ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To date, there is no specific validated coronavirus disease 2019 score to assess the disease severity. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the National Early Warning Score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Comorbidity-Age-Lymphocyte count-Lactate dehydrogenase scores in predicting the in-hospital outcome of critical or severe coronavirus disease 2019 patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single-centered analytical study was carried out in the coronavirus disease 2019 high dependency unit from April to August 2020. National Early Warning Score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Comorbidity-Age-Lymphocyte count-Lactate dehydrogenase scores were calculated for each critical to severely ill coronavirus disease 2019 patient. The diagnostic accuracy of these 3 scores in determining the in-hospital outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 patients was assessed by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. The cut-off value of each score along with sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratio were calculated by Youden index. Predictors of outcome in coronavirus disease 2019 patients were analyzed by Cox-regression analysis. RESULTS: The area under the curve was highest for the Comorbidity-Age-Lymphocyte count-Lactate dehydrogenase score (area under the curve=0.85) while the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score had an area under the curve of 0.72. The cut-off values for National Early Warning Score score was 8 (sensitivity=72.34%, specificity=76.10%), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 3 (sensitivity=68.97%, specificity=67.42%), and Comorbidity-Age-Lymphocyte count-Lactate dehydrogenase score was 8 (sensitivity=88.89%, specificity=66.67%). The pairwise comparison showed that the difference between the area under the curve of these 3 scores was statistically insignificant (P > .05). The rate of mortality and invasive ventilation was significantly high in groups with high National Early Warning Score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, and Comorbidity-Age-Lymphocyte count-Lactate dehydrogenase scores (P > .0001). These 3 scores, age, low platelets, and high troponin-T levels were found to be statistically significant predictors of outcome Conclusion:Comorbidity-Age-Lymphocyte count-Lactate dehydrogenase score had a good area under the curve, the highest sensitivity of its cut-off value, required only 4 parameters, and is easy to calculate so it may be a better tool among the 3 scores in outcome prediction for coronavirus disease 2019 patients.
ABSTRACT
Background: Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) significantly contributes to the pathophysiology and progression of COVID-19. It is speculated that therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) can dampen CRS via elimination of pathogenic cytokines. Objectives: The study is intended to compare the outcomes of COVID-19 patients with CRS treated with TPE and standard care (SC) to their counterparts receiving SC alone. Methodology: A retrospective cohort study of severe COVID-19 confirmed patients presenting with CRS and admitted to the medical ICU was conducted between March and August 2021. Using case-control (CC) matching 1:1, 162 patients were selected and divided into two equal groups. The primary outcome was 28-day in-hospital survival analysis in severe COVID-19 patients with CRS. However, secondary outcomes included the effect of plasmapheresis on inflammatory markers, the need for mechanical ventilation, the rate of extubation, and the duration of survival. Results: After CC matching, the study cohort had a mean age of 55.41 (range 56.41±11.56 in TP+SC and 54.42±8.94 in SC alone; p=0.22). There were 25.95% males and 74.05% females in both groups. The mean time from first day of illness to hospitalization was 6.53±2.18 days. The majority of patients with CRS had comorbid conditions (75.9%). Diabetes mellitus was the most common comorbidity (40.1%), followed by hypertension (25.3%), and chronic kidney disease (21%). Notable reduction in some inflammatory markers (D-dimers, LDH, CRP and serum ferritin) (p<0.0001) was observed in the group that received TPE+SC. Moreover, the patients in the plasmapheresis plus standard care group required relatively less mechanical ventilation as compared to the group receiving SC alone (46.9% vs 58.1%, respectively; p>0.05). The rate of extubation in the TP+SC group vs SC alone was 60.5% vs 44.7%, respectively (p>0.05). Similarly, the mortality percentages in both groups were 19.8% and 24.7%, respectively. Conclusion: For this particular group of matched patients with COVID-19-induced CRS, TPE+SC was linked with relatively better overall survival, early extubation, and earlier discharge compared to SC alone. As these results were not statistically significant, multi-centered randomized control trials are needed to further elaborate the role of therapeutic plasmapheresis in COVID-19 induced CRS.
