Systemic thrombolytics as rescue therapy for COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: A retrospective observational study.

Q3 Medicine
Prathibha Gowda Ashwathappa, Ipe Jacob, Pradeep Rangappa, Karthik Rao
{"title":"Systemic thrombolytics as rescue therapy for COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: A retrospective observational study.","authors":"Prathibha Gowda Ashwathappa,&nbsp;Ipe Jacob,&nbsp;Pradeep Rangappa,&nbsp;Karthik Rao","doi":"10.4103/ijciis.ijciis_45_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is often associated with a progressive respiratory failure that is refractory to maximal ventilatory support and other ARDS strategies. Studies show evidence of a hypercoagulable state in COVID-19 patients, including capillary thrombosis and alveolar fibrin deposits which impede normal gas exchange. In this context, thrombolysis is considered as a salvage therapy to rescue critically hypoxemic patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective observational study, the efficacy of thrombolysis on outcome of COVID-19 ARDS with respiratory failure was analyzed. Patients with severe ARDS and d-dimer levels of 5 μg/ml or above were initiated on alteplase, as a 25 mg bolus followed by a 25 mg infusion over 22 h. Primary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) mortality and secondary outcomes were change in PaO2/FiO2 24 h after thrombolysis, avoidance of intubation, ventilator free days (VFD), and ICU and hospital length-of-stay (LOS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen out of 34 patients with severe COVID ARDS underwent thrombolysis. They had lower ICU mortality than non-thrombolysed patients (23.1% vs. 71.4%, <i>P</i> = 0.006), greater percentage improvement in PaO2/FiO2 (116% vs. 31.5%, <i>P</i> = 0.002), more VFDs (13 days vs. 0 day, <i>P</i> = 0.004), and lesser requirement for intubation (23.1% vs. 76.2%, <i>P</i> = 0.004). ICU and hospital LOS were similar.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Thrombolysis can be considered as a rescue therapy for nonintubated COVID-19 ARDS patients with severe hypoxemic respiratory failure, who show evidence of a procoagulant state. Larger studies are needed before inclusion into the regular treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":13938,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science","volume":"12 4","pages":"197-203"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9910116/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Critical Illness and Injury Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijciis.ijciis_45_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is often associated with a progressive respiratory failure that is refractory to maximal ventilatory support and other ARDS strategies. Studies show evidence of a hypercoagulable state in COVID-19 patients, including capillary thrombosis and alveolar fibrin deposits which impede normal gas exchange. In this context, thrombolysis is considered as a salvage therapy to rescue critically hypoxemic patients.

Methods: In this retrospective observational study, the efficacy of thrombolysis on outcome of COVID-19 ARDS with respiratory failure was analyzed. Patients with severe ARDS and d-dimer levels of 5 μg/ml or above were initiated on alteplase, as a 25 mg bolus followed by a 25 mg infusion over 22 h. Primary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) mortality and secondary outcomes were change in PaO2/FiO2 24 h after thrombolysis, avoidance of intubation, ventilator free days (VFD), and ICU and hospital length-of-stay (LOS).

Results: Thirteen out of 34 patients with severe COVID ARDS underwent thrombolysis. They had lower ICU mortality than non-thrombolysed patients (23.1% vs. 71.4%, P = 0.006), greater percentage improvement in PaO2/FiO2 (116% vs. 31.5%, P = 0.002), more VFDs (13 days vs. 0 day, P = 0.004), and lesser requirement for intubation (23.1% vs. 76.2%, P = 0.004). ICU and hospital LOS were similar.

Conclusion: Thrombolysis can be considered as a rescue therapy for nonintubated COVID-19 ARDS patients with severe hypoxemic respiratory failure, who show evidence of a procoagulant state. Larger studies are needed before inclusion into the regular treatment protocol for COVID-19 patients.

全身溶栓剂作为新冠肺炎急性呼吸窘迫综合征患者的抢救疗法:一项回顾性观察研究。
背景:2019冠状病毒病(新冠肺炎)肺炎伴严重急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)通常与进行性呼吸衰竭有关,这种呼吸衰竭对最大通气支持和其他ARDS策略是难治的。研究表明,有证据表明新冠肺炎患者处于高凝状态,包括毛细血管血栓形成和肺泡纤维蛋白沉积,阻碍了正常的气体交换。在这种情况下,溶栓被认为是抢救危重低氧血症患者的一种挽救疗法。方法:回顾性观察分析溶栓治疗新冠肺炎ARDS并发呼吸衰竭的疗效。严重ARDS和d-二聚体水平为5μg/ml或以上的患者开始服用阿替普酶,每次25mg,然后在22小时内输注25mg。主要结果是重症监护室(ICU)死亡率,次要结果是溶栓后24小时PaO2/FiO2的变化、避免插管、无呼吸机天数(VFD),结果:34例严重新冠肺炎ARDS患者中有13例接受了溶栓治疗。与未血栓溶解的患者相比,他们的ICU死亡率更低(23.1%对71.4%,P=0.006),PaO2/FiO2改善百分比更高(116%对31.5%,P=0.002),VFD更多(13天对0天,P=0.004),插管需求更少(23.1%比76.2%,P=0.004。结论:对于有证据表明处于促凝状态的严重低氧血症性呼吸衰竭的新冠肺炎非住院ARDS患者,血栓溶解可被视为一种抢救性治疗方法。在纳入新冠肺炎患者常规治疗方案之前,需要进行更大规模的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: IJCIIS encourages research, education and dissemination of knowledge in the field of Critical Illness and Injury Science across the world thus promoting translational research by striking a synergy between basic science, clinical medicine and public health. The Journal intends to bring together scientists and academicians in the emergency intensive care and promote translational synergy between Laboratory Science, Clinical Medicine and Public Health. The Journal invites Original Articles, Clinical Investigations, Epidemiological Analysis, Data Protocols, Case Reports, Clinical Photographs, review articles and special commentaries. Students, Residents, Academicians, Public Health experts and scientists are all encouraged to be a part of this initiative by contributing, reviewing and promoting scientific works and science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信