Intravenous fluids are recommended for the treatment of patients who are in septic shock, but higher fluid volumes have been associated with harm in patients who are in the intensive care unit (ICU).

To comprehensively assess published peer-reviewed studies related to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), focusing on outcomes and complications of ECMO in adult patients. Systematic review and meta-analysis. MEDLINE/PubMed was searched for articles on complications and mortality occurring during or after ECMO. Included studies had more than 100 patients receiving ECMO and reported in detail fatal or nonfatal complications occurring during or after ECMO. Primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up available; secondary outcomes were fatal and non-fatal complications. Twelve studies were included (1763 patients), mostly reporting on venoarterial ECMO. Criteria for applying ECMO were variable, but usually comprised acute respiratory failure, cardiogenic shock or both. After a median follow-up of 30 days (1st-3rd quartile, 30-68 days), overall mortality was 54% (95% CI, 47%-61%), with 45% (95% CI, 42%-48%) of fatal events occurring during ECMO and 13% (95% CI, 11%-15%) after it. The most common complications associated with ECMO were: renal failure requiring continuous venovenous haemofiltration (occurring in 52%), bacterial pneumonia (33%), any bleeding (33%), oxygenator dysfunction requiring replacement (29%), sepsis (26%), haemolysis (18%), liver dysfunction (16%), leg ischaemia (10%), venous thrombosis (10%), central nervous system complications (8%), gastrointestinal bleeding (7%), aspiration pneumonia (5%), and disseminated intravascular coagulation (5%). Even with conditions usually associated with a high chance of death, almost 50% of patients receiving ECMO survive up to discharge. Complications are frequent and most often comprise renal failure, pneumonia or sepsis, and bleeding.

Catecholaminergic inotropes have a place in the management of low output syndrome and decompensated heart failure but their effect on mortality is debated. Levosimendan is a calcium sensitizer that enhances myocardial contractility without increasing myocardial oxygen use. A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the impact of levosimendan on mortality and hospital stay. BioMedCentral, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials were searched for pertinent studies. International experts and the manufacturer were contacted. Articles were assessed by four trained investigators, with divergences resolved by consensus. Inclusion criteria were random allocation to treatment and comparison of levosimendan vs. control. There were no restrictions on dose or time of levosimendan administration or on language. Exclusion criteria were: duplicate publications, nonadult studies, oral administration of levosimendan, and no data on main outcomes. Study end points, main outcomes, study design, population, clinical setting, levosimendan dosage, and treatment duration were extracted. Data from 5,480 patients in 45 randomized clinical trials were analyzed. The overall mortality rate was 17.4% (507 of 2,915) among levosimendan-treated patients and 23.3% (598 of 2,565) in the control group (risk ratio 0.80 [0.72; 0.89], p for effect <.001, number needed to treat = 17 with 45 studies included). Reduction in mortality was confirmed in studies with placebo (risk ratio 0.82 [0.69; 0.97], p = .02) or dobutamine (risk ratio 0.68 [0.52–0.88]; p = .003) as comparator and in studies performed in cardiac surgery (risk ratio 0.52 [0.35; 0.76] p = .001) or cardiology (risk ratio 0.75 [0.63; 0.91], p = .003) settings. Length of hospital stay was reduced in the levosimendan group (weighted mean difference = −1.31 [−1.95; −0.31], p for effect = .007, with 17 studies included). A trend toward a higher percentage of patients experiencing hypotension was noted in levosimendan vs. control (risk ratio 1.39 [0.97–1.94], p = .053). Levosimendan might reduce mortality in cardiac surgery and cardiology settings of adult patients.

We described features of hospitalized Covid-19 patients and identified predictors of clinical deterioration. We included patients consecutively admitted at Humanitas Research Hospital (Rozzano, Milan, Italy); retrospectively extracted demographic; clinical; laboratory and imaging findings at admission; used survival methods to identify factors associated with clinical deterioration (defined as intensive care unit (ICU) transfer or death), and developed a prognostic index. Overall; we analyzed 239 patients (29.3% females) with a mean age of 63.9 (standard deviation [SD]; 14.0) years. Clinical deterioration occurred in 70 patients (29.3%), including 41 (17.2%) ICU transfers and 36 (15.1%) deaths. The most common symptoms and signs at admission were cough (77.8%) and elevated respiratory rate (34.1%), while 66.5% of patients had at least one coexisting medical condition. Imaging frequently revealed ground-glass opacity (68.9%) and consolidation (23.8%). Age; increased respiratory rate; abnormal blood gas parameters and imaging findings; coexisting coronary heart disease; leukocytosis; lymphocytopenia; and several laboratory parameters (elevated procalcitonin; interleukin-6; serum ferritin; C-reactive protein; aspartate aminotransferase; lactate dehydrogenase; creatinine; fibrinogen; troponin-I; and D-dimer) were significant predictors of clinical deterioration. We suggested a prognostic index to assist risk-stratification (C-statistic; 0.845; 95% CI; 0.802–0.887). These results could aid early identification and management of patients at risk, who should therefore receive additional monitoring and aggressive supportive care.

Tocilizumab is an IL-6 receptor-blocking agent proposed for the treatment of severe COVID-19. The aim of this systematic review was to describe the rationale for the use of tocilizumab for the treatment of COVID-19 and to summarize the available evidence regarding its efficacy and safety. MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, pre-print repositories (bioRxiv and medRxiv) and two trial Registries were searched for studies on the use of tocilizumab in COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 infection, viral pneumonia, and/or sepsis until 20th June 2020. We identified 3 indirect pre-clinical studies and 28 clinical studies including 5776 patients with COVID-19 (13 with a comparison group, 15 single-arm). To date, no randomized trials have been published. We retrieved no studies at low risk of bias. Forty-five ongoing studies were retrieved from trial registries. There is insufficient evidence regarding the clinical efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in patients with COVID-19. Its use should be considered experimental, requiring ethical approval and clinical trial oversight.