Coagulopathy in COVID‐19

The COVID‐19 pandemic has become an urgent issue in every country. Based on recent reports, the most severely ill patients present with coagulopathy, and disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC)‐like massive intravascular clot formation is frequently seen in this cohort. Therefore, coagulation tests may be considered useful to discriminate severe cases of COVID‐19. The clinical presentation of COVID‐19‐associated coagulopathy is organ dysfunction primarily, whereas hemorrhagic events are less frequent. Changes in hemostatic biomarkers represented by increase in D‐dimer and fibrin/fibrinogen degradation products indicate the essence of coagulopathy is massive fibrin formation. In comparison with bacterial‐sepsis‐associated coagulopathy/DIC, prolongation of prothrombin time, and activated partial thromboplastin time, and decrease in antithrombin activity is less frequent and thrombocytopenia is relatively uncommon in COVID‐19. The mechanisms of the coagulopathy are not fully elucidated, however. It is speculated that the dysregulated immune responses orchestrated by inflammatory cytokines, lymphocyte cell death, hypoxia, and endothelial damage are involved. Bleeding tendency is uncommon, but the incidence of thrombosis in COVID‐19 and the adequacy of current recommendations regarding standard venous thromboembolic dosing are uncertain.     

COVID‐19 and acute coagulopathy in pregnancy

We present a putative link between maternal COVID‐19 infection in the peripartum period and rapid maternal deterioration with early organ dysfunction and coagulopathy. The current pandemic with SARS‐CoV‐2 has already resulted in high numbers of critically ill patients and deaths in the non‐pregnant population, mainly due to respiratory failure. During viral outbreaks, pregnancy poses a uniquely increased risk to women due to changes to immune function, alongside physiological adaptive alterations, such as increased oxygen consumption and edema of the respiratory tract. The laboratory derangements may be reminiscent of HELLP (hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, low platelet count) syndrome, and thus knowledge of the COVID‐19 relationship is paramount for appropriate diagnosis and management. In addition to routine measurements of D‐dimers, prothrombin time, and platelet count in all patients presenting with COVID‐19 as per International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) guidance, monitoring of activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and fibrinogen levels should be considered in pregnancy, as highlighted in this report. These investigations in SARS‐CoV‐2‐positive pregnant women are vital, as their derangement may signal a more severe COVID‐19 infection, and may warrant pre‐emptive admission and consideration of delivery to achieve maternal stabilization.     

Informing emergency care for COVID‐19 patients: The COVID‐19 Emergency Department Quality Improvement Project protocol

Objectives: There is an urgency to support Australian ED clinicians with real‐time tools as the COVID‐19 pandemic evolves. The COVID‐19 Emergency Department (COVED) Quality Improvement Project has commenced and will provide flexible and responsive clinical tools to determine the predictors of key ED‐relevant clinical outcomes. Methods: The COVED Project includes all adult patients presenting to a participating ED and meeting contemporary testing criteria for COVID‐19. The dataset has been embedded in the electronic medical record and the COVED Registry has been developed. Results: Outcomes measured include being COVID‐19 positive and requiring intensive respiratory support. Regression methodology will be used to generate clinical prediction tools. Conclusion: This project will support EDs during this pandemic.     

Fibrinolysis and COVID‐19: A plasmin paradox

The COVID‐19 pandemic has provided many challenges in the field of thrombosis and hemostasis. Among these is a novel form of coagulopathy that includes exceptionally high levels of D‐dimer. D‐dimer is a marker of poor prognosis, but does this also imply a causal relationship? These spectacularly raised D‐dimer levels may actually signify the failing attempt of the fibrinolytic system to remove fibrin and necrotic tissue from the lung parenchyma, being consumed or overwhelmed in the process. Indeed, recent studies suggest that increasing fibrinolytic activity might offer hope for patients with critical disease and severe respiratory failure. However, the fibrinolytic system can also be harnessed by coronavirus to promote infectivity and where antifibrinolytic measures would also seem appropriate. Hence, there is a clinical paradox where plasmin formation can be either deleterious or beneficial in COVID‐19, but not at the same time. Hence, it all comes down to timing.     

