Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
2.
EClinicalMedicine ; 34: 100778, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1157252

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During COVID-19, the main manifestations of the disease are not only pneumonia but also coagulation disorders. The purpose of this study was to evaluate pulmonary vascular abnormalities 3 months after hospitalization for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in patients with persistent respiratory symptoms. METHODS: Among the 320 patients who participated in a systematic follow-up 3 months after hospitalization, 76 patients had residual symptoms justifying a specialized follow-up in the department of pulmonology. Among them, dual-energy CT angiography (DECTA) was obtained in 55 patients. FINDINGS: The 55 patients had partial (n = 40; 72.7%) or complete (n = 15; 27.3%) resolution of COVID-19 lung infiltration. DECTA was normal in 52 patients (52/55; 94.6%) and showed endoluminal filling defects in 3 patients (3/55; 5.4%) at the level of one (n = 1) and two (n = 1) segmental arteries of a single lobe and within central and peripheral arteries (n = 1). DECT lung perfusion was rated as non-interpretable (n = 2;3.6%), normal (n = 17; 30.9%) and abnormal (n = 36; 65.5%), the latter group comprising 32 patients with residual COVID-19 opacities (32/36; 89%) and 4 patients with normal lung parenchyma (4/36; 11%). Perfusion abnormalities consisted of (a) patchy defects (30/36; 83%), (b) PE-type defects (6/36; 16.6%) with (n = 1) or without proximal thrombosis (n = 5); and (c) focal areas of hypoperfusion (2/36; 5.5%). Increased perfusion was seen in 15 patients, always matching GGOs, bands and/or vascular tree-in- bud patterns. INTERPRETATION: DECT depicted proximal arterial thrombosis in 5.4% of patients and perfusion abnormalities suggestive of widespread microangiopathy in 65.5% of patients. Lung microcirculation was abnormal in 4 patients with normal lung parenchyma.

3.
Eur J Hosp Pharm ; 29(e1): e30-e35, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1133224

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to compare clinical pharmacist interventions between two care groups: COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative patients, and to identify drugs that require particular attention, especially those involved in COVID-19 management. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted on patients with positive and negative COVID-19 statuses admitted to Lille University Hospital over 1 month. Pharmaceutical analysis instigated interventions to rectify drug-related errors. For each pharmaceutical intervention (PI), the anatomical therapeutic chemical classification of the drug and the outcome of such an intervention were specified. RESULTS: The study included 438 patients. Prescription analysis led to 188 PIs performed on 118 patients (64 COVID-19-positive patients and 54 COVID-19-negative patients). Most drug-related problems were incorrect dosage representing 36.7% (69/188) of all interventions: 27.9% (29/104) for the COVID-19-positive group and 47.6% (40/84) for the COVID-19-negative group. The most frequent PI in 34% (64/188) of cases was terminating a drug: 27.9% (29/104) for the COVID-19-positive group and 47.6% (40/84) for the COVID-19-negative group. The main drug classes involved were antithrombotic agents (20.7%, 39/188), antibacterials for systemic use (13.8%, 26/188) and drugs for gastric acid-related disorders (6.4%, 12/188). Study population was limited to a single centre over 1 month. CONCLUSION: No difference in PI was noted between the two groups. The presence of pharmacists led to a reduction in drug-related prescription problems, especially for antithrombotic and antibacterial drugs for both groups. Clinical pharmacy commitment in such a pandemic is therefore important.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Pharmacists , Hospitals, University , Humans , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL