Rapid Decrease in Fluoroquinolones Consumption following Implementation of a Simple Antimicrobial Stewardship Bundled Intervention in a University Hospital during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Fluoroquinolones (FQs) represent an class of antibiotics of medical importance, but their use has been restricted due to their ecologic impact and associated side effects. The reduction of FQs use is an important goal of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP). This work describes an ASP focused on overall antibiotics and FQs consumption reduction. From January 2021, an ASP was implemented in a 700-bed teaching hospital. The ASP was based on: (i) antibiotics consumption monitoring system (DDD/100 bed days); (ii) mandatory antibiotic prescription-motivation (using a dedicated informatic format) with the goal of >75% of motivated prescriptions; and (iii) data feedback and training on FQs use indications. We evaluated the impact of the intervention on overall systemic antibiotics and FQs consumption according to the objectives posed by Italian PNCAR (National Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance). A decrease of 6.6% in antibiotic use was observed (2019 vs. 2021). Notably, the FQs consumption fell by 48.3% from 7.1 DDD/100 bd in 2019 to 3.7 DDD/100 bd in 2021 (p < 0.001). After six months of mandatory antibiotic prescription-indication, all units achieved the target set. The study suggests that a simple, bundled ASP intervention can be rapidly effective obtaining the objectives of PNCAR on the reduction of overall antibiotics and FQs consumption.

Diaphragm ultrasound evaluation during weaning from mechanical ventilation in COVID-19 patients: a pragmatic, cross-section, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Diaphragmatic dysfunction is a major factor responsible for weaning failure in patients that underwent prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation for acute severe respiratory failure from COVID-19. This study hypothesizes that ultrasound measured diaphragmatic thickening fraction (DTF) could provide corroborating information for weaning COVID-19 patients from mechanical ventilation. METHODS: This was an observational, pragmatic, cross-section, multicenter study in 6 Italian intensive care units. DTF was assessed in COVID-19 patients undergoing weaning from mechanical ventilation from 1st March 2020 to 30th June 2021. Primary aim was to evaluate whether DTF is a predictive factor for weaning failure. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients were enrolled, 25 patients failed spontaneous breathing trial (44%). Median length of invasive ventilation was 14 days (IQR 7-22). Median DTF within 24 h since the start of weaning was 28% (IQR 22-39%), RASS score (- 2 vs - 2; p = 0.031); Kelly-Matthay score (2 vs 1; p = 0.002); inspiratory oxygen fraction (0.45 vs 0.40; p = 0.033). PaO2/FiO2 ratio was lower (176 vs 241; p = 0.032) and length of intensive care stay was longer (27 vs 16.5 days; p = 0.025) in patients who failed weaning. The generalized linear regression model did not select any variables that could predict weaning failure. DTF was correlated with pH (RR 1.56 × 1027; p = 0.002); Kelly-Matthay score (RR 353; p < 0.001); RASS (RR 2.11; p = 0.003); PaO2/FiO2 ratio (RR 1.03; p = 0.05); SAPS2 (RR 0.71; p = 0.005); hospital and ICU length of stay (RR 1.22 and 0.79, respectively; p < 0.001 and p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: DTF in COVID-19 patients was not predictive of weaning failure from mechanical ventilation, and larger studies are needed to evaluate it in clinical practice further. Registered: ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT05019313, 24 August 2021).

Omicron Infection Evokes Cross-Protection against SARS-CoV-2 Variants in Vaccinees.

Due to the rapid global spread of the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant, efforts to scale up COVID-19 booster vaccination have been improved, especially in light of the increasing evidence of reduced neutralizing antibody (NT Ab) over time in vaccinated subjects. In this study, neutralizing antibody responses against the Wild-Type, Delta, and Omicron strains were evaluated among vaccinees, both infected with Omicron or uninfected, and non-vaccinated subjects infected with Omicron. The aim of the study was to compare the cross-protective humoral response to the variant strains induced by vaccination and/or Omicron infection. The results showed a significant difference in the neutralizing antibody response between the vaccinees and the Omicron-infected vaccinated subjects against the three tested strains (p < 0.001), confirming the booster effect of the Omicron infection in the vaccinees. By contrast, Omicron infection only did not enhance the antibody response to the other variants, indicating a lack of cross-protection. These results suggest the importance of updating the current formulation of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine to protect people against the Omicron subvariants. A specific Omicron vaccine, administered as a booster for the previously adopted mRNA vaccines, may protect against a wider range of SARS-CoV-2 variants. However, it is unlikely that the Omicron vaccine alone would be able to protect non-vaccinated subjects against other circulating variants.

Overview of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immune Response Six Months after BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: We have designed a prospective study aiming to monitor the immune response in 178 health care workers six months after BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination. METHODS: The humoral immune response of all subjects was evaluated by chemiluminescence (CMIA); in 60 serum samples, a live virus-based neutralization assay was also tested. Moreover, 6 months after vaccination, B- and T-cell subsets from 20 subjects were observed by FACS analysis after restimulation with the trimeric SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein as an antigen, thus mimicking reinfection in vitro. RESULTS: A significant decrease of circulating IgG levels and neutralizing antibodies over time were observed. Moreover, six months after vaccination, a variable T-cell immune response after in vitro antigen stimulation of PBMC was observed. On the contrary, the analysis of B-cell response showed a shift from unswitched to switched memory B-cells and an increase of Th17 cells. CONCLUSIONS: Although the variability of the CD4+ and CD8+ immune response and an antibody decline was observed among vaccinated subjects, the increase of switched memory B-cells and Th17 cells, correlating with the presence of neutralizing antibodies, opened the debate on the correct timing of vaccination.

Biomarkers Predict In-Hospital Major Adverse Cardiac Events in COVID-19 Patients: A Multicenter International Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic carries a high burden of morbidity and mortality worldwide. We aimed to identify possible predictors of in-hospital major cardiovascular (CV) events in COVID-19. METHODS: We retrospectively included patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from 10 centers. Clinical, biochemical, electrocardiographic, and imaging data at admission and medications were collected. Primary endpoint was a composite of in-hospital CV death, acute heart failure (AHF), acute myocarditis, arrhythmias, acute coronary syndromes (ACS), cardiocirculatory arrest, and pulmonary embolism (PE). RESULTS: Of the 748 patients included, 141(19%) reached the set endpoint: 49 (7%) CV death, 15 (2%) acute myocarditis, 32 (4%) sustained-supraventricular or ventricular arrhythmias, 14 (2%) cardiocirculatory arrest, 8 (1%) ACS, 41 (5%) AHF, and 39 (5%) PE. Patients with CV events had higher age, body temperature, creatinine, high-sensitivity troponin, white blood cells, and platelet counts at admission and were more likely to have systemic hypertension, renal failure (creatinine ≥ 1.25 mg/dL), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, atrial fibrillation, and cardiomyopathy. On univariate and multivariate analysis, troponin and renal failure were associated with the composite endpoint. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a clear divergence of in-hospital composite event-free survival stratified according to median troponin value and the presence of renal failure (Log rank p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings, derived from a multicenter data collection study, suggest the routine use of biomarkers, such as cardiac troponin and serum creatinine, for in-hospital prediction of CV events in patients with COVID-19.

Early versus late tracheal intubation in COVID-19 patients: a "pros/cons" debate also considering heart-lung interactions.

The best timing of orotracheal intubation and invasive ventilation in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome is unknown. The use of non-invasive ventilation, a life-saving technique in many medical conditions, is debated in patients with ARDS since prolonged NIV and delayed intubation may be harmful. Shortage of intensive care beds and ventilators during a respiratory pandemic can trigger a widespread use of early non-invasive ventilation in many hospitals but which is the best way to ventilate patients with severe bilateral pneumonia and severely increased spontaneous ventilation is controversial. Moreover, viral spreading to health-care workers and other hospitalized patients is an issue for any device used to administer oxygen. Even if protective mechanical ventilation is currently the gold standard for the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome, tracheal intubation is not without risks and is associated with delirium, hemodynamic instability, immobilization and post intensive care syndrome. Both invasive and non-invasive ventilation are associated with advantages and limitations that should be carefully considered when patients with COVID-19-ARDS need our attention. In the absence of strong evidence, in this review we highlight all the pro and con of these two different approaches.

Hyperimmune plasma in three immuno-deficient patients affected by non-severe, prolonged COVID-19: a single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma (CP) and hyperimmune plasma (HP) are passive immunotherapies consisting in the infusion of plasma from recovered people into infected patients. Following pre-existing evidence in many other viral diseases, such as SARS, MERS and Ebola, CP and HP have also been proposed for the treatment of COVID-19. Nevertheless, due to the lack of large, well-designed, clinical trials, no clear-cut guidelines exist about what subtype of patient CP and HP should be administered to. CASE PRESENTATION: We have reported the cases of 3 patients, all immunosuppressed and affected by non-severe, prolonged COVID-19. They were treated with HP, whose neutralizing titer was higher than 1/80. The first patient was a 55-year-old male, who had undergone lung transplant. He was under therapy with Tacrolimus and developed non-neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV2. The second patient was a 77-year-old female, affected by follicular lymphoma. She had tested positive for SARS-CoV2 after 6 months. The third was a 60-year-old patient, affected by chronic leukemia. He did not develop antibodies after 2-month disease. All 3 patients received HP and had tested negative for SARS-CoV2 within 2 weeks. CONCLUSION: Despite encouraging initial data, no strong evidence exist in support of CP and HP to treat COVID-19. In our experience, although limited due to the reduced number of patients, we found a good safety and efficacy of HP in 3 immuno-deficient subjects. Further data are needed in order to assess whether this subtype of patients may particularly benefit from passive immunization.

Neutralizing Antibody Response of Vaccinees to SARS-CoV-2 Variants.

Due to their increased transmissibility, three variants of high concern have emerged in the United Kingdom (also known as B.1.1.7 lineage or VOC-202012/01), South Africa (B.1.351 lineage), and Brazil (P1 lineage) with multiple substitutions in the spike protein. Since neutralizing antibodies elicited by vaccination are likely considered as correlates of protection for SARS-CoV-2 infection, it is important to analyze whether vaccinees with mRNA BNT162b2 are equally protected against these emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. To this aim, we enrolled healthy subjects one month after complete vaccination with Comirnaty and evaluated the neutralizing response against the native Wuhan strain and the emerging B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and P1 lineages, by using the microneutralization assay, currently considered the gold standard test for the evaluation and detection of functional neutralizing antibodies. The most remarkable finding of this study was the significantly lower neutralizing antibody titer against B.1.351 lineage, compared to the wild-type virus. No significant differences were observed with the other two lineages. These findings provide evidence that vaccinated subjects may not be equally protected against all SARS-CoV-2 lineages.

Antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 in infected patients with different clinical outcome.

Data regarding antibody responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in patients infected with COVID-19 are not yet available. In this study, we aimed to evaluate serum antibody responses in patients regardless of the outcome. We measured the circulating immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody levels in 60 subjects with a certified history of SARS-CoV-2 infection by using immunoenzymatic, chemiluminescent, and Neutralization assays. Half patients had a severe infection, the other half were pauci-symptomatic. We analyzed their antibody response to see the trend of the humoral response. Our results showed a significant difference in circulating IgG level among the two groups. The neutralizing antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 was significantly higher among those who had severe disease. Furthermore, ten subjects from each group were screened twice, and a declining antibody trend was observed in pauci-symptomatic individuals. These findings provide evidence that humoral immunity against SARS-CoV-2 in pauci-symptomatic people is weak and may not be long-lasting. This may have implications for immunity strategy and prevention, since it is still not clear whether a time-dependent decrease of both circulating and neutralizing antibodies to nonprotective levels could occur in a longer time span and whether potential vaccines are able to induce a herd immunity and a durable response.

Right Ventricular Dysfunction in Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to describe the features of right ventricular impairment and pulmonary hypertension in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and assess their effect on mortality. DESIGN: The authors carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. SETTING: The authors performed a search through PubMed, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the Cochrane Library for studies reporting right ventricular dysfunction in patients with COVID-19 and outcomes. PARTICIPANTS: The search yielded nine studies in which the appropriate data were available. INTERVENTIONS: Pooled odds ratios were calculated according to the random-effects model. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Overall, 1,450 patients were analyzed, and half of them were invasively ventilated. Primary outcome was mortality at the longest follow-up available. Mortality was 48.5% versus 24.7% in patients with or without right ventricular impairment (n = 7; OR = 3.10; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72-5.58; p = 0.0002), 56.3% versus 30.6% in patients with or without right ventricular dilatation (n = 6; OR = 2.43; 95% CI 1.41-4.18; p = 0.001), and 52.9% versus 14.8% in patients with or without pulmonary hypertension (n = 3; OR = 5.75; 95% CI 2.67-12.38; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Mortality in patients with COVID-19 requiring respiratory support and with a diagnosis of right ventricular dysfunction, dilatation, or pulmonary hypertension is high. Future studies should highlight the mechanisms of right ventricular derangement in COVID-19, and early detection of right ventricular impairment using ultrasound might be important to individualize therapies and improve outcomes.

