The interplay between inflammation and oxidative stress is a vicious circle, potentially resulting in organ damage. Essential micronutrients such as selenium (Se) and zinc (Zn) support anti-oxidative defense systems and are commonly depleted in severe disease. This single-center retrospective study investigated micronutrient levels under Se and Zn supplementation in critically ill patients with COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and explored potential relationships with immunological and clinical parameters. According to intensive care unit (ICU) standard operating procedures, patients received 1.0 mg of intravenous Se daily on top of artificial nutrition, which contained various amounts of Se and Zn. Micronutrients, inflammatory cytokines, lymphocyte subsets and clinical data were extracted from the patient data management system on admission and after 10 to 14 days of treatment. Forty-six patients were screened for eligibility and 22 patients were included in the study. Twenty-one patients (95%) suffered from severe ARDS and 14 patients (64%) survived to ICU discharge. On admission, the majority of patients had low Se status biomarkers and Zn levels, along with elevated inflammatory parameters. Se supplementation significantly elevated Se (p = 0.027) and selenoprotein P levels (SELENOP; p = 0.016) to normal range. Accordingly, glutathione peroxidase 3 (GPx3) activity increased over time (p = 0.021). Se biomarkers, most notably SELENOP, were inversely correlated with CRP (r_s = −0.495), PCT (r_s = −0.413), IL-6 (r_s = −0.429), IL-1β (r_s = −0.440) and IL-10 (r_s = −0.461). Positive associations were found for CD8⁺ T cells (r_s = 0.636), NK cells (r_s = 0.772), total IgG (r_s = 0.493) and PaO₂/FiO₂ ratios (r_s = 0.504). In addition, survivors tended to have higher Se levels after 10 to 14 days compared to non-survivors (p = 0.075). Sufficient Se and Zn levels may potentially be of clinical significance for an adequate immune response in critically ill patients with severe COVID-19 ARDS.

Pharmacologic cardiac conditioning increases the intrinsic resistance against ischemia and reperfusion (I/R) injury. The cardiac conditioning response is mediated via complex signaling networks. These networks have been an intriguing research field for decades, largely advancing our knowledge on cardiac signaling beyond the conditioning response. The centerpieces of this system are the mitochondria, a dynamic organelle, almost acting as a cell within the cell. Mitochondria comprise a plethora of functions at the crossroads of cell death or survival. These include the maintenance of aerobic ATP production and redox signaling, closely entwined with mitochondrial calcium handling and mitochondrial permeability transition. Moreover, mitochondria host pathways of programmed cell death impact the inflammatory response and contain their own mechanisms of fusion and fission (division). These act as quality control mechanisms in cellular ageing, release of pro-apoptotic factors and mitophagy. Furthermore, recently identified mechanisms of mitochondrial regeneration can increase the capacity for oxidative phosphorylation, decrease oxidative stress and might help to beneficially impact myocardial remodeling, as well as invigorate the heart against subsequent ischemic insults. The current review highlights different pathways and unresolved questions surrounding mitochondria in myocardial I/R injury and pharmacological cardiac conditioning.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated coagulopathy (CAC) leads to thromboembolic events in a high number of critically ill COVID-19 patients. However, specific diagnostic or therapeutic algorithms for CAC have not been established. In the current study, we analyzed coagulation abnormalities with point-of-care testing (POCT) and their relation to hemostatic complications in patients suffering from COVID-19 induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Our hypothesis was that specific diagnostic patterns can be identified in patients with COVID-19 induced ARDS at risk of thromboembolic complications utilizing POCT. Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective observational study. Longitudinal data from 247 rotational thromboelastometries (Rotem®) and 165 impedance aggregometries (Multiplate®) were analysed in 18 patients consecutively admitted to the ICU with a COVID-19 induced ARDS between March 12th to June 30th, 2020. Results: Median age was 61 years (IQR: 51–69). Median PaO₂/FiO₂ on admission was 122 mmHg (IQR: 87–189), indicating moderate to severe ARDS. Any form of hemostatic complication occurred in 78 % of the patients with deep vein/arm thrombosis in 39 %, pulmonary embolism in 22 %, and major bleeding in 17 %. In Rotem® elevated A10 and maximum clot firmness (MCF) indicated higher clot strength. The delta between EXTEM A10 minus FIBTEM A10 (ΔA10) > 30 mm, depicting the sole platelet-part of clot firmness, was associated with a higher risk of thromboembolic events (OD: 3.7; 95 %CI 1.3–10.3; p = 0.02). Multiplate® aggregometry showed hypoactive platelet function. There was no correlation between single Rotem® and Multiplate® parameters at intensive care unit (ICU) admission and thromboembolic or bleeding complications. Conclusions: Rotem® and Multiplate® results indicate hypercoagulability and hypoactive platelet dysfunction in COVID-19 induced ARDS but were all in all poorly related to hemostatic complications..

Background: Viscoelastic test–guided coagulation management has become increasingly important in assessing hemostasis. We developed Visual Clot, an animated, 3D blood clot that illustrates raw rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) parameters in a user-centered and situation awareness–oriented method. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of Visual Clot by examining its effects on users that are novices in viscoelastic-guided resuscitation. Methods: We conducted an investigator-initiated, international, multicenter study between September 16, 2020, and October 6, 2020, in 5 tertiary care hospitals in central Europe. We randomly recruited medical students and inexperienced resident physicians without significant prior exposure to viscoelastic testing. The 7 participants per center managed 9 different ROTEM outputs twice, once as standard ROTEM tracings and once as the corresponding Visual Clot. We randomly presented the 18 viscoelastic cases and asked the participants for their therapeutic decisions. We assessed the performance, diagnostic confidence, and perceived workload in managing the tasks using mixed statistical models and adjusted for possible confounding factors. Results: Analyzing a total of 630 results, we found that the participants solved more cases correctly (odds ratio [OR] 33.66, 95% CI 21.13-53.64; P<.001), exhibited more diagnostic confidence (OR 206.2, 95% CI 93.5-454.75; P<.001), and perceived less workload (coefficient –41.63; 95% CI –43.91 to –39.36; P<.001) using Visual Clot compared to using standard ROTEM tracings. Conclusions: This study emphasizes the practical benefit of presenting viscoelastic test results in a user-centered way. Visual Clot may allow inexperienced users to be involved in the decision-making process to treat bleeding-associated coagulopathy. The increased diagnostic confidence, diagnostic certainty, reduced workload, and positive user feedback associated with this visualization may promote the further adoption of viscoelastic methods in diverse health care settings.