Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To assess the impact of percutaneous dilational tracheostomy in coronavirus disease 2019 patients requiring mechanical ventilation and the risk for healthcare providers. DESIGN/METHODS:Prospective cohort study; patients were enrolled between March 11, and April 29, 2020. The date of final follow-up was July 30, 2020. We used a propensity score matching approach to compare outcomes. Study outcomes were formulated before data collection and analysis. SETTING/METHODS:Critical care units at two large metropolitan hospitals in New York City. PATIENTS/METHODS:Five-hundred forty-one patients with confirmed severe coronavirus disease 2019 respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS/METHODS:Bedside percutaneous dilational tracheostomy with modified visualization and ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS/RESULTS:Required time for discontinuation off mechanical ventilation, total length of hospitalization, and overall patient survival. Of the 541 patients, 394 patients were eligible for a tracheostomy. One-hundred sixteen were early percutaneous dilational tracheostomies with median time of 9 days after initiation of mechanical ventilation (interquartile range, 7-12 d), whereas 89 were late percutaneous dilational tracheostomies with a median time of 19 days after initiation of mechanical ventilation (interquartile range, 16-24 d). Compared with patients with no tracheostomy, patients with an early percutaneous dilational tracheostomy had a higher probability of discontinuation from mechanical ventilation (absolute difference, 30%; p < 0.001; hazard ratio for successful discontinuation, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.34-5.84; p = 0.006) and a lower mortality (absolute difference, 34%, p < 0.001; hazard ratio for death, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.06-0.22; p < 0.001). Compared with patients with late percutaneous dilational tracheostomy, patients with early percutaneous dilational tracheostomy had higher discontinuation rates from mechanical ventilation (absolute difference 7%; p < 0.35; hazard ratio for successful discontinuation, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.3; p = 0.04) and had a shorter median duration of mechanical ventilation in survivors (absolute difference, -15 d; p < 0.001). None of the healthcare providers who performed all the percutaneous dilational tracheostomies procedures had clinical symptoms or any positive laboratory test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. CONCLUSIONS:In coronavirus disease 2019 patients on mechanical ventilation, an early modified percutaneous dilational tracheostomy was safe for patients and healthcare providers and associated with improved clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE:To better characterize COVID-19 patients most at risk for severe, outpatient thrombosis by defining patients hospitalized with COVID-19 with an arterial or venous thrombosis diagnosed at admission METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a single center retrospective analysis of COVID-19 patients. There was a shift in the proportions of thrombosis subtypes from 2019 to 2020, with declines in STEMI (from 22.0% to 10.1% of thrombotic events) and stroke (from 48.6% to 37.2%), and an increase in the proportion of patients with VTE (29.4% to 52.7%). COVID-associated thrombosis were younger (58 years vs. 64 years, p=0.043), trended to be less frequently female (31.3% vs. 43.9%, p =0.16), but there was no difference body mass index or major comorbidities between those with and without COVID-19. COVID-19-associted thrombosis was correlated with a higher mortality (15.2% vs. 4.3%, p=0.016). The biometric profile of patients admitted with COVID-associated thrombosis compared to regular thrombosis had significant changes in the complete blood count, liver function tests, d-dimer, c-related protein, ferritin, and coagulation panels. CONCLUSIONS:Outpatients with COVID-19 who developed thrombosis requiring hospitalization have an increased mortality over non-COVID-19 outpatients who develop thrombosis requiring hospitalization. Given the significantly higher inflammatory markers, it is possible this is related to different mechanisms of thrombotic disease in these patients. The inflammation may be a target to reduce the risk of or aid in the treatment of thrombosis. We call for more studies elucidating the role immunothrombosis maybe playing in COVID.

Background The long-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 are just now coming to light. These remaining symptoms are sometimes referred to as "Post-COVID syndrome." The types and incidence of prolonged symptoms from the acute viral illness are unknown. Yet understanding the prevalence and which symptoms persist would help normalize post COVID syndrome and help providers recognize these issues in their COVID survivors. Methods We conducted a single-center retrospective analysis with patients discharged from New York University (NYU) Langone Hospital with primary diagnosis of COVID-19. Each patient was then called and given a phone survey 45-60 days post discharge. In the survey they were consented and asked about residual symptoms. Study data were collected and managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools hosted at NYU hospital. Patient surveys were then merged with their medical record from their COVID hospitalization. All statistical analysis was processed in SPSS. The study was approved through our institutional IRB. Results Overall, 101 patients were surveyed post discharge. The median age was 59, with the most common co-morbidities being DM (N = 20) and HTN (N = 45). Most patients (N= 57) reported residual lethargy and malaise as compared to prior. Thirty-eight patients continued to have limited exercise tolerance. Thirty- eight patients experienced shortness of breath more than prior to getting COVID, while 24 patients continued to have shortness of breath while walking within their house. Some experienced chest pain with breathing (N=5), dry cough (N=14) and productive cough (N=5) that was not present prior to COVID infection. Conclusion We found that COVID patients continued to have symptoms 2 months post discharge. More than half of patients reached reported continued lethargy post discharge. Other symptoms were quite common, with 1/4-1/3 having continued shortness of breath and decreased exercise tolerance. The full pathophysiology between continued symptoms and post COVID syndrome is not yet known; however, clinicians need to understand the prevalence to treat patients accordingly. Physicians should help to normalize these symptoms to patients. Treatment should include supportive care such as rehab and physical therapy with consideration of referral to post COVID centers

