Literature DB >> 34848495

Improved COVID-19 outcomes in a large non-invasive respiratory support cohort despite emergence of the alpha variant.

Chris D Turnbull1,2,3, Benedict M L Porter4, Sarah B Evans4, Oliver Smith4,5, Rachel Lardner4,5, Robert Hallifax4,2,3, Henry V Bettinson4, Nicholas P Talbot4,2,3, Mona Bafadhel4,2,3, Najib M Rahman4,2,3, Nayia Petousi4,2,3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Respiratory high-dependency units (rHDUs) are used to manage respiratory failure in COVID-19 outside of the intensive care unit (ICU). The alpha variant of COVID-19 has been linked to increased rates of mortality and admission to ICU; however, its impact on a rHDU population is not known. We aimed to compare rHDU outcomes between the two main UK waves of COVID-19 infection and evaluate the impact of the alpha variant on second wave outcomes.
METHODS: We conducted a single-centre, retrospective analysis of all patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 admitted to the rHDU of our teaching hospital for respiratory support during the first and second main UK waves.
RESULTS: In total, 348 patients were admitted to rHDU. In the second wave, mortality (26.7% s vs 50.7% first wave, χ2=14.7, df=1, p=0.0001) and intubation rates in those eligible (24.3% s vs 58.8% first wave, χ2=17.3, df=2, p=0.0002) were improved compared with the first wave. In the second wave, the alpha variant had no effect on mortality (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.32, p=0.64). Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) (89.5%) and awake proning (85.6%) were used in most patients in the second wave. DISCUSSION: Our single-centre experience shows that rHDU mortality and intubation rates have improved over time in spite of the emergence of the alpha variant. Our data support the use of CPAP and awake proning, although improvements in outcome are likely to be multifactorial. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19; non invasive ventilation

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34848495      PMCID: PMC8634283          DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2021-001044

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ Open Respir Res        ISSN: 2052-4439


Were there differences in respiratory high-dependency unit (HDU) outcomes for patients with COVID-19 and respiratory failure between the two main UK waves and what was the effect of the alpha variant on second wave outcomes? Our single-centre respiratory HDU experience shows that mortality and intubation rates have improved over time in spite of the emergence of the alpha variant, with most patients using continuous positive airway pressure and awake proning in the second wave. Respiratory HDU management is widely used and we report a large UK respiratory HDU cohort investigating outcomes in the first and second main UK COVID-19 waves.

Introduction

Respiratory high-dependency units (rHDUs) can feasibly manage respiratory failure in COVID-19, outside of the intensive care unit (ICU) for patients not requiring intubation.1 We have reported our early experience of rHDU management including continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and awake proning during the first UK COVID-19 wave.2 However, the impact of new treatments adopted as usual care3 and the emergence of the alpha severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant in the second wave on rHDU outcomes have not yet been established.

Methods

We conducted a single-centre, retrospective analysis of all patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 admitted to the rHDU of our teaching hospital for respiratory support, aiming to (1) compare our clinical practice and rHDU outcomes between the first two main UK waves of COVID-19 infection and (2) identify factors that influence outcomes in the second wave.

Data analyses

Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS V26.0. Summary statistics were used to define the population. First and second wave characteristics and outcomes were compared using independent sample t-tests and χ as appropriate. Oxygenation before and after awake proning was compared using paired t-tests, including in those who attempted awake proning after CPAP was established. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate factors associated with risk mortality and intubation in the second, and where significant these were adjusted for for age, frailty and symptom duration.

Patient and public involvement

Given the severe nature of the disease, the rapidity of the set-up of the respiratory HDU and the high mortality rate, patient and public involvement was not deemed suitable for the design, conduct and reporting of this retrospective study.

Results

In total, 348 patients were admitted to rHDU; 71 (20.4%) during the first wave from 23 March to 4 June 2020, and 277 (79.6%) in the second wave between 10 October 2020 until 31 January 2021 when our evaluation ended. rHDU admissions accounted for similar proportions of total hospital admissions in the first (77 of 565 (12.6%)) and second waves (277 of 2028 (13.7%)). Patient characteristics are shown in table 1. In the second wave, rHDU patients were less frail and a greater proportion were deemed candidates for potential intubation. Treatments with dexamethasone and remdesivir were more common. A greater patient proportion were managed with awake proning combined with CPAP, which was used for a longer duration, compared with the first wave.
Table 1

Comparison of first and second wave characteristics and treatment data

First waveSecond waveMean difference (95% CI)X2 (df)P value
Baseline characteristics
Age (years)69.0 (52.0–80.0)62.0 (52.0–71.0)−3.4 (−7.8 to +1.1)0.14
Sex

