Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
Pulm Circ ; 13(2): e12228, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2304749

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 related lung disease (CRLD) has emerged as an indication for lung transplantation (LT) in highly select patients. The prevalence and prognostic implication of coexisting pulmonary hypertension (PH) in patients with CRLD listed for LT is not known. Adult patients in the United Network for Organ Sharing database listed for LT for COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome or fibrosis through March 2022 were identified. The prevalence and impact of precapillary PH on pre- and posttransplantation survival was determined. Time-to-event analysis was used to compare outcomes between those with and without precapillary PH. We identified 245 patients listed for LT for CRLD who had right heart catheterization data available at the time of registry listing. Median age of the cohort was 54 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 46, 60), 56 (22.9%) were female, and the median lung allocation score was 81.3 (IQR: 53.3, 89.4). The prevalence of precapillary PH at the time of transplant listing was 27.9%. There was no significant difference in pretransplant mortality in patients with and without precapillary PH (sHR: 0.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.1-1.7, p = 0.261). A total of 187 patients ultimately underwent LT; of those, 60 (31.0%) were identified as having precapillary PH during the waitlist period. Posttransplantation survival was similar between patients with and without pretransplant precapillary PH (hazard ratio: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.2-3.7, p = 0.953). We observed a high rate of concomitant precapillary PH in patients listed for LT for CRLD. Though common, coexisting precapillary PH was not associated with a significant difference in either pre- or post-transplantation outcomes.

3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(1): e491-e498, 2022 08 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1700720

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring hospitalization is characterized by robust antibody production, dysregulated immune response, and immunothrombosis. Fostamatinib is a novel spleen tyrosine kinase inhibitor that we hypothesize will ameliorate Fc activation and attenuate harmful effects of the anti-COVID-19 immune response. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in hospitalized adults requiring oxygen with COVID-19 where patients receiving standard of care were randomized to receive fostamatinib or placebo. The primary outcome was serious adverse events by day 29. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients underwent randomization (30 to fostamatinib and 29 to placebo). Serious adverse events occurred in 10.5% of patients in the fostamatinib group compared with 22% in placebo (P = .2). Three deaths occurred by day 29, all receiving placebo. The mean change in ordinal score at day 15 was greater in the fostamatinib group (-3.6 ±â€…0.3 vs -2.6 ±â€…0.4, P = .035) and the median length in the intensive care unit was 3 days in the fostamatinib group vs 7 days in placebo (P = .07). Differences in clinical improvement were most evident in patients with severe or critical disease (median days on oxygen, 10 vs 28, P = .027). There were trends toward more rapid reductions in C-reactive protein, D-dimer, fibrinogen, and ferritin levels in the fostamatinib group. CONCLUSION: For COVID-19 requiring hospitalization, the addition of fostamatinib to standard of care was safe and patients were observed to have improved clinical outcomes compared with placebo. These results warrant further validation in larger confirmatory trials. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04579393.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Adult , Aminopyridines , Double-Blind Method , Hospitalization , Humans , Morpholines , Oxazines/therapeutic use , Oxygen , Pyridines/therapeutic use , Pyrimidines , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
4.
Chest ; 161(1): 169-178, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1616416

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused acute lung injury in millions of individuals worldwide. Some patients develop COVID-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS) and cannot be liberated from mechanical ventilation. Others may develop post-COVID fibrosis, resulting in substantial disability and need for long-term supplemental oxygen. In both of these situations, treatment teams often inquire about the possibility of lung transplantation. In fact, lung transplantation has been successfully employed for both CARDS and post-COVID fibrosis in a limited number of patients worldwide. Lung transplantation after COVID infection presents a number of unique challenges that transplant programs must consider. In those with severe CARDS, the inability to conduct proper psychosocial evaluation and pretransplantation education, marked deconditioning from critical illness, and infectious concerns regarding viral reactivation are major hurdles. In those with post-COVID fibrosis, our limited knowledge about the natural history of recovery after COVID-19 infection is problematic. Increased knowledge of the likelihood and degree of recovery after COVID-19 acute lung injury is essential for appropriate decision-making with regard to transplantation. Transplant physicians must weigh the risks and benefits of lung transplantation differently in a post-COVID fibrosis patient who is likely to remain stable or gradually improve in comparison with a patient with a known progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease (fILD). Clearly lung transplantation can be a life-saving therapeutic option for some patients with severe lung injury from COVID-19 infection. In this review, we discuss how lung transplant providers from a number of experienced centers approach lung transplantation for CARDS or post-COVID fibrosis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/surgery , Lung Transplantation , Pneumonia, Viral/surgery , Pulmonary Fibrosis/surgery , Humans , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Pulmonary Fibrosis/virology , SARS-CoV-2
5.
J Heart Lung Transplant ; 41(4): 458-466, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1587721

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As a marker of underlying lung allograft injury, donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) may be used to identify episodes of acute allograft injury in lung transplant recipients. We investigated the utility of dd-cfDNA to monitor subjects at risk of acute rejection or infection in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study collected data from lung transplant recipients within 3 years of transplant at 4 centers between March 24, 2020 and September 1, 2020. During this period, as part of routine care during the COVID-19 pandemic, these centers implemented a home-based surveillance program using plasma dd-cfDNA in preference to surveillance bronchoscopy. Dd-cfDNA was used to detect acute lung allograft dysfunction (ALAD) - a composite endpoint of acute rejection and infection. dd-cfDNA levels in patients with ALAD were compared to stable patients. The performance characteristics of dd-cfDNA ≥ 1.0% to detect ALAD were estimated. RESULTS: A total of 175 patients underwent 380 dd-cfDNA measurements, of which 290 were for routine surveillance purposes. dd-cfDNA was higher in patients with ALAD than stable patients (Median (IQR) 1.7% (0.63, 3.1) vs 0.35% (0.22, 0.79), p < 0.001). As an indication of underlying ALAD during surveillance testing, the estimated sensitivity of dd-cfDNA ≥1% was 73.9%, specificity of 87.7%, positive predictive value of 43.4% and negative predictive value of 96.5%. CONCLUSIONS: dd-cfDNA identified acute lung allograft dysfunction in asymptomatic lung transplant patients that may not have been identified by using a clinically indicated biopsy strategy alone. dd-cfDNA <1.0% may be useful in ruling out acute rejection and infection, supporting its use as a potential noninvasive marker for surveillance monitoring.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cell-Free Nucleic Acids , Kidney Transplantation , Allografts , Graft Rejection/genetics , Humans , Lung , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies
7.
Clin Med Insights Circ Respir Pulm Med ; 15: 11795484211047065, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1443748

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Limited evidence exists regarding use of inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) in spontaneously breathing patients. We evaluated the effectiveness of continuous iNO via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in COVID-19 respiratory failure. METHODS: We performed a multicenter cohort study of patients with respiratory failure from COVID-19 managed with HFNC. Patients were stratified by administration of iNO via HFNC. Regression analysis was used to compare the need for mechanical ventilation and secondary endpoints including hospital mortality, length of stay, acute kidney injury, need for renal replacement therapy, and need for extracorporeal life support. RESULTS: A total of 272 patients were identified and 66 (24.3%) of these patients received iNO via HFNC for a median of 88 h (interquartile range: 44, 135). After 12 h of iNO, supplemental oxygen requirement was unchanged or increased in 52.7% of patients. Twenty-nine (43.9%) patients treated with iNO compared to 79 (38.3%) patients without iNO therapy required endotracheal intubation (P = .47). After multivariable adjustment, there was no difference in need for mechanical ventilation between groups (odds ratio: 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.74-3.17), however, iNO administration was associated with longer hospital length of stay (incidence rate ratio: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.31-1.51). No difference was found for mortality, acute kidney injury, need for renal replacement therapy, or need for extracorporeal life support. CONCLUSION: In patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure, iNO delivered via HFNC did not reduce oxygen requirements in the majority of patients or improve clinical outcomes. Given the observed association with increased length of stay, judicious selection of those likely to benefit from this therapy is warranted.

8.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 8(8): ofab391, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1371741

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) and remdesivir (REM) have been approved for investigational use to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Nepal. METHODS: In this prospective, multicentered study, we evaluated the safety and outcomes of treatment with CPT and/or REM in 1315 hospitalized COVID-19 patients over 18 years in 31 hospitals across Nepal. REM was administered to patients with moderate, severe, or life-threatening infection. CPT was administered to patients with severe to life-threatening infections who were at high risk for progression or clinical worsening despite REM. Clinical findings and outcomes were recorded until discharge or death. RESULTS: Patients were classified as having moderate (24.2%), severe (64%), or life-threatening (11.7%) COVID-19 infection. The majority of CPT and CPT + REM recipients had severe to life-threatening infections (CPT 98.3%; CPT + REM 92.1%) and were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU; CPT 91.8%; CPT + REM 94.6%) compared with those who received REM alone (73.3% and 57.5%, respectively). Of 1083 patients with reported outcomes, 78.4% were discharged and 21.6% died. The discharge rate was 84% for REM (n = 910), 39% for CPT (n = 59), and 54.4% for CPT + REM (n = 114) recipients. In a logistic model comparing death vs discharge and adjusted for age, gender, steroid use, and severity, the predicted margin for discharge was higher for recipients of remdesivir alone (0.82; 95% CI, 0.79-0.84) compared with CPT (0.58; 95% CI, 0.47-0.70) and CPT + REM (0.67; 95% CI, 0.60-0.74) recipients. Adverse events of remdesivir and CPT were reported in <5% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a safe rollout of CPT and REM in a resource-limited setting. Remdesivir recipients had less severe infection and better outcomes.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier. NCT04570982.

9.
PLoS One ; 15(11): e0242651, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-940728

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The outcomes of patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for COVID-19 remain poorly defined. We sought to determine clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 managed with invasive mechanical ventilation in an appropriately resourced US health care system. METHODS: Outcomes of COVID-19 infected patients requiring mechanical ventilation treated within the Inova Health System between March 5, 2020 and April 26, 2020 were evaluated through an electronic medical record review. RESULTS: 1023 COVID-19 positive patients were admitted to the Inova Health System during the study period. Of these, 164 (16.0%) were managed with invasive mechanical ventilation. All patients were followed to definitive disposition. 70/164 patients (42.7%) had died and 94/164 (57.3%) were still alive. Deceased patients were older (median age of 66 vs. 55, p <0.0001) and had a higher initial d-dimer (2.22 vs. 1.31, p = 0.005) and peak ferritin levels (2998 vs. 2077, p = 0.016) compared to survivors. 84.3% of patients over 70 years old died in the hospital. Conversely, 67.4% of patients age 70 or younger survived to hospital discharge. Younger age, non-Caucasian race and treatment at a tertiary care center were all associated with survivor status. CONCLUSION: Mortality of patients with COVID-19 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation is high, with particularly daunting mortality seen in patients of advanced age, even in a well-resourced health care system. A substantial proportion of patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation were not of advanced age, and this group had a reasonable chance for recovery.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/mortality , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Critical Care/standards , Female , Ferritins/blood , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysis , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge , Retrospective Studies , Virginia/epidemiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL