Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
2.
Br J Haematol ; 201(4): 628-639, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2272144

ABSTRACT

Outcome of early treatment of COVID-19 with antivirals or anti-spike monoclonal antibodies (MABs) in patients with haematological malignancies (HM) is unknown. A retrospective study of HM patients treated for mild/moderate COVID-19 between March 2021 and July 2022 was performed. The main composite end-point was treatment failure (severe COVID-19 or COVID-19-related death). We included 328 consecutive patients who received MABs (n = 120, 37%; sotrovimab, n = 73) or antivirals (n = 208, 63%; nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, n = 116) over a median of two days after symptoms started; 111 (33.8%) had non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL); 89 (27%) were transplant/CAR-T (chimaeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy) recipients. Most infections (n = 309, 94%) occurred during the Omicron period. Failure developed in 31 patients (9.5%). Its independent predictors were older age, fewer vaccine doses, and treatment with MABs. Rate of failure was lower in the Omicron versus the pre-Omicron period (7.8% versus 36.8%, p < 0.001). During the Omicron period, predictors of failure were age, fewer vaccine doses and diagnosis of acute myeloid leukaemia/myelodysplastic syndrome (AML/MDS). Independent predictors of longer viral shedding were age, comorbidities, hospital admission at diagnosis, NHL/CLL, treatment with MABs. COVID-19-associated mortality was 3.4% (n = 11). The mortality in those who developed severe COVID-19 after early treatment was 26% in the Omicron period. Patients with HM had a significant risk of failure of early treatment, even during the Omicron period, with high mortality rate.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hematologic Diseases , Hematologic Neoplasms , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Hematologic Neoplasms/complications , Hematologic Neoplasms/therapy , Antibodies, Monoclonal , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use
4.
Hematol Oncol ; 2022 Oct 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2228595

ABSTRACT

Main aim of this systematic review is to quantify the risk and identify predictors of clinical evolution of SARS-CoV-2 in hematological patients compared to different control populations. Two independent reviewers screened the literature assessing clinical outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection in adult patients with active hematological malignancies published up to June 2021. Primary outcome was COVID-19 related mortality, secondary outcomes were hospital and intensive-care admission, mechanical ventilation (MV), and thromboembolic events. Variables related to study setting, baseline patients' demographic, comorbidities, underlying hematological disease, ongoing chemotherapy, COVID-19 presentation, and treatments were extracted. A total of 67 studies including 10,061 hematological patients and 111,143 controls were included. Most of the studies were retrospective cohorts (51 studies, 76%) and only 19 (13%) provided data for a control group. A significant increased risk of clinical progression in the hematological population compared to the controls was found in terms of COVID-19 related mortality (OR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.77-2.54), hospitalization (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.15-3.43), intensive-care admission (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.38-2.26), and MV (OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.71-2.75). The risk remained significantly higher in the subgroup analysis comparing hematological patients versus solid cancer. Meta-regression analysis of uncontrolled studies showed that older age, male sex, and hypertension were significantly related to worse clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in hematological population. Older age and hypertension were found to be associated also to thromboembolic events. In conclusion, hematological patients have a higher risk of COVID-19 clinical progression compared to both the general population and to patients with solid cancer.

5.
EJHaem ; 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2057259

ABSTRACT

Efficacy of early treatment with anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 spike protein monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for nosocomial SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in hematologic patients is unknown. Retrospective, cohort study conducted in four Italian teaching hospitals. We included adult patients with hematologic malignancies and hospital‐acquired SARS‐CoV‐2 infection diagnosed between November 2020 and December 2021. The principal exposure variable was administration of mAbs. The primary endpoint was clinical failure dea composite outcome of mortality and/or invasive and noninvasive ventilation within 90 days from infection onset. We included 52 patients with hospital‐acquired SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Males were 29 (60%), median age was 62 (interquartile range [IQR] 48–70). Forty‐five (86%) patients were on chemotherapy or had received chemotherapy within 30 days. MAbs were administered in 19/52 (36%) patients. Clinical failure occurred in 22 (42%) patients;21% (4/19) in mAbs group versus 54% (18/33) in non‐mAbs group (p = 0.03). Other predictors of clinical failure were older age (median [IQR] 69 [61–72] versus 58 [46–66], p = 0.001), and higher Charlson comorbidity index (median [IQR], 5 [3.25‐5] versus 3 [2–5], p = 0.002). At multivariable Cox regression model, mAbs were independently associated with a significantly lower rate of clinical failure (HR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01–0.85, p = 0.01), after adjusting for confounders. In conclusion, mAbs are promising for early treatment of hematologic patients with healthcare‐related SARS‐CoV‐2 infection.

6.
Expert Rev Mol Diagn ; 22(1): 49-60, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2008441

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Pneumonia is one of the main causes of mortality associated with infectious diseases worldwide. Several challenges have been identified in the management of patients with pneumonia, ranging from accurate and cost-effective microbiological investigations, prompt and adequate therapeutic management, and optimal treatment duration. AREAS COVERED: In this review, an updated summary on the current management of pneumonia patients is provided and the epidemiological issues of infectious respiratory diseases, which in the current pandemic situation are of particular concern, are addressed. The clinical and microbiological approaches to pneumonia diagnosis are reviewed, including discussion about the new molecular assays pointing out both their strengths and limitations. Finally, the current recommendations about antibiotic treatment are examined and discussed depending on the epidemiological contexts, including those with high prevalence of multidrug-resistant bacteria. EXPERT OPINION: We claim that rapid diagnostic tests, if well-positioned in the diagnostic workflow and reserved for the subset of patients who could most benefit from these technologies, may represent an interesting and feasible tool to optimize timing of targeted treatments especially in terms of early de-escalation or discontinuation of antibiotic therapy.


Subject(s)
Diagnostic Tests, Routine , Pneumonia , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial , Humans , Pneumonia/diagnosis , Pneumonia/drug therapy , Prevalence
8.
J Fungi (Basel) ; 8(4)2022 Apr 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1785786

ABSTRACT

First reports of cases and case series of COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) emerged during the first months of the pandemic. Prevalence rates varied widely due to the fact that CAPA was, and still remains, challenging to diagnose in patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory failure (ARF). The clinical picture and radiological findings of CAPA are unspecific and can resemble those of severe COVID-19. Hence, mycological evidence became a key component in establishing a diagnosis. However, blood tests lack sensitivity in early treatable phases of CAPA and once positive, mortality has been shown to exceed 80% despite systemic antifungal therapy. The primarily airway invasive growth in non-neutropenic patients and the late occurrence of angioinvasion in the course of disease may mainly account for these diagnostic obstacles. Testing of bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is therefore crucial in the diagnostic process, but was rarely performed during the early phase of the pandemic, which potentially interfered with the accuracy of reported prevalence. Current guidelines recommend treatment of CAPA during its early airway invasive phase, which may result in some overtreatment (i.e., treatment in patients that may not develop angioinvasive infection) and adverse drug events, yet there is no viable alternative approach. Timely treatment of cases needs to be ensured for patients with mycological evidence of CAPA in the lower respiratory tract given the independent contribution of CAPA to devastating mortality rates of around 50% that have been shown in multiple studies. Here, we review the evolution of reported CAPA prevalence and the role of CAPA as an important opportunistic infection affecting COVID-19 patients in intensive care units (ICUs).

9.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 28(8): 1057-1065, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1734284

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A significant increased risk of complications and mortality in immunocompromised patients affected by COVID-19 has been described. However, the impact of COVID-19 in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients is an issue still under debate, due to conflicting evidence that has emerged from different observational studies. OBJECTIVES: We performed a systematic review with a meta-analysis to assess the clinical outcome in SOT recipients with COVID-19 compared with the general population. DATA SOURCES: PubMed-MEDLINE and Scopus were independently searched until 13 October 2021. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Prospective or retrospective observational studies comparing clinical outcome in SOT recipients versus general populations affected by COVID-19 were included. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were patients with confirmed COVID-19. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions reviewed were SOTs. METHODS: The quality of the included studies was independently assessed with the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool for observational studies. The meta-analysis was performed by pooling ORs retrieved from studies providing adjustment for confounders using a random-effects model with the inverse variance method. Multiple subgroups and sensitivity analyses were conducted to investigate the source of heterogeneity. RESULTS: A total of 3501 articles were screened, and 31 observational studies (N = 590 375; 5759 SOT recipients vs. 584 616 general population) were included in the meta-analyses. No difference in 30-day mortality rate was found in the primary analysis, including studies providing adjustment for confounders (N = 17; 3752 SOT recipients vs. 159 745 general population; OR: 1.13; 95% CI, 0.94-1.35; I2 = 33.9%). No evidence of publication bias was reported. A higher risk of intensive care unit admission (OR: 1.56; 95% CI, 1.03-2.63) and occurrence of acute kidney injury (OR: 2.50; 95% CI, 1.81-3.45) was found in SOT recipients. CONCLUSIONS: No increased risk in mortality was found in SOT recipients affected by COVID-19 compared with the general population when adjusted for demographic and clinical features and COVID-19 severity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Organ Transplantation , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Organ Transplantation/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Transplant Recipients
11.
JAC Antimicrob Resist ; 3(4): dlab174, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1528164