Male

Female

 49 (69.0%) 22 (31.0%) 180 (65.0%) 97 (35.0%) – 0.4 (1) 0.52
Ethnicity

Asian

Black

White

Other/unknown

 7 (9.9%) 5 (7.0%) 59 (83.1%) 0 (0.0%) 27 (9.7%) 7 (2.5%) 165 (59.6%) 78 (28.2%) – 28.2 (3) <0.0001
BMI (kg/m2)*28.5 (24.9–33.6)29.6 (24.8–34.9)+0.6 (−1.7 to +2.9)0.63
Comorbidities, frailty and level of care
Hypertension31 (43.7%)125 (45.1%)0.05 (1)0.83
Diabetes mellitus21 (29.6%)81 (29.2%)0.003 (1)0.96
Cardiovascular disease13 (18.3%)77 (27.8%)2.7 (1)0.10
Asthma8 (11.3%)49 (17.7%)1.7 (1)0.19
COPD10 (14.1%)25 (9.0%)1.6 (1)0.21
No of comorbidities:

None

1

2

3

4 or more

 15 (21.1%) 14 (19.7%) 14 (19.7%) 13 (18.3%) 15 (21.1%) 56 (20.2%) 71 (25.6%) 48 (17.3%) 49 (17.7%) 53 (19.1%) – 1.1 (1) 0.89
Clinical Frailty Score:

1 to 2 (fit)

3 (managing well)

4 (very mild frailty)

5 (mild frailty)

6 (moderate frailty)

7+ (severe frailty)

 18 (25.4%) 23 (32.4%) 13 (18.3%) 6 (8.5%) 7 (9.9%) 4 (5.6%) 132 (47.7%) 71 (25.6%) 30 (10.8%) 23 (8.3%) 9 (3.2%) 12 (4.3%) – 15.6 (5) 0.008
Not eligible for intubation37 (52.1%)67 (24.2%)21.0 (1)<0.0001
Symptoms and severity markers
Symptom duration8 (5–11)8 (6–11)+0.2 (−1.0 to +1.3)0.76
≥60% oxygen on HDU admission52 (73.2%)214 (77.3%)0.51 (1)0.48
CTPA performed35 (49.3%)251 (90.6%)65.9 (1)<0.0001
CT severity score

Mild

Moderate/severe

Severe

Atypical

 0 (0%) 11 (29.7%) 23 (62.2%) 3 (8.1%) 5 (2.0%) 131 (52.2%) 113 (45.0%) 2 (0.8%) – 16.0 (3) 0.0012
Pulmonary embolism present10 (14.1%)22 (7.9%)12.1 (1)0.0005
Lymphocytes on rHDU admission (×109/L)0.8 (0.5–1.1)0.8 (0.5–1.1)−0.4 (−1.4 to +0.5)0.35
CRP prior to rHDU admission (mg/L)180.6 (118.0–210.0)124.1 (78.1–175.6)−44.1 (−66.9 to −21.3)0.0002
D-dimer prior to rHDU admission (µg/L)1252 (767–2528)892 (603–1466)−644 (−3530 to +2242)0.66
Nasal pharyngeal PCR swab results
Result

Positive

Negative (clinical diagnosis)

 56 (78.9%) 15 (21.1%) 274 (98.9%) 3 (1.1%) – 46.3 (1) <0.0001
Spike gene testing†

Alpha variant

Wild-type

Ambiguous

 -

 -

 -

 143 (67.1%) 57 (26.8%) 13 (6.1%) – – –
Treatments
Dexamethasone3 (4.2%)266 (96.0%)271.4 (1)<0.0001
Remdesivir4 (5.6%)198 (71.5%)100.6 (1)<0.0001
Respiratory support duration2 (1–4)5 (3–8)3.0 (1.8 to 4.2)<0.0001
CPAP as primary respiratory support32 (45.1%)248 (89.5%)71.1 (1)<0.0001
Able to adopt semi-prone or full-prone position42 (59.2%)237 (85.6%)24.8 (1)<0.0001

Continuous variables are expressed as median (first quartile, third quartile) or mean±SD and categorical variables are expressed as number (percentage). Differences between the first and second waves were compared via t-tests for continuous variables and χ2 tests for categorical variables.

*Missing for 11 (15.5%) patients in the first wave and 58 (20.9%) patients in the second wave.

†From December 2020, routine nasal pharyngeal swabs, tested by PCR, reported the presence or absence of the spike gene (S-gene), following the emergence of the alpha variant in the UK, suggested by absence of the spike gene.