ABSTRACT
(1) Objectives: Patients with COVID-19 infection have been given various formulations and dosages of steroids over the last year and a half. This study aims to compare the effects of different formulations and doses of steroids on the 30 day in-hospital clinical outcome of patients with severe COVID-19 infection. (2) Material and Methods: An analysis of a retrospective cohort was carried out on patients with severe COVID-19 infection in a high-dependency unit (HDU) between February and July 2021. In total, 557 patients were included in this study. Patients who did not receive steroids (124) were excluded. Patients were divided into three groups based on dosages of steroids (Dexamethasone = 6 mg/day, Dexamethasone > 6 mg/day, and Methylprednisolone = 500 mg/day), given for 10 days. First, clinical outcome was evaluated on the 10th day of steroid administration in relation to mode of oxygen delivery. Then, Kaplan-Meier analysis was employed to determine 30 day in-hospital survival in relation to the use of steroid. (3) Results: Three groups were statistically equal according to biochemical characteristics. After 10 days of Methylprednisolone = 500 mg/day vs. Dexamethasone = 6 mg/day, 10.9% vs. 6.2% of patients required invasive ventilation (p = 0.01). The 30 day in-hospital mortality was lowest, 3%, in individuals receiving Dexamethasone = 6 mg/day, compared to 3.9% in individuals receiving Dexamethasone > 6 mg/day and 9.9% in individuals receiving Methylprednisolone = 500 mg/day, respectively. The median elapsed time was longer than 28 days between admission and outcome for Dexamethasone = 6 mg/day, compared to 18 days for Dexamethasone > 6 mg/day and 17 days for Methylprednisolone = 500 mg/day (p = < 0.0001). Dexamethasone = 6 mg/day was found to be a positive predictor of clinical outcome in COVID-19 patients on regression analysis. (4) Conclusions: Low-dose Dexamethasone (6 mg/day) is more effective than high-dose Dexamethasone and Methylprednisolone in improving the survival outcome of severe COVID-19 cases.
ABSTRACT
(1) Background: Severe coronavirus disease can be complicated by a hypercoagulable state in conjunction with sepsis, increasing the risk of venous thromboembolism. This study aimed to observe the effect of anticoagulants on 30-day high-dependency unit (HDU) outcomes of moderate to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients of a tertiary care hospital at Rawalpindi, Pakistan. (2) Methods: A retrospective propensity-based case-control study was carried out to examine COVID-19 patients admitted to the HDU. Patient groups who did and did not receive anticoagulants were labeled as "anticoagulant" and "non-anticoagulant", respectively. Case-control matching (1:1) was performed via propensity scores (calculated by a regression model). Kaplan-Meier and logrank analyses were used to study survival probability. Single predictors of outcomes were determined by Cox regression analysis. (3) Results: The anticoagulant group had elevated D-dimers, advanced age, more comorbidities and a higher frequency of severe disease compared to the non-anticoagulant group (p < 0.05). Therefore, 47 cases and 47 matched controls were selected based on their propensity scores. The primary endpoint was outcome (survived vs. died). The 30-day in-HDU mortality was 25.5% for cases and 61.7% for controls (p = 0.0004). The median time from admission to death was 16 days for the case group and 7 days for the control group (p < 0.0001). The 30-day mortality was 19.1% for the enoxaparin group and 16.4% for the heparin group (p > 0.05). Enoxaparin (therapeutic and prophylactic doses) and heparin (prophylactic dose) were found to be independent factors affecting the outcomes of these patients (p < 0.001). (4) Conclusions: Anticoagulants play a beneficial role in reducing mortality among COVID-19 patients. Both anticoagulant formulations, enoxaparin (therapeutic and prophylactic doses) and heparin (prophylactic dose), were associated with improving survival among these patients.