Mortality among patients with COVID-19 and respiratory failure is high and there are no known lower airway biomarkers that predict clinical outcome. We investigated whether bacterial respiratory infections and viral load were associated with poor clinical outcome and host immune tone. We obtained bacterial and fungal culture data from 589 critically ill subjects with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation. On a subset of the subjects that underwent bronchoscopy, we also quantified SARS-CoV-2 viral load, analyzed the microbiome of the lower airways by metagenome and metatranscriptome analyses and profiled the host immune response. We found that isolation of a hospital-acquired respiratory pathogen was not associated with fatal outcome. However, poor clinical outcome was associated with enrichment of the lower airway microbiota with an oral commensal ( Mycoplasma salivarium ), while high SARS-CoV-2 viral burden, poor anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody response, together with a unique host transcriptome profile of the lower airways were most predictive of mortality. Collectively, these data support the hypothesis that 1) the extent of viral infectivity drives mortality in severe COVID-19, and therefore 2) clinical management strategies targeting viral replication and host responses to SARS-CoV-2 should be prioritized.

Mortality among patients with COVID-19 and respiratory failure is high and there are no known lower airway biomarkers that predict clinical outcome. We investigated whether bacterial respiratory infections and viral load were associated with poor clinical outcome and host immune tone. We obtained bacterial and fungal culture data from 589 critically ill subjects with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation. On a subset of the subjects that underwent bronchoscopy, we also quantified SARS-CoV-2 viral load, analyzed the microbiome of the lower airways by metagenome and metatranscriptome analyses and profiled the host immune response. We found that isolation of a hospital-acquired respiratory pathogen was not associated with fatal outcome. However, poor clinical outcome was associated with enrichment of the lower airway microbiota with an oral commensal ( Mycoplasma salivarium ), while high SARS-CoV-2 viral burden, poor anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody response, together with a unique host transcriptome profile of the lower airways were most predictive of mortality. Collectively, these data support the hypothesis that 1) the extent of viral infectivity drives mortality in severe COVID-19, and therefore 2) clinical management strategies targeting viral replication and host responses to SARS-CoV-2 should be prioritized.

OBJECTIVES:This study sought to prospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Indigo aspiration system in submassive acute pulmonary embolism (PE). BACKGROUND:PE treatment with thrombolytics has bleeding risks. Aspiration thrombectomy can remove thrombus without thrombolytics, but data are lacking. METHODS:This study was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter study that enrolled patients with symptomatic acute PE ≤14 days, systolic blood pressure ≥90 mm Hg, and right ventricular-to-left ventricular (RV/LV) ratio >0.9. The primary efficacy endpoint was change in RV/LV ratio from baseline to 48 h post-procedure on core lab-adjudicated computed tomography angiography. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of 48-h major adverse events: device-related death, major bleeding, and device-related serious adverse events (clinical deterioration, pulmonary vascular, or cardiac injury). All sites received Institutional Review Board approval. RESULTS:A total of 119 patients (mean age 59.8 ± 15.0 years) were enrolled at 22 U.S. sites between November 2017 and March 2019. Median device insertion to removal time was 37.0 (interquartile range: 23.5 to 60.0) min. Two (1.7%) patients received intraprocedural thrombolytics. Mean RV/LV ratio reduction from baseline to 48 h post-procedure was 0.43 (95% confidence interval: 0.38 to 0.47; p < 0.0001). Two (1.7%) patients experienced 3 major adverse events. Rates of cardiac injury, pulmonary vascular injury, clinical deterioration, major bleeding, and device-related death at 48 h were 0%, 1.7%, 1.7%, 1.7%, and 0.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:In this prospective, multicenter study the Indigo aspiration system was associated with a significant reduction in the RV/LV ratio and a low major adverse event rate in submassive PE patients. Intraprocedural thrombolytic drugs were avoided in 98.3% of patients. (Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of the Indigo aspiration system in Acute Pulmonary Embolism [EXTRACT-PE]; NCT03218566).