BMI, body mass index; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CPAP, continuous positive airway pressure; CRP, c reactive protein; CT, computed tomography; CTPA, CT pulmonary angiogram; HDU, high-dependency unit; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; rHDU, respiratory high-dependency unit.

Comparison of first and second wave characteristics and treatment data Male Female Asian Black White Other/unknown None 1 2 3 4 or more 1 to 2 (fit) 3 (managing well) 4 (very mild frailty) 5 (mild frailty) 6 (moderate frailty) 7+ (severe frailty) Mild Moderate/severe Severe Atypical Positive Negative (clinical diagnosis) Alpha variant Wild-type Ambiguous - - - Continuous variables are expressed as median (first quartile, third quartile) or mean±SD and categorical variables are expressed as number (percentage). Differences between the first and second waves were compared via t-tests for continuous variables and χ2 tests for categorical variables. *Missing for 11 (15.5%) patients in the first wave and 58 (20.9%) patients in the second wave. †From December 2020, routine nasal pharyngeal swabs, tested by PCR, reported the presence or absence of the spike gene (S-gene), following the emergence of the alpha variant in the UK, suggested by absence of the spike gene. BMI, body mass index; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CPAP, continuous positive airway pressure; CRP, c reactive protein; CT, computed tomography; CTPA, CT pulmonary angiogram; HDU, high-dependency unit; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; rHDU, respiratory high-dependency unit.

Physiological effects of CPAP and awake proning

The oxyhaemoglobin saturation (SaO2) to inspired oxygen fraction (FiO2) ratio was used as a marker of lung injury severity. Where oxygen delivery was uncontrolled, the FiO2 was estimated (0.2+0.04 × flow (L/min)). Physiotherapy, comprising both CPAP optimisation and semi or full-prone positioning, significantly improved the SaO2:FiO2 by +54.0 (95% CI +46.7 to+61.4, p<0.0001, n=229), indicating improved lung injury severity. In a subgroup of 15 patients already established on CPAP, additional semi-prone or full-prone positioning significantly improved the SaO2:FiO2 by +60.3 (95% CI +37.1 to +83.5, p≤0.0001), suggesting the effects of CPAP and proning are additive.

First and second wave outcomes

Table 2 shows patient outcomes. Overall rHDU mortality was lower in the second wave. While there was a greater proportion of patients who were not eligible for intubation in the first wave, mortality was still lower in the second wave in those not eligible for intubation. In patients eligible for intubation, mortality was comparable, but intubation rates were significantly lower in the second wave. Having identified these differences, factors associated with risk of death or intubation in the second wave were explored.
Table 2

Outcome data compared by wave by ceiling of care

TotalFirst waveSecond waveX2 (df)P value
Overall (n=348)
Admission outcome*

Died

Discharged

110 (31.6%)236 (67.8%)36 (50.7%)35 (49.3%)74 (26.7%)201 (72.5%)14.7 (1)0.0001
Patients eligible for intubation (n=244)
Admission outcome*

Died

Discharged

36 (14.8%)206 (84.4%)5 (14.7%)29 (85.3%)31 (14.8%)177 (84.3%)0.001 (1)0.97
Respiratory HDU outcome

Died

Off respiratory support

Intubated

7 (2.9%)166 (68.0%)71 (29.1%)0 (0.0%)14 (41.2%)20 (58.8%)7 (3.3%)152 (72.4%)51 (24.3%)17.3 (2)0.0002
ICU outcome (n=71)*

Died

Off respiratory support

29 (40.8%)40 (56.3%)5 (25.0%)15 (75.0%)24 (47.1%)25 (49.0%)3.35 (1)0.067
Patients not eligible for intubation (n=104)
Respiratory HDU outcome

Died

Discharged

74 (71.2%)30 (28.8%)31 (83.8%)6 (16.2%)43 (64.2%)24 (35.8%)4.5 (1)0.035

*Two second wave patients who were intubated were receiving ongoing hospital care at time of censor.

HDU, high-dependency unit; ICU, intensive care unit.

Outcome data compared by wave by ceiling of care Died Discharged Died Discharged Died Off respiratory support Intubated Died Off respiratory support Died Discharged *Two second wave patients who were intubated were receiving ongoing hospital care at time of censor. HDU, high-dependency unit; ICU, intensive care unit.

