical power was associated with a lower number of days alive and ventilator free until day 28 (IRRadj 0.83 per 7.1 J/min increase; 95% CI 0.75–0.91; p < 0.001, adjusted risk difference − 2.7 days per 7.1J/min increase; 95% CI − 4.1 to − 1.3). Conclusion A higher mechanical power is associated with elevated 30-day mortality. While patients with COVID-19 received mechanical ventilation with higher mechanical power, this association was independent of a concomitant diagnosis of COVID-19.