COVID-19 and Acute Coronary Syndromes: Current Data and Future Implications.

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a global healthcare burden, characterized by high mortality and morbidity rates all over the world. During the outbreak period, the topic of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) has raised several clinical issues, due to the risks of COVID-19 induced myocardial injury and to the uncertainties about the management of these cardiologic emergency conditions, which should be organized optimizing the diagnostic and therapeutic resources and ensuring the maximum protection to healthcare personnel and hospital environment. COVID-19 status should be assessed as soon as possible. Moreover, considerably lower rates of hospitalization for ACS have been reported all over the world, due to patients' hesitations to refer to hospital and to missed diagnosis. As a result, short- and long-term complications of myocardial infarction are expected in the near future; therefore, great efforts of healthcare providers will be required to limit the effects of this issue. In the present review we discuss the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on ACS diagnosis and management, with possible incoming consequences, providing an overview of the available evidence and suggesting future changes in social and clinical approach to ACS.

Portable Pocket-Sized Ultrasound Scanner for the Evaluation of Lung Involvement in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients.

Ultrasound imaging of the lung (LUS) and associated tissues has demonstrated clinical utility in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the possibilities of a portable pocket-sized ultrasound scanner in the evaluation of lung involvement in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. We conducted 437 paired readings in 34 LUS evaluations of hospitalized individuals with COVID-19. The LUS scans were performed on the same day with a standard high-end ultrasound scanner (Venue GO, GE Healthcare, Chicago, IL, USA) and a pocket-sized ultrasound scanner (Butterfly iQ, Butterfly Network Inc., Guilford, CT, USA). Fourteen scans were performed on individuals with severe cases, 11 on individuals with moderate cases and nine on individuals with mild cases. No difference was observed between groups in days since onset of symptoms (23.29 ± 10.07, 22.91 ± 8.91 and 28.56 ± 11.13 d, respectively; p = 0.38). No significant differences were found between LUS scores obtained with the high-end and the portable pocket-sized ultrasound scanner. LUS scores in individuals with mild respiratory impairment were significantly lower than in those with moderate and severe cases. Our study confirms the possibilities of portable pocket-sized ultrasound imaging of the lung in COVID-19 patients. Portable pocket-sized ultrasound scanners are cheap, easy to handle and equivalent to standard scanners for non-invasive assessment of severity and dynamic observation of lung lesions in COVID-19 patients.

SARS-CoV-2 in pleural fluid in a kidney transplant patient.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has quickly spread all over the globe from China. Pleural involvement is not common; around 5-10% of patients can develop pleural effusion and little is known about the involvement of pleural structures in this new infection.A 61-year-old male kidney transplant patient with a history of multiple biopsy-confirmed acute rejections and chronic allograft rejection was admitted to our COVID-19 Unit with dry cough, exertional dyspnea, oliguria, and abdominal distension. Lung ultrasound imaging, chest X-ray, and CT scan showed left pleural effusion and atelectasis of the neighboring lung parenchyma. RT-PCR was positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the pleural fluid and cytology showed mesothelial cells with large and multiple nuclei, consistent with a cytopathic effect of the virus.This is one of few reports describing detection of SARS-CoV-2 in the pleural fluid and to the best of our knowledge, is the first to document the simultaneous presence of a direct cytopathic effect of the virus on mesothelial cells in a kidney transplant patient with COVID-19 pneumonia. The pleura proved to be a site of viral replication where signs of a direct pathological effect of the virus on cells can be observed, as we report here. RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 should be part of routine examination of pleural effusion even in patients with mild respiratory symptoms or with comorbidities that seem to explain the cause of effusion.

Ruxolitinib Rapidly Reduces Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in COVID-19 Disease. Analysis of Data Collection From RESPIRE Protocol.

