Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(3): 551, 2022 Aug 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2077689
2.
PLoS One ; 17(6): e0266901, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1962992

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: While corticosteroids have been hypothesized to exert protective benefits in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, data remain mixed. This study sought to investigate the outcomes of methylprednisone administration in an Italian cohort of hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Patients with confirmatory testing for SARS-CoV-2 were retrospectively enrolled from a tertiary university hospital in Milan, Italy from March 1st to April 30th, 2020 and divided into two groups by administration of corticosteroids. Methylprednisolone was administered to patients not responding to pharmacological therapy and ventilatory support at 0.5-1mg/kg/day for 4 to 7 days. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for baseline differences between the steroid and non-steroid cohorts via inverse probability of treatment weight. Primary outcomes included acute respiratory failure (ARF), shock, and 30-day mortality among surviving patients. RESULTS: Among 311 patients enrolled, 71 patients received steroids and 240 did not receive steroids. The mean age was 63.1 years, 35.4% were female, and hypertension, diabetes, heart disease, and chronic pulmonary disease were present in 3.5%, 1.3%, 14.8% and 12.2% respectively. Crude analysis revealed no statistically significant reduction in the incidence of 30-day mortality (36,6% vs 21,7%; OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.18-3.70; p = 0.011), shock (2.8% vs 4.6%; OR, 0.60; 95% CI = 0.13-2.79; p = 0.514) or ARF (12.7% vs 15%; OR, 0.82; 95% CI = 0.38-1.80; p = 0.625) between the steroid and non-steroid groups. After IPTW analysis, the steroid-group had lower incidence of shock (0.9% vs 4.1%; OR, 0.21; 95% CI,0.06-0.77; p = 0.010), ARF (6.6% vs 16.0%; OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.22-0.64; p<0.001) and 30-day mortality (20.3% vs 22.8%; OR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.59-1.26 p = 0.436); even though, for the latter no statistical significance was reached. Steroid use was also associated with increased length of hospital stay both in crude and IPTW analyses. Subgroup analysis revealed that patients with cardiovascular comorbidities or chronic lung diseases were more likely to be steroid responsive. No significant survival benefit was seen after steroid treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should avoid routine methylprednisolone use in SARS-CoV-2 patients, since it does not reduce 30-day mortality. However, they must consider its use for severe patients with cardiovascular or respiratory comorbidities in order to reduce the incidence of either shock or acute respiratory failure.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Respiratory Insufficiency , Adrenal Cortex Hormones , Female , Humans , Male , Methylprednisolone/therapeutic use , Middle Aged , Probability , Respiratory Insufficiency/chemically induced , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Front Mol Biosci ; 8: 614207, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1191696

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Characteristic chest computed tomography (CT) manifestation of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) was added as a diagnostic criterion in the Chinese National COVID-19 management guideline. Whether the characteristic findings of Chest CT could differentiate confirmed COVID-19 cases from other positive nucleic acid test (NAT)-negative patients has not been rigorously evaluated. PURPOSE: We aim to test whether chest CT manifestation of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) can be differentiated by a radiologist or a computer-based CT image analysis system. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case-control study that included 52 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients and 80 non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia patients between 20 December, 2019 and 10 February, 2020. The chest CT images were evaluated by radiologists in a double blind fashion. A computer-based image analysis system (uAI System, Lianying Inc., Shanghai, China) detected the lesions in 18 lung segments defined by Boyden classification system and calculated the infected volume in each segment. The number and volume of lesions detected by radiologist and computer system was compared with Chi-square test or Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate. RESULTS: The main CT manifestations of COVID-19 were multi-lobar/segmental peripheral ground-glass opacities and patchy air space infiltrates. The case and control groups were similar in demographics, comorbidity, and clinical manifestations. There was no significant difference in eight radiologist identified CT image features between the two groups of patients. There was also no difference in the absolute and relative volume of infected regions in each lung segment. CONCLUSION: We documented the non-differentiating nature of initial chest CT image between COVID-19 and other viral pneumonia with suspected symptoms. Our results do not support CT findings replacing microbiological diagnosis as a critical criterion for COVID-19 diagnosis. Our findings may prompt re-evaluation of isolated patients without laboratory confirmation.

5.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 97: 106145, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-753827

ABSTRACT

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new treatment for COVID-19 vs. standard care, certain key endpoints are related to the duration of a specific event, such as hospitalization, ICU stay, or receipt of supplemental oxygen. However, since patients may die in the hospital during study follow-up, using, for example, the duration of hospitalization to assess treatment efficacy can be misleading. If the treatment tends to prolong patients' survival compared with standard care, patients in the new treatment group may spend more time in hospital. This can lead to a "survival bias" issue, where a treatment that is effective for preventing death appears to prolong an undesirable outcome. On the other hand, by using hospital-free survival time as the endpoint, we can circumvent the survival bias issue. In this article, we use reconstructed data from a recent, large clinical trial for COVID-19 to illustrate the advantages of this approach. For the analysis of ICU stay or oxygen usage, where the initiating event is potentially an outcome of treatment, standard survival analysis techniques may not be appropriate. We also discuss issues with analyzing the durations of such events.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Clinical Trials as Topic , Duration of Therapy , Patient Care Management , Survival Analysis , Bias , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/therapy , Clinical Trials as Topic/methods , Clinical Trials as Topic/standards , Endpoint Determination , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Patient Care Management/methods , Patient Care Management/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2
6.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 21(1): 62-67, 2020 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-124747

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Virus infection is underevaluated in older adults with severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs). We aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of combining point-of-care molecular viral test and serum procalcitonin (PCT) level for antibiotic stewardship in the emergency department (ED). DESIGN: A prospective twin-center cohort study was conducted between January 2017 and March 2018. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Older adult patients who presented to the ED with SARIs received a rapid molecular test for 17 respiratory viruses and a PCT test. MEASURES: To evaluate the clinical impact, we compared the outcomes of SARI patients between the experimental cohort and a propensity score-matched historical cohort. The primary outcome was the proportion of antibiotics discontinuation or de-escalation in the ED. The secondary outcomes included duration of intravenous antibiotics, length of hospital stay, and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 676 patients were included, of which 169 patients were in the experimental group and 507 patients were in the control group. More than one-fourth (27.9%) of the patients in the experimental group tested positive for virus. Compared with controls, the experimental group had a significantly higher proportion of antibiotics discontinuation or de-escalation in the ED (26.0% vs 16.1%, P = .007), neuraminidase inhibitor uses (8.9% vs 0.6%, P < .001), and shorter duration of intravenous antibiotics (10.0 vs 14.5 days, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Combining rapid viral surveillance and PCT test is a useful strategy for early detection of potential viral epidemics and antibiotic stewardship. Clustered viral respiratory infections in a nursing home is common. Patients transferred from nursing homes to ED may benefit from this approach.


Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship/methods , Procalcitonin/blood , Respiratory Tract Infections/diagnosis , Virus Diseases/diagnosis , Aged , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Biomarkers/blood , Case-Control Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Tract Infections/complications , Virus Diseases/complications , Virus Diseases/drug therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL