Carroll, Christopher L.

Abstract Background We aimed to determine if pre-existing immunocompromising conditions (ICCs) were associated with the presentation or outcome of patients with acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) admitted for pediatric intensive care. Methods Fifty-five hospitals in 30 US states reported cases through the Overcoming COVID-19 public health surveillance registry. Patients <21 years admitted 12 March 2020–30 December 2021 to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) or high-acuity unit for acute COVID-19 were included. Results Of 1274 patients, 105 (8.2%) had an ICC, including 33 (31.4%) hematologic malignancies, 24 (22.9%) primary immunodeficiencies and disorders of hematopoietic cells, 19 (18.1%) nonmalignant organ failure with solid-organ transplantation, 16 (15.2%) solid tumors, and 13 (12.4%) autoimmune disorders. Patients with ICCs were older, had more underlying renal conditions, and had lower white blood cell and platelet counts than those without ICCs, but had similar clinical disease severity upon admission. In-hospital mortality from COVID-19 was higher (11.4% vs 4.6%, P = .005) and hospitalization was longer (P = .01) in patients with ICCs. New major morbidities upon discharge were not different between those with and without ICC (10.5% vs 13.9%, P = .40). In patients with ICCs, bacterial coinfection was more common in those with life-threatening COVID-19. Conclusions In this national case series of patients <21 years of age with acute COVID-19 admitted for intensive care, existence of a prior ICCs were associated with worse clinical outcomes. Reassuringly, most patients with ICCs hospitalized in the PICU for severe acute COVID-19 survived and were discharged home without new severe morbidities.

ImportanceRespiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the leading cause of lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) and infant hospitalization worldwide.ObjectiveTo evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of RSV-related critical illness in US infants during peak 2022 RSV transmission.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cross-sectional study used a public health prospective surveillance registry in 39 pediatric hospitals across 27 US states. Participants were infants admitted for 24 or more hours between October 17 and December 16, 2022, to a unit providing intensive care due to laboratory-confirmed RSV infection.ExposureRespiratory syncytial virus.Main Outcomes and MeasuresData were captured on demographics, clinical characteristics, signs and symptoms, laboratory values, severity measures, and clinical outcomes, including receipt of noninvasive respiratory support, invasive mechanical ventilation, vasopressors or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and death. Mixed-effects multivariable log-binomial regression models were used to assess associations between intubation status and demographic factors, gestational age, and underlying conditions, including hospital as a random effect to account for between-site heterogeneity.ResultsThe first 15 to 20 consecutive eligible infants from each site were included for a target sample size of 600. Among the 600 infants, the median (IQR) age was 2.6 (1.4-6.0) months; 361 (60.2%) were male, 169 (28.9%) were born prematurely, and 487 (81.2%) had no underlying medical conditions. Primary reasons for admission included LRTI (594 infants [99.0%]) and apnea or bradycardia (77 infants [12.8%]). Overall, 143 infants (23.8%) received invasive mechanical ventilation (median [IQR], 6.0 [4.0-10.0] days). The highest level of respiratory support for nonintubated infants was high-flow nasal cannula (243 infants [40.5%]), followed by bilevel positive airway pressure (150 infants [25.0%]) and continuous positive airway pressure (52 infants [8.7%]). Infants younger than 3 months, those born prematurely (gestational age <37 weeks), or those publicly insured were at higher risk for intubation. Four infants (0.7%) received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and 2 died. The median (IQR) length of hospitalization for survivors was 5 (4-10) days.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cross-sectional study, most US infants who required intensive care for RSV LRTIs were young, healthy, and born at term. These findings highlight the need for RSV preventive interventions targeting all infants to reduce the burden of severe RSV illness.

Background Cardiac complications related to COVID‐19 in children and adolescents include ventricular dysfunction, myocarditis, coronary artery aneurysm, and bradyarrhythmias, but tachyarrhythmias are less understood. The goal of this study was to evaluate the frequency, characteristics, and outcomes of children and adolescents experiencing tachyarrhythmias while hospitalized for acute severe COVID‐19 or multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. Methods and Results This study involved a case series of 63 patients with tachyarrhythmias reported in a public health surveillance registry of patients aged <21 years hospitalized from March 15, 2020, to December 31, 2021, at 63 US hospitals. Patients with tachyarrhythmias were compared with patients with severe COVID‐19–related complications without tachyarrhythmias. Tachyarrhythmias were reported in 22 of 1257 patients (1.8%) with acute COVID‐19 and 41 of 2343 (1.7%) patients with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. They included supraventricular tachycardia in 28 (44%), accelerated junctional rhythm in 9 (14%), and ventricular tachycardia in 38 (60%); >1 type was reported in 12 (19%). Registry patients with versus without tachyarrhythmia were older (median age, 15.4 [range, 10.4–17.4] versus 10.0 [range, 5.4–14.8] years) and had higher illness severity on hospital admission. Intervention for treatment of tachyarrhythmia was required in 37 (59%) patients and included antiarrhythmic medication (n=31, 49%), electrical cardioversion (n=11, 17%), cardiopulmonary resuscitation (n=8, 13%), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n=9, 14%). Patients with tachyarrhythmias had longer hospital length of stay than those who did not, and 9 (14%) versus 77 (2%) died. Conclusions Tachyarrhythmias were a rare complication of acute severe COVID‐19 and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children and adolescents and were associated with worse clinical outcomes, highlighting the importance of close monitoring, aggressive treatment, and postdischarge care.

Abstract Background Clinical differences between critical illness from influenza infection vs coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have not been well characterized in pediatric patients. Methods We compared demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of US children (aged 8 months to 17 years) admitted to the intensive care or high-acuity unit with influenza or COVID-19. Using mixed-effects models, we assessed the odds of death or requiring life support for influenza vs COVID-19 after adjustment for age, sex, race and Hispanic origin, and underlying conditions including obesity. Results Children with influenza (n = 179) were younger than those with COVID-19 (n = 381; median, 5.2 years vs 13.8 years), less likely to be non-Hispanic Black (14.5% vs 27.6%) or Hispanic (24.0% vs 36.2%), and less likely to have ≥1 underlying condition (66.4% vs 78.5%) or be obese (21.4% vs 42.2%), and a shorter hospital stay (median, 5 days vs 7 days). They were similarly likely to require invasive mechanical ventilation (both 30.2%), vasopressor support (19.6% and 19.9%), or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (2.2% and 2.9%). Four children with influenza (2.2%) and 11 children with COVID-19 (2.9%) died. The odds of death or requiring life support in children with influenza vs COVID-19 were similar (adjusted odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, .78–2.15; P = .32). Conclusions Despite differences in demographics and clinical characteristics of children with influenza or COVID-19, the frequency of life-threatening complications was similar. Our findings highlight the importance of implementing prevention measures to reduce transmission and disease severity of influenza and COVID-19.

Abstract Background It is unclear how acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-directed therapies are used in children with life-threatening COVID-19 in US hospitals. We described characteristics of children hospitalized in the intensive care unit or step-down unit (ICU/SDU) who received COVID-19-directed therapies and the specific therapies administered. Methods Between March 15, 2020 and December 27, 2020, children &lt;18 years of age in the ICU/SDU with acute COVID-19 at 48 pediatric hospitals in the United States were identified. Demographics, laboratory values, and clinical course were compared in children who did and did not receive COVID-19-directed therapies. Trends in COVID-19-directed therapies over time were evaluated. Results Of 424 children in the ICU/SDU, 235 (55%) received COVID-19-directed therapies. Children who received COVID-19-directed therapies were older than those who did not receive COVID-19-directed therapies (13.3 [5.6-16.2] vs 9.8 [0.65-15.9] years), more had underlying medical conditions (188 [80%] vs 104 [55%]; difference = 25% [95% CI: 16% to 34%]), more received respiratory support (206 [88%] vs 71 [38%]; difference = 50% [95% CI: 34% to 56%]), and more died (8 [3.4%] vs 0). Of the 235 children receiving COVID-19-directed therapies, 172 (73%) received systemic steroids and 150 (64%) received remdesivir, with rising remdesivir use over the study period (14% in March/April to 57% November/December). Conclusion Despite the lack of pediatric data evaluating treatments for COVID-19 in critically ill children, more than half of children requiring intensive or high acuity care received COVID-19-directed therapies.

Abstract Evidence-based medicine asks us to integrate the best available evidence with clinical experience and patient values. In the modern intensive care unit, the primary focus is on complex technology and electronic health records, often away from the bedside. Excess interventionism is the norm. The term “intensivist” itself implies an intensive management strategy, which can lead us away from a patient-centered practice and toward iatrogenic harm. Under the hashtag #zentensivist, an international, multiprofessional group of clinicians has begun to discuss via Twitter how to apply key principles of history taking, physical examination, physiology, pharmacology, and clinical research in a competent, compassionate, and minimalist fashion. The term “zentensivist” intentionally combines concepts seemingly at odds—Zen philosophy and intensive care—to describe a holistic approach to the art of caring for the critically ill. We describe the key tenets of zentensivist practice and how we may inspire these actions in those we lead and educate.