Background: The Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is causing millions of infections and hundreds of thousands of deaths worldwide. Cumulative clinical and laboratory evidence suggest that a subset of patients with severe COVID-19 may develop a cytokine storm syndrome during the course of the disease, with severe respiratory impairment requiring ventilatory support. One field of research nowadays is to identify and treat viral-induced hyperinflammation with drugs used in other clinical conditions characterized by an hyperinflammation status. These drugs might help to reduce COVID19 mortality. Methods: Ruxolitinib, a JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor, has been successfully used to treat severe immune-mediated diseases, such as graft vs. host disease and Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. We used ruxolitinib in 18 patients with clinically progressive COVID-19 related acute respiratory distress syndrome, with a primary endpoint to rapidly reduce the degree of respiratory impairment and as a secondary endpoint to rapidly restore the PaO2/FiO2 ratio, as an evaluation of clinical status, and monitoring of drug related Adverse Events. Parameters of inflammation responses and organ functions were assessed and monitored. The treatment plan was ruxolitinib 20 mg bid for the first 48 h and subsequent two-step de-escalation at 10 mg bid and 5 mg bid for a maximum of 14 days of treatment. Results: Our data collection shows a rapid clinical response with no evolution from non-invasive ventilation to mechanical ventilation in 16/18 patients and no response in two patients (overall response rate-ORR 89%). Already after 48 h of ruxolitinib treatment 16/18 patients showed evident clinical improvement, and after 7 days of treatment 11/18 patients showed fully recovered respiratory function (pO2 > 98% in spontaneous breathing), 4/18 patients had minimal oxygen requirement (2-4 L/m), 1/18 patient showed stable disease, and 2/18 patient showed progressive disease. After 14 days, 16/18 patients showed complete recovery of respiratory function (ORR 89%). Compliance to ruxolitinib planned treatment was 100% and no serious adverse event was recorded. In our case series of 18 critically ill patients with COVID-19 and ARDS, administration of ruxolitinib resulted in a clinical improvement that concurred to modify the standard course of disease. Ruxolitinib can be a therapeutic option for patients with respiratory insufficiency in COVID-19 related ARDS. RESPIRE Study (Ruxolitinib for the treatment of acute rESPIratory distREss syndrome, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04361903).

COVID-19 and the burning issue of drug interaction: never forget the ECG.

The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2), has been rapidly escalating, becoming a relevant threat to global health. Being a recent virus outbreak, there are still no available therapeutic regimens that have been approved in large randomised trials and so patients are currently being treated with multiple drugs. This raises concerns regarding drug interaction and their implication in arrhythmic burden. In fact, two of the actually used drugs against SARS-CoV2, such as chloroquine and the combination lopinavir/ritonavir, might determine a QT (the time from the start of the Q wave to the end of the T wave) interval prolongation and they show several interactions with antiarrhythmic drugs and antipsychotic medications, making them prone to an increased risk of developing arrhythmias. This brief review focuses the attention on the most relevant drug interactions involving the currently used COVID-19 medications and their possible association with cardiac rhythm disorders, taking into account also pre-existing condition and precipitating factors that might additionally increase this risk. Furthermore, based on the available evidence and based on the knowledge of drug interaction, we propose a quick and simple algorithm that might help both cardiologists and non-cardiologists in the management of the arrhythmic risk before and during the treatment with the specific drugs used against SARS-CoV2.

COVID-19 in patients with heart failure: the new and the old epidemic.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread in nearly 200 countries in less than 4 months since its first identification; accordingly, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 2019) has affirmed itself as a clinical challenge. The prevalence of pre-existing cardiovascular diseases in patients with COVID19 is high and this dreadful combination dictates poor prognosis along with the higher risk of intensive care mortality. In the setting of chronic heart failure, SARS-CoV-2 can be responsible for myocardial injury and acute decompensation through various mechanisms. Given the clinical and epidemiological complexity of COVID-19, patiens with heart failure may require particular care since the viral infection has been identified, considering an adequate re-evaluation of medical therapy and a careful monitoring during ventilation.

Safe performance of echocardiography during the COVID-19 pandemic: a practical guide.

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has become a worldwide healthcare emergency, with continuously growing number of infected subjects. Considering the easy virus spread through respiratory droplets produced with cough, sneezes or spit or through close contact with infected people or surfaces, healthcare workers are further exposed to COVID-19. Particularly, echocardiography remains an essential diagnostic service which, due to the close contact with patients during the exam, provides echocardiographers high-risk of contagion. Therefore, the common modalities of performing echocardiography should be improved in this scenario, avoiding performing unnecessary exams, using the appropriate personal protective equipment depending on patients' status and location, optimizing time-effectiveness of the echocardiographic study and accurately sanitizing the environment and devices after each exam. This paper aims to provide a simple guide for the clinicians to balance between providing the best care to each patient and protecting themselves and other patients from the spread of the virus. It also proposes the use of the mnemonic PREVENT to resume the crucial indications to be followed for the execution of appropriate echocardiographic examination during the COVID-19 pandemic.