Expert opinion on the management and follow-up of uveitis patients during SARS-CoV-2 outbreak.

INTRODUCTION: Routine medical and ophthalmic care is being drastically curtailed in the context of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Uveitis patients require particular attention because of their theoretical risk of viral infection, in the context of therapeutic immunosuppression. AREAS COVERED: This collaborative work proposes practical management and follow-up criteria for uveitis patients in the context of the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. EXPERT OPINION: Management should proceed as usual when access to health care possible in patients who do not belong to a group at high risk of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, and in uncontrolled uveitis cases. In case of reduced access to eye clinics or high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients' management should be stratified based on their clinical presentation. In non-severe uveitis cases, the use of systemic steroids should be avoided, and local steroids preferred whenever possible. In uncontrolled situations where there is real risk of permanent visual loss, high-dose intravenous steroids and/or systemic immunosuppressants and/or biotherapies can be administered depending on the severity of eye disease. Immunosuppressive therapy should not be withheld, unless the patient develops SARS-CoV2 infection.

Outcomes of Hydroxychloroquine Usage in United States Veterans Hospitalized with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Despite limited and conflicting evidence, hydroxychloroquine, alone or in combination with azithromycin, is widely used in COVID-19 therapy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of electronic health records of patients hospitalized with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in US Veterans Health Administration medical centers between March 9, 2020 and April 29, 2020. Patients hospitalized within 24 h of diagnosis were classified based on their exposure to hydroxychloroquine alone (HC) or with azithromycin (HC+AZ) or no HC as treatments. The primary outcomes were mortality and use of mechanical ventilation. FINDINGS: A total of 807 patients were evaluated. Compared to the no HC group, after propensity score adjustment for clinical characteristics, the risk of death from any cause was higher in the HC group (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-2.89; p = 0.009), but not in the HC+AZ group (aHR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.80-2.15; p = 0.28). Both the propensity-score-adjusted risks of mechanical ventilation and death after mechanical ventilation were not significantly different in the HC group (aHR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.78-1.82; p = 0.42 and aHR, 2.11; 95% CI, 0.96-4.62; p = 0.06, respectively) or in the HC+AZ group (aHR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.72-1.66; p = 0.69 and aHR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.59-2.68; p = 0.56, respectively) compared to the no HC group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, this retrospective study did not identify any significant reduction in mortality or in the need for mechanical ventilation with hydroxychloroquine treatment with or without azithromycin. FUNDING: University of Virginia Strategic Investment Fund.