Factors affecting outcome in the second wave

Where available, the impact of the alpha variant on outcome was evaluated. There was no significant effect of the alpha variant on the unadjusted overall odds of mortality or odds of intubation among patients eligible for intubation; 45 (31.5%) patients with the alpha variant versus 16 (28.1%) with wild-type died (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.32, p=0.64); 31 (29.8%) alpha variant versus 12 (28.6%) wild-type were intubated (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.48 to 2.34, p=0.88). To investigate the impact of CPAP prior to intubation, the effect of CPAP duration on mortality was explored in the subgroup eligible for intubation. Median CPAP duration prior to intubation was 4 days. Unadjusted odds of mortality were significantly increased in those intubated after 3 days of respiratory support (18 died (62.1%)), compared with those intubated within 3 days (six died (27.3%); OR 4.38, 95% CI 1.21 to 15.81, p=0.02), and this remained significant following adjustments for age, frailty and symptom duration (OR 4.36, 95% CI 1.17 to 16.26, p=0.03).

Discussion

Our single-centre experience shows that mortality and intubation rates on rHDU have improved over time. Our cohort is novel in reporting rHDU outcomes following the routine use of medical therapies and following the emergence of the alpha variant, which were not present in previous reports.1 4 5 Our results are comparable with the preliminary findings of a recent adaptive randomised controlled trial, which showed that CPAP reduced a combined outcome of intubation and mortality in comparison with standard oxygen therapy.6 Improvements in outcome are likely to be multifactorial. Patients were less frail and had milder serological and radiological evidence of COVID-19 severity in the second wave. However, selection differences are unlikely as a similar proportion of patients received rHDU care in the first and second waves. Pharmacological treatments of proven benefit were routinely available in the second but not the first wave.3 CPAP and awake proning were more commonly used in the second wave which might have improved outcomes,4 and we found a significant effect of combining CPAP with awake proning on reducing hypoxaemia. Patients with the alpha variant of COVID-19 did not have worse outcomes in rHDU. This contrasts with community-based patients where the alpha variant increased mortality.7 However, our findings are consistent with an ICU population which showed no increase in ICU mortality even though alpha variant infection doubled the risk of ICU admission.8 Intubated patients had higher mortality in the second wave. However, a smaller proportion of eligible patients were intubated in the second wave. We found an increased risk of death in those intubated after 3 days of CPAP therapy in the second wave, similar to other reports suggesting that prolonged CPAP and delaying intubation may be harmful.9 However, these data do not demonstrate causality. In the second wave, only 24.3% of patients deemed eligible were intubated. CPAP was used for a median duration 5 days in eligible patients who were not intubated, and longer durations of CPAP therapy lead to favourable outcomes in most patients. Intolerance of CPAP is a common reason for early intubation, and late CPAP failure may reflect disease severity rather than tolerance, as is the case in other diseases.10 11 Therefore, it is possible that those requiring early intubation simply represent a group who do not tolerate CPAP, and those who go on to require intubation later have more severe disease. There are limitations to our data. This was a moderate size single-centre study with evolving management of patients due to evidence-based changes in standard care, meaning that our data are not definitive. Nevertheless, we have shown improved rHDU outcomes over time and have not found worse outcomes in those with the alpha variant. Our data highlight uncertainties in the rHDU management in need of focused clinical trials, particularly in those intubated following longer durations of CPAP therapy.
  10 in total

1.  Noninvasive Ventilation Intolerance: Characteristics, Predictors, and Outcomes.

Authors:  Jinhua Liu; Jun Duan; Linfu Bai; Lintong Zhou
Journal:  Respir Care       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 2.258

2.  Effect of Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation vs High-Flow Nasal Oxygen on Days Free of Respiratory Support in Patients With COVID-19 and Moderate to Severe Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: The HENIVOT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Domenico Luca Grieco; Luca S Menga; Melania Cesarano; Tommaso Rosà; Savino Spadaro; Maria Maddalena Bitondo; Jonathan Montomoli; Giulia Falò; Tommaso Tonetti; Salvatore L Cutuli; Gabriele Pintaudi; Eloisa S Tanzarella; Edoardo Piervincenzi; Filippo Bongiovanni; Antonio M Dell'Anna; Luca Delle Cese; Cecilia Berardi; Simone Carelli; Maria Grazia Bocci; Luca Montini; Giuseppe Bello; Daniele Natalini; Gennaro De Pascale; Matteo Velardo; Carlo Alberto Volta; V Marco Ranieri; Giorgio Conti; Salvatore Maurizio Maggiore; Massimo Antonelli
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Outcomes of COVID-19 patients treated with continuous positive airway pressure outside the intensive care unit.