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with increased rates of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Pulmonary Embolism Response Teams (PERT) have previously been associated with improved outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether PERT utilization, recommendations, and outcomes for patients diagnosed with acute PE changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients with acute PE who received care at an academic hospital system in New York City between March 1st and April 30th, 2020. These patients were compared against historic controls between March 1st and April 30th, 2019. PE severity, PERT utilization, initial management, PERT recommendations, and outcomes were compared. There were more cases of PE during the pandemic (82 vs. 59), but less PERT activations (26.8% vs. 64.4%, p < 0.001) despite similar markers of PE severity. PERT recommendations were similar before and during the pandemic; anticoagulation was most recommended (89.5% vs. 86.4%, p = 0.70). During the pandemic, those with PERT activations were more likely to be female (63.6% vs. 31.7%, p = 0.01), have a history of DVT/PE (22.7% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.01), and to be SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative (68.2% vs. 38.3% p = 0.02). PERT activation during the pandemic is associated with decreased length of stay (7.7 ± 7.7 vs. 13.2 ± 12.7 days, p = 0.02). PERT utilization decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic and its activation was associated with different biases. PERT recommendations and outcomes were similar before and during the pandemic, and led to decreased length of stay during the pandemic.

BACKGROUND:COVID-19 is a worldwide pandemic, with many patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Tracheostomy is not recommended by current guidelines as it is considered a super-spreading event due to aerosolization that unduly risks healthcare workers. METHODS:Patients with severe COVID-19 that were on mechanical ventilation ≥ 5 days were evaluated for percutaneous dilational tracheostomy. We developed a novel percutaneous tracheostomy technique that placed the bronchoscope alongside the endotracheal tube, not inside it. This improved visualization during the procedure and continued standard mechanical ventilation after positioning the inflated endotracheal tube cuff in the distal trachea. This technique offers a significant mitigation for the risk of virus aerosolization during the procedure. RESULTS:From March 10 to April 15, 2020, 270 patients with COVID-19 required invasive mechanical ventilation at New York University Langone Health Manhattan's campus of which 98 patients underwent percutaneous dilational tracheostomy. The mean time from intubation to the procedure was 10.6 days (SD ±5 days). Currently, thirty-two (33%) patients do not require mechanical ventilatory support, 19 (19%) have their tracheostomy tube downsized and 8 (8%) were decannulated. Forty (41%) patients remain on full ventilator support, while 19 (19%) are weaning from mechanical ventilation. Seven (7%) died as result of respiratory and multiorgan failure. Tracheostomy related bleeding was the most common complication (5 patients). None of health care providers have developed symptoms or tested positive for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS:Our percutaneous tracheostomy technique appears to be safe and effective for COVID-19 patients and safe for healthcare workers.

BACKGROUND:Pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) have become increasingly popular at institutions around the country, although the evidence to support their efficacy is limited. PERTs are mechanisms for rapid involvement of a multidisciplinary team in the management of a time-sensitive condition with many treatment options. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed 201 patients with PERT activations since inception, collecting data on demographics, time to treatment, treatment modality, and in-hospital outcomes. RESULTS:Massive pulmonary embolism accounted for 16 (8.7%) PERT activations. The majority of patients were treated without invasive intervention; 91.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.1%-95.7%) of patients received anticoagulation alone, 4.5% (95% CI, 0%-18.6%) had catheter-directed therapy (CDT), and 3.0% (95% CI, 0%-16.9%) had systemic administration of tissue plasminogen activator (tPA). The average time to intervention was 665 minutes (95% CI, 249-1080 minutes) for CDT and 22 minutes (95% CI, 0-456 minutes) for systemic TPA. The average time to anticoagulation was 2.3 minutes (95% CI, 0-43 minutes). There was a trend toward higher rates of cardiac events (odds ratio [OR], 12.68; 95% CI, 0.62-65.74) and death (OR, 3.19; 95% CI, 0.28-5.18) among patients with massive PE. There was a higher rate of cardiac events (OR, 5.66; 95% CI, 1.34-23.83) among patients who received tPA or an invasive intervention. There was no difference in mortality rates of patients who underwent aggressive management compared with anticoagulation alone. CONCLUSIONS:A dedicated PERT results in efficient delivery of care and excellent outcomes, in part owing to the rapid (on average, 8 minutes) time to initiation of a multidisciplinary discussion. Patients who ultimately underwent CDT had an interval of >10 hours on average between diagnosis and CDT. This provisional or delayed approach to CDT in selected patients who were not improving with anticoagulation alone (and therefore had potential for higher net benefit from a procedure with its own inherent risks) may have resulted in a lower rate of CDT.