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the impact of cefiderocol use on outcome in patients admitted to the ICU for severe COVID-19 and further diagnosed with carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CR-Ab) infection. METHODS: Retrospective multicentre observational study was performed at four Italian hospitals, from January 2020 to April 2021. Adult patients admitted to ICU for severe COVID-19 and further diagnosed with CR-Ab infections were enrolled. Patients treated with cefiderocol, as compassionate use, for at least 72 h were compared with those receiving alternative regimens. Primary endpoint was all-cause 28 day mortality. The impact of cefiderocol on mortality was evaluated by multivariable Cox regression model. RESULTS: In total, 107 patients were enrolled (76% male, median age 65 years). The median time from ICU admission to CR-Ab infection diagnosis was 14 (IQR 8-20) days, and the main types of CR-Ab infections were bloodstream infection (58%) and lower respiratory tract infection (41%). Cefiderocol was administered to 42 patients within a median of 2 (IQR 1-4) days after CR-Ab infection diagnosis and as monotherapy in all cases. The remaining patients received colistin, mostly (82%) administered as combination therapy. All-cause 28 day mortality rate was 57%, without differences between groups (cefiderocol 55% versus colistin 58% P = 0.70). In multivariable analysis, the independent risk factor for mortality was SOFA score (HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.15-1.38, P < 0.001). Cefiderocol was associated with a non-significant lower mortality risk (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.38-1.08, P = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms the potential role of cefiderocol in the treatment of CR-Ab infection, but larger clinical studies are needed.

12.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 28(2): 222-238, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525742

ABSTRACT

SCOPE: In January 2021, the ESCMID Executive Committee decided to launch a new initiative to develop ESCMID guidelines on several COVID-19-related issues, including treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: An ESCMID COVID-19 guidelines task force was established by the ESCMID Executive Committee. A small group was established, half appointed by the chair, and the remaining selected with an open call. Each panel met virtually once a week. For all decisions, a simple majority vote was used. A long list of clinical questions using the PICO (population, intervention, comparison, outcome) format was developed at the beginning of the process. For each PICO, two panel members performed a literature search with a third panellist involved in case of inconsistent results. Voting was based on the GRADE approach. QUESTIONS ADDRESSED BY THE GUIDELINE AND RECOMMENDATIONS: A synthesis of the available evidence and recommendations is provided for each of the 15 PICOs, which cover use of hydroxychloroquine, bamlanivimab alone or in combination with etesevimab, casirivimab combined with imdevimab, ivermectin, azithromycin and empirical antibiotics, colchicine, corticosteroids, convalescent plasma, favipiravir, remdesivir, tocilizumab and interferon ß-1a, as well as the utility of antifungal prophylaxis and enoxaparin. In general, the panel recommended against the use of hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, azithromycin, colchicine and interferon ß-1a. Conditional recommendations were given for the use of monoclonal antibodies in high-risk outpatients with mild-moderate COVID-19, and remdesivir. There was insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for use of favipiravir and antifungal prophylaxis, and it was recommended that antibiotics should not be routinely prescribed in patients with COVID-19 unless bacterial coinfection or secondary infection is suspected or confirmed. Tocilizumab and corticosteroids were recommended for treatment of severe COVID-19 but not in outpatients with non-severe COVID-19. SCOPE: The aim of the present guidance is to provide evidence-based recommendations for management of adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). More specifically, the goal is to aid clinicians managing patients with COVID-19 at various levels of severity including outpatients, hospitalized patients, and those admitted to intensive care unit. Considering the composition of the panel, mostly clinical microbiologists or infectious disease specialists with no pulmonology or intensive care background, we focus only on pharmacological treatment and do not give recommendations on oxygen supplement/support. Similarly, as no paediatricians were included in the panel; the recommendations are only for adult patients with COVID-19. Considering the current literature, no guidance was given for special populations such as the immunocompromised.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , COVID-19 , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing/therapeutic use , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Practice Guidelines as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Serotherapy
13.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 43(4): 461-466, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1349624

