Bottiroli Maurizio, Calini Angelo, Pinciroli Riccardo, Mueller Ariel, Siragusa Antonio, Anelli Carlo, Urman Richard, Nozari Ala, Berra Lorenzo, Mondino Michele, Fumagalli Roberto
Ospedale Niguarda Ca'Granda.
ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda.
Res Sq. 2021 Feb 12:rs.3.rs-228821. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-228821/v1.
BackgroundThe surge of critically ill patients due to the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) overwhelmed critical care capacity in areas of northern Italy. Anesthesia machines have been used as alternatives to traditional ICU mechanical ventilators. However, the outcomes for patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure cared for with Anesthesia Machines is currently unknow. We hypothesized that COVID-19 patients receiving care with Anesthesia Machines would have worse outcomes compared to standard practice.MethodsWe designed a retrospective study of patients admitted with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis at a large tertiary urban hospital in northern Italy. Two care units were included: a 27-bed standard ICU and a 15-bed temporary unit emergently opened in an operating room setting. Intubated patients assigned to Anesthesia Machines (AM group) were compared to a control cohort treated with standard mechanical ventilators (ICU-VENT group). Outcomes were assessed at 60-day follow-up. A multivariable Cox regression analysis of risk factors between survivors and non-survivors was conducted to determine the adjusted risk of death for patients assigned to AM group.ResultsComplete daily data from 89 mechanically ventilated patients consecutively admitted to the two units were analyzed. Seventeen patients were included in the AM group, whereas 72 were in the ICU-VENT group. Disease severity and intensity of treatment were comparable between the two groups. The 60-day mortality was significantly higher in the AM group compared to the ICU-vent group (12/17 vs. 27/72, 70.6% vs. 37.5%, respectively, p = 0.016). Allocation to AM group was associated with a significantly increased risk of death after adjusting for covariates (HR 4.05, 95% CI: 1.75-9.33, p = 0.001). Several incidents and complications were reported with Anesthesia Machine care, raising safety concerns.ConclusionsOur results support the hypothesis that care associated with the use of Anesthesia Machines is inadequate to provide long-term critical care to patients with COVID-19. Added safety risks must be considered if no other option is available to treat severely ill patients during the ongoing pandemic.Clinical Trial NumberNot applicable.
背景
2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)导致的重症患者激增,使意大利北部地区的重症监护能力不堪重负。麻醉机已被用作传统重症监护病房(ICU)机械通气机的替代品。然而,目前尚不清楚使用麻醉机治疗COVID-19呼吸衰竭患者的结果如何。我们假设,与标准治疗方法相比,使用麻醉机治疗的COVID-19患者预后更差。
方法
我们对意大利北部一家大型城市三级医院确诊为COVID-19的住院患者进行了一项回顾性研究。纳入了两个护理单元:一个有27张床位的标准ICU和一个在手术室环境中紧急开设的有15张床位的临时单元。将分配到麻醉机治疗的插管患者(AM组)与接受标准机械通气治疗的对照组(ICU-VENT组)进行比较。在60天随访时评估结果。对幸存者和非幸存者之间的危险因素进行多变量Cox回归分析,以确定分配到AM组患者的校正死亡风险。
结果
分析了连续入住这两个单元的89例机械通气患者的完整每日数据。AM组纳入17例患者,而ICU-VENT组有72例。两组之间的疾病严重程度和治疗强度相当。AM组的60天死亡率显著高于ICU-vent组(分别为12/17和27/72,70.6%对37.5%,p = 0.016)。在调整协变量后,分配到AM组与死亡风险显著增加相关(风险比4.05,95%置信区间:1.75 - 9.33,p = 0.001)。使用麻醉机护理报告了几起事件和并发症,引发了安全担忧。
结论
与使用麻醉机相关的护理不足以对COVID-19患者提供长期重症监护。在当前大流行期间,如果没有其他选择来治疗重症患者,必须考虑额外的安全风险。
临床试验编号
不适用。