CLUE: COVID‐19 lung ultrasound in emergency department

Lung ultrasound (LUS) plays a critical role in the SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic. Evidence is mounting on its utility to diagnose, assess the severity and as a triage tool in the ED. Sonographic features correlate well to computed tomography (CT) chest findings and a bedside LUS performed by a trained clinician along with clinical examination, could be an alternative to chest X‐ray and CT chest in these highly infectious patients. In this article, we have described a step‐by‐step approach to LUS in COVID patients and the CLUE (COVID‐19 LUS in the ED) protocol, which involves an anatomical parameter, the severity of lung changes, objectively scored using the validated LUS scoring system and a physiological parameter, oxygen requirement. We believe this CLUE protocol can help risk‐stratify patients presenting to ED with suspected COVID‐19 and aid clinicians in making appropriate disposition decisions.     

ISTH DIC subcommittee communication on anticoagulation in COVID‐19

Hypercoagulability is an increasingly recognized complication of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. As such, anticoagulation has become part and parcel of comprehensive COVID‐19 management. However, several uncertainties exist in this area, including the appropriate type and dose of heparin. In addition, special patient populations, including those with high body mass index and renal impairment, require special consideration. Although the current evidence is still insufficient, we provide a pragmatic approach to anticoagulation in COVID‐19, but stress the need for further trials in this area.     

COVID‐19 and toxicity from potential treatments: Panacea or poison

Since December 2019, coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) has been increasingly spreading from its origin in Wuhan, China to many countries around the world eventuating in morbidity and mortality affecting millions of people. This pandemic has proven to be a challenge given that there is no immediate cure, no vaccine is currently available and medications or treatments being used are still undergoing clinical trials. There have already been examples of self‐medication and overdose. Clearly, there is a need to further define the efficacy of treatments used in the management of COVID‐19. This evidence needs to be backed by large randomised‐controlled clinical trials. In the meantime, there will no doubt be further off‐label use of these medications by patients and practitioners and possibly related toxicity.     

COVID‐19 and medical litigation: More than just the obvious

COVID‐19 has massively changed the health landscape around the world. Wide‐ranging changes to healthcare delivery have occurred, especially in hospitals and EDs. Health services have made local decisions about care pathways, in some cases deviating from what would, until recently, have been considered widely accepted care. These changes bring with them new medicolegal risk for clinicians. In Australia, civil liability Acts provide protection for professionals when the criterion of having undertaken ‘competent’ practice that would be ‘widely accepted’ ‘in the circumstances’ is met. There is doubt how courts, and the medical experts who advise them, will evaluate clinical care provided during the pandemic when health services have developed local care pathways and there is no nationally accepted standard.     

Indomethacin and resveratrol as potential treatment adjuncts for SARS‐CoV‐2/COVID‐19

The ongoing pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2, also known as COVID‐19) has led to unprecedented challenges for the global healthcare system. This novel coronavirus disease phenotype ranges from asymptomatic carriage to fulminant cytokine storm with respiratory failure, polyorgan dysfunction and death. Severe disease is characterised by exuberant inflammation resulting from high circulating cytokines such as interleukin‐6 and tumour necrosis factor. These inflammatory mediators are responsible for the detrimental effects on the immune, hematologic, respiratory, renal, gastrointestinal and other body systems. In addition to inhibition of viral replication, blunting this inflammatory response before overt cytokine storm is important to improve outcomes. Although there are upcoming promising agents such as remdesivir and convalescent plasma, inexpensive, safe and widely available adjunct treatments to ameliorate disease burden would be welcome. Two potential anti‐inflammatory agents include indomethacin, which has been shown in experimental models to decrease canine coronavirus levels in dogs and exhibit antiviral activity against several other viruses and the polyphenol, resveratrol, a potent antioxidant that has shown antiviral activity against several viruses.     

The principle of salvage in the context of COVID‐19

The prioritisation of scarce resources has a particular urgency within the context of the COVID‐19 pandemic crisis. This paper sets out a hypothetical case of Patient X (who is a nurse) and Patient Y (who is a non‐health care worker). They are both in need of a ventilator due to COVID‐19 with the same clinical situation and expected outcomes. However, there is only one ventilator available. In addressing the question of who should get priority, the proposal is made that the answer may lie in how the pandemic is metaphorically described using military terms. If nursing is understood to take place at the ‘frontline’ in the ‘battle’ against COVID‐19, a principle of military medical ethics—namely the principle of salvage—can offer guidance on how to prioritise access to a life‐saving resource in such a situation. This principle of salvage purports a moral direction to return wounded soldiers back to duty on the battlefield. Applying this principle to the hypothetical case, this paper proposes that Patient X (who is a nurse) should get priority of access to the ventilator so that he/she can return to the ‘frontline’ in the fight against COVID‐19.