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of colonization and infection with carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) and carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CR-Ab) in the ICUs of our city hospitals before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, before-and-after, cross-sectional study to compare the rates of colonization and infection with CPE and/or CR-Ab in 2 study periods, period 1 (January-April 2019) and period 2 (January-April 2020). Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of weekly colonization and infection rates for each period were compared for the 2 study periods using Poisson regression. Weekly trends in the incidence of colonization or infection for each study period were summarized using local weighted (Loess) regression. RESULTS: We detected no significant change in either IRR and weekly trend in CPE colonization and infection during the 2 study periods. A shift from KPC to other CPE mechanisms (OXA-48 and VIM) was observed during period 2. Compared to period 1, during period 2 the IRR of colonization and infection with CR-Ab increased 7.5- and 5.5-fold, respectively. Genome sequencing showed that all CR-Ab strains belonged to the CC92/IC2 clonal lineage. Clinical strains clustered closely into a single monophyletic group in 1 of the 3 centers, whereas they segregated in 2 different clusters in the other 2 centers, which strongly indicates horizontal transmission. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate the need to conduct infection control activities targeted against the spread of antimicrobial resistance between and within hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic, and if necessary, remodulating them according to the new organizational structures imposed by the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Acinetobacter baumannii , COVID-19 , Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Bacterial Proteins , COVID-19/epidemiology , Carbapenems/pharmacology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Pandemics , beta-Lactamases
14.
J Clin Med ; 10(4)2021 Feb 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1060487

ABSTRACT

The primary objective of this multicenter, observational, retrospective study was to assess the incidence rate of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in intensive care units (ICU). The secondary objective was to assess predictors of 30-day case-fatality of VAP. From 15 February to 15 May 2020, 586 COVID-19 patients were admitted to the participating ICU. Of them, 171 developed VAP (29%) and were included in the study. The incidence rate of VAP was of 18 events per 1000 ventilator days (95% confidence intervals [CI] 16-21). Deep respiratory cultures were available and positive in 77/171 patients (45%). The most frequent organisms were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (27/77, 35%) and Staphylococcus aureus (18/77, 23%). The 30-day case-fatality of VAP was 46% (78/171). In multivariable analysis, septic shock at VAP onset (odds ratio [OR] 3.30, 95% CI 1.43-7.61, p = 0.005) and acute respiratory distress syndrome at VAP onset (OR 13.21, 95% CI 3.05-57.26, p < 0.001) were associated with fatality. In conclusion, VAP is frequent in critically ill COVID-19 patients. The related high fatality is likely the sum of the unfavorable prognostic impacts of the underlying viral and the superimposed bacterial diseases.

15.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 27(1): 105-111, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-861317

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of corticosteroids in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: A multicentre observational study was performed from 22 February through 30 June 2020. We included consecutive adult patients with severe COVID-19, defined as respiratory rate ≥30 breath per minute, oxygen saturation ≤93% on ambient air or arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen ≤300 mm Hg. We excluded patients being treated with other immunomodulant drugs, receiving low-dose corticosteroids and receiving corticosteroids 72 hours after admission. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality from hospital admission. The main exposure variable was corticosteroid therapy at a dose of ≥0.5 mg/kg of prednisone equivalents. It was introduced as binomial covariate in a logistic regression model for the primary endpoint and inverse probability of treatment weighting using the propensity score. RESULTS: Of 1717 patients with COVID-19 evaluated, 513 were included in the study, and of these, 170 (33%) were treated with corticosteroids. During hospitalization, 166 patients (34%) met the criteria of the primary outcome (60/170, 35% in the corticosteroid group and 106/343, 31% in the noncorticosteroid group). At multivariable analysis corticosteroid treatment was not associated with lower 30-day mortality rate (adjusted odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.20-1.74; p 0.33). After inverse probability of treatment weighting, corticosteroids were not associated with lower 30-day mortality (average treatment effect, 0.05; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.09; p 0.12). However, subgroup analysis revealed that in patients with PO2/FiO2 < 200 mm Hg at admission (135 patients, 52 (38%) treated with corticosteroids), corticosteroid treatment was associated with a lower risk of 30-day mortality (23/52, 44% vs. 45/83, 54%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.04-0.90; p 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: The effect of corticosteroid treatment on mortality might be limited to critically ill COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , COVID-19/mortality , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/drug therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Adult , Aged , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/pathology , Critical Illness , Female , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/therapeutic use , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Italy , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/pathology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Severity of Illness Index , Survival Analysis , Treatment Outcome
16.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 26(11): 1545-1553, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-764425

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to develop and validate a risk score to predict severe respiratory failure (SRF) among patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We performed a multicentre cohort study among hospitalized (>24 hours) patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from 22 February to 3 April 2020, at 11 Italian hospitals. Patients were divided into derivation and validation cohorts according to random sorting of hospitals. SRF was assessed from admission to hospital discharge and was defined as: Spo2 <93% with 100% Fio2, respiratory rate >30 breaths/min or respiratory distress. Multivariable logistic regression models were built to identify predictors of SRF, ß-coefficients were used to develop a risk score. Trial Registration NCT04316949. RESULTS: We analysed 1113 patients (644 derivation, 469 validation cohort). Mean (±SD) age was 65.7 (±15) years, 704 (63.3%) were male. SRF occurred in 189/644 (29%) and 187/469 (40%) patients in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. At multivariate analysis, risk factors for SRF in the derivation cohort assessed at hospitalization were age ≥70 years (OR 2.74; 95% CI 1.66-4.50), obesity (OR 4.62; 95% CI 2.78-7.70), body temperature ≥38°C (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.30-2.29), respiratory rate ≥22 breaths/min (OR 3.75; 95% CI 2.01-7.01), lymphocytes ≤900 cells/mm3 (OR 2.69; 95% CI 1.60-4.51), creatinine ≥1 mg/dL (OR 2.38; 95% CI 1.59-3.56), C-reactive protein ≥10 mg/dL (OR 5.91; 95% CI 4.88-7.17) and lactate dehydrogenase ≥350 IU/L (OR 2.39; 95% CI 1.11-5.11). Assigning points to each variable, an individual risk score (PREDI-CO score) was obtained. Area under the receiver-operator curve was 0.89 (0.86-0.92). At a score of >3, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 71.6% (65%-79%), 89.1% (86%-92%), 74% (67%-80%) and 89% (85%-91%), respectively. PREDI-CO score showed similar prognostic ability in the validation cohort: area under the receiver-operator curve 0.85 (0.81-0.88). At a score of >3, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 80% (73%-85%), 76% (70%-81%), 69% (60%-74%) and 85% (80%-89%), respectively. CONCLUSION: PREDI-CO score can be useful to allocate resources and prioritize treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Logistic Models , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Respiratory Insufficiency/diagnosis , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Child , Child, Preschool , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Prognosis , Reproducibility of Results , Respiratory Insufficiency/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Young Adult
17.
Transpl Infect Dis ; 23(1): e13421, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-700195

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be associated with worse outcome in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. We performed a prospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, from March 15 to April 30, 2020, at two tertiary hospitals in Emilia-Romagna Region. SOT recipients were compared with non-SOT patients. Primary endpoint was all-cause 30-day mortality. Relationship between SOT status and mortality was investigated by univariable and multivariable Cox regression analysis. Patients were assessed from COVID-19 diagnosis to death or 30-day whichever occurred first. Study cohort consisted of 885 patients, of them 24 SOT recipients (n = 22, kidney, n = 2 liver). SOT recipients were younger, had lower BMI, but higher Charlson Index. At admission they presented less frequently with fever and respiratory failure. No difference in 30-day mortality between the two groups (19% vs 22.1%) was found; however, there was a trend toward higher rate of respiratory failure (50% vs 33.1%, P = .07) in SOT recipients. Superinfections were more represented in SOT recipients, (50% vs 15.5%, P < .001). At multivariate analysis adjusted for main covariates, there was no association between SOT and 30-day mortality HR 1.15 (95% CI 0.39-3.35) P = .79. Our data suggest that mortality among COVID-19 SOT recipients is similar to general population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Organ Transplantation , Risk Factors , Transplant Recipients , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(11): e3606-e3614, 2021 12 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-684211

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the incidence of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis among intubated patients with critical COVID-19 and evaluated different case definitions of invasive aspergillosis. METHODS: Prospective, multicenter study in adult patients with microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 receiving mechanical ventilation. All included participants underwent a screening protocol for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis with bronchoalveolar lavage galactomannan and cultures performed on admission at 7 days and in case of clinical deterioration. Cases were classified as coronavirus-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) according to previous consensus definitions. The new definition was compared with putative invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (PIPA). RESULTS: 108 patients were enrolled. Probable CAPA was diagnosed in 30 (27.7%) patients after a median of 4 (2-8) days from intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Kaplan-Meier curves showed a significantly higher 30-day mortality rate from ICU admission among patients with either CAPA (44% vs 19%, P = .002) or PIPA (74% vs 26%, P < .001) when compared with patients not fulfilling criteria for aspergillosis. The association between CAPA (OR, 3.53; 95% CI, 1.29-9.67; P = .014) or PIPA (OR, 11.60; 95% CI, 3.24-41.29; P < .001) with 30-day mortality from ICU admission was confirmed, even after adjustment for confounders with a logistic regression model. Among patients with CAPA receiving voriconazole treatment (13 patients; 43%) a trend toward lower mortality (46% vs 59%; P = .30) and reduction in galactomannan index in consecutive samples were observed. CONCLUSIONS: We found a high incidence of CAPA among critically ill COVID-19 patients and its occurrence seems to change the natural course of disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis , Pulmonary Aspergillosis , Adult , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis/diagnosis , Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis/epidemiology , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL