Back

Intra-pulmonary and intra-cardiac shunts in adult COVID-19 versus non-COVID ARDS ICU patients using echocardiography and contrast bubble studies (COVID-Shunt Study): a prospective, observational cohort study

Lau, V. I.; Mah, G.; Wang, X. M.; Byker, L.; Robinson, A.; Milovanovic, L.; Alherbish, A.; Odenbach, J.; Vadeanu, C.; Lu, D.; Smyth, L.; Rohatensky, M.; Whiteside, B.; Gregoire, P.; Luksun, W.; Van Diepen, S.; Anderson, D.; Verma, S.; Slemko, J.; Brindley, P.; Kutsogiannis, D. J.; Jacka, M.; Shaw, A.; Wheatley, M.; Windram, J.; Opgenorth, D.; Baig, N.; Rewa, O. G.; Bagshaw, S. M.; Buchanan, B. M.

2022-08-06 respiratory medicine
10.1101/2022.08.04.22278445 medRxiv
Show abstract

ImportanceStudies have suggested intra-pulmonary shunts may contribute to hypoxemia in COVID-19 ARDS and may be associated with worse outcomes. ObjectiveTo evaluate the presence of right-to-left (R-L) shunts in COVID-19 and non-COVID ARDS patients using a comprehensive hypoxemia work-up for shunt etiology and associations with mortality. Design, Setting, ParticipantsWe conducted a multi-centre (4 Canadian hospitals), prospective, observational cohort study of adult critically ill, mechanically ventilated, ICU patients admitted for ARDS from both COVID-19 or non-COVID (November 16, 2020-September 1, 2021). InterventionContrast-enhanced agitated-saline bubble studies with transthoracic echocardiography/transcranial Doppler (TTE/TCD) {+/-} transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) assessed for the presence of R-L shunts. Main Outcomes and MeasuresPrimary outcomes were shunt incidence and association with hospital mortality. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine association of shunt presence/absence with covariables. ResultsThe study enrolled 226 patients (182 COVID-19 vs. 42 non-COVID). Median age was 58 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 47-67) and APACHE II scores of 30 (IQR: 21-36). In COVID-19 patients, the incidence of R-L shunt was 31/182 patients (17.0%; intra-pulmonary: 61.3%; intra-cardiac: 38.7%) versus 10/44 (22.7%) non-COVID patients. No evidence of difference was detected between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 shunt rates (risk difference [RD]: -5.7%, 95% CI: -18.4-7.0, p=0.38). In the COVID-19 group, hospital mortality was higher for those with R-L shunt compared to those without (54.8% vs 35.8%, RD: 19.0%, 95% CI 0.1-37.9, p=0.05). But this did not persist at 90-day mortality, nor after regression adjustments for age and illness severity. ConclusionsThere was no evidence of increased R-L shunt rates in COVID-19 compared to non-COVID controls. Right-to-left shunt was associated with increased in-hospital mortality for COVID-19 patients, but this did not persist at 90-day mortality or after adjusting using logistic regression. Key Points QuestionDoes right-to-left shunt incidence increase with COVID-19 ARDS compared to non-COVID, and is there association with shunt incidence and mortality? FindingsIn this prospective, observational cohort study, we showed no statistically significant difference in shunt prevalence between COVID-19 ARDS patients (17.0%) and non-COVID patients (22.7%). However, in COVID-19 patients, there was a difference in hospital mortality for those with shunt (54.8%) compared to those without shunt (35.8%), but this difference did not persist at 90-day mortality, nor after regression adjustments for age and illness severity. MeaningThere was no evidence of increased R-L shunt rates in COVID-19 compared to non-COVID or historical controls. Right-to-left shunt presence was associated with increased hospital mortality for COVID-19 patients, but this did not persist for 90-day mortality or after adjustment using logistic regression.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 6%
23.2%
2
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 1%
12.7%
3
Critical Care Explorations
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.4%
4
Journal of Internal Medicine
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.0%
50% of probability mass above
5
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.5%
6
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 34%
3.7%
8
Critical Care
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
9
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
10
Frontiers in Pediatrics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
11
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology
29 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.4%
12
European Respiratory Journal
54 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
13
BJGP Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
14
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
15
Annals of Translational Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.0%
16
ERJ Open Research
44 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
17
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
18
Life
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
19
The American Journal of Pathology
31 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
20
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
21
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
22
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
23
Pediatric Pulmonology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%
24
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
25
Infection
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%
26
Journal of Medical Microbiology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.5%
27
Medical Research Archives
11 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.5%