Progressive cholestasis and associated sclerosing cholangitis are frequent complications of COVID-19 in patients with chronic liver disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cholestasis is associated with disease severity and worse outcome in COVID-19. Cases of secondary sclerosing cholangitis (SSC) after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection have been described. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 between 03/2020 and 07/2021 were included. Patients were stratified as having (i) no chronic liver disease (CLD), (ii) non-advanced CLD (non-ACLD), or (iii) advanced CLD (ACLD). Patients with CLD and non-COVID-19 pneumonia were matched to patients with CLD and COVID-19 as a control cohort. Liver chemistries before (Pre) and at first, second, and third blood withdrawal after SARS-CoV-2 infection (T1-T3) and at last available time point (last) were recorded. A total of 496 patients were included. In total, 13.1% (n = 65) had CLD (non-ACLD: 70.8%; ACLD: 29.2%); the predominant etiology was NAFLD/NASH (60.0%). COVID-19-related liver injury was more common among patients with CLD (24.6% vs. 10.6%; p = 0.001). After SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with CLD exhibited progressive cholestasis with persistently increasing levels of alkaline phosphatase (Pre: 91.0 vs. T1: 121.0 vs. last: 175.0 U/L; p < 0.001) and gamma-glutamyl transferase (Pre: 95.0 vs. T1: 135.0 vs. last: 202.0 U/L; p = 0.001). A total of 23.1% of patients with CLD (n = 15/65) developed cholestatic liver failure (cholestasis plus bilirubin ≥6 mg/dl) during COVID-19, and 15.4% of patients (n = 10/65) developed SSC. SSC was significantly more frequent among patients with CLD and COVID-19 than in patients with CLD and non-COVID-19 pneumonia (p = 0.040). COVID-19-associated SSC occurred predominantly in patients with NAFLD/NASH and metabolic risk factors. A total of 26.3% (n = 5/19) of patients with ACLD experienced hepatic decompensation after SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: About 20% of patients with CLD develop progressive cholestasis after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with NAFLD/NASH and metabolic risk factors are at particular risk for developing cholestatic liver failure and/or SSC after COVID-19.

Duration of invasive mechanical ventilation prior to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is not associated with survival in acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by coronavirus disease 2019

BackgroundDuration of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) prior to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) affects outcome in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related ARDS, the role of pre-ECMO IMV duration is unclear. This single-centre, retrospective study included critically ill adults treated with ECMO due to severe COVID-19-related ARDS between 01/2020 and 05/2021. The primary objective was to determine whether duration of IMV prior to ECMO cannulation influenced ICU mortality.ResultsDuring the study period, 101 patients (mean age 56 [SD ± 10] years;70 [69%] men;median RESP score 2 [IQR 1–4]) were treated with ECMO for COVID-19. Sixty patients (59%) survived to ICU discharge. Median ICU length of stay was 31 [IQR 20.7–51] days, median ECMO duration was 16.4 [IQR 8.7–27.7] days, and median time from intubation to ECMO start was 7.7 [IQR 3.6–12.5] days. Fifty-three (52%) patients had a pre-ECMO IMV duration of > 7 days. Pre-ECMO IMV duration had no effect on survival (p = 0.95). No significant difference in survival was found when patients with a pre-ECMO IMV duration of < 7 days (< 10 days) were compared to ≥ 7 days (≥ 10 days) (p = 0.59 and p = 1.0).ConclusionsThe role of prolonged pre-ECMO IMV duration as a contraindication for ECMO in patients with COVID-19-related ARDS should be scrutinised. Evaluation for ECMO should be assessed on an individual and patient-centred basis.

Age-adjusted mortality and predictive value of liver chemistries in a Viennese cohort of COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) causes considerable mortality worldwide. We aimed to investigate the frequency and predictive role of abnormal liver chemistries in different age groups. METHODS: Patients with positive severe acute respiratory distress syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test between 03/2020-07/2021 at the Vienna General Hospital were included. Patients were stratified for age: 18-39 vs. 40-69 vs. ≥70 years (y). Aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine-aminotransferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) and total bilirubin (BIL) were recorded. RESULTS: 900 patients (18-39 years: 32.2%, 40-69 years: 39.7%, ≥70 years: 28.1%) were included. Number of comorbidities, median D-dimer and C-reactive protein increased with age. During COVID-19, AST/ALT and ALP/GGT levels significantly increased. Elevated hepatocellular transaminases (AST/ALT) and cholestasis parameters (ALP/GGT/BIL) were observed in 40.3% (n  = 262/650) and 45.0% (n  = 287/638) of patients respectively. Liver-related mortality was highest among patients with pre-existing decompensated liver disease (28.6%, p < .001). 1.7% of patients without pre-existing liver disease died of liver-related causes, that is consequences of hepatic dysfunction or