Authors:  Rosanna Vaschetto; Francesco Barone-Adesi; Fabrizio Racca; Claudio Pissaia; Carlo Maestrone; Davide Colombo; Carlo Olivieri; Nello De Vita; Erminio Santangelo; Lorenza Scotti; Luigi Castello; Tiziana Cena; Martina Taverna; Luca Grillenzoni; Maria Adele Moschella; Gianluca Airoldi; Silvio Borrè; Francesco Mojoli; Francesco Della Corte; Marta Baggiani; Sara Baino; Piero Balbo; Simona Bazzano; Valeria Bonato; Sara Carbonati; Federico Crimaldi; Veronica Daffara; Luca De Col; Matteo Maestrone; Mario Malerba; Federica Moroni; Raffaella Perucca; Mario Pirisi; Valentina Rondi; Daniela Rosalba; Letizia Vanni; Francesca Vigone; Paolo Navalesi; Gianmaria Cammarota
Journal:  ERJ Open Res       Date:  2021-01-25

4.  Predictors of intubation in COVID-19 patients treated with out-of-ICU continuous positive airway pressure.

Authors:  N De Vita; L Scotti; G Cammarota; F Racca; C Pissaia; C Maestrone; D Colombo; C Olivieri; F Della Corte; F Barone-Adesi; P Navalesi; R Vaschetto
Journal:  Pulmonology       Date:  2021-01-20

5.  Mortality and critical care unit admission associated with the SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 in England: an observational cohort study.

Authors:  Martina Patone; Karen Thomas; Rob Hatch; Pui San Tan; Carol Coupland; Weiqi Liao; Paul Mouncey; David Harrison; Kathryn Rowan; Peter Horby; Peter Watkinson; Julia Hippisley-Cox
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 25.071

Review 6.  Timing of noninvasive ventilation failure: causes, risk factors, and potential remedies.

Authors:  Ezgi Ozyilmaz; Aylin Ozsancak Ugurlu; Stefano Nava
Journal:  BMC Pulm Med       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 3.317

7.  Feasibility and clinical impact of out-of-ICU noninvasive respiratory support in patients with COVID-19-related pneumonia.

Authors:  Cosimo Franco; Nicola Facciolongo; Roberto Tonelli; Roberto Dongilli; Andrea Vianello; Lara Pisani; Raffaele Scala; Mario Malerba; Annalisa Carlucci; Emanuele Alberto Negri; Greta Spoladore; Giovanna Arcaro; Paolo Amedeo Tillio; Cinzia Lastoria; Gioachino Schifino; Luca Tabbì; Luca Guidelli; Giovanni Guaraldi; V Marco Ranieri; Enrico Clini; Stefano Nava
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  2020-11-05       Impact factor: 16.671

8.  Successful awake proning is associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19: single-centre high-dependency unit experience.

Authors:  Rob J Hallifax; Benedict Ml Porter; Patrick Jd Elder; Sarah B Evans; Chris D Turnbull; Gareth Hynes; Rachel Lardner; Kirsty Archer; Henry V Bettinson; Annabel H Nickol; William G Flight; Stephen J Chapman; Maxine Hardinge; Rachel K Hoyles; Peter Saunders; Anny Sykes; John M Wrightson; Alastair Moore; Ling-Pei Ho; Emily Fraser; Ian D Pavord; Nicholas P Talbot; Mona Bafadhel; Nayia Petousi; Najib M Rahman
Journal:  BMJ Open Respir Res       Date:  2020-09

9.  Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19.

Authors:  Peter Horby; Wei Shen Lim; Jonathan R Emberson; Marion Mafham; Jennifer L Bell; Louise Linsell; Natalie Staplin; Christopher Brightling; Andrew Ustianowski; Einas Elmahi; Benjamin Prudon; Christopher Green; Timothy Felton; David Chadwick; Kanchan Rege; Christopher Fegan; Lucy C Chappell; Saul N Faust; Thomas Jaki; Katie Jeffery; Alan Montgomery; Kathryn Rowan; Edmund Juszczak; J Kenneth Baillie; Richard Haynes; Martin J Landray
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2020-07-17       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Risk of mortality in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern 202012/1: matched cohort study.

Authors:  Robert Challen; Ellen Brooks-Pollock; Jonathan M Read; Louise Dyson; Krasimira Tsaneva-Atanasova; Leon Danon
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2021-03-09
  10 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  Clinical challenges of SARS-CoV-2 variants (Review).

Authors:  Cristian Cojocaru; Elena Cojocaru; Adina Magdalena Turcanu; Dragos Cosmin Zaharia
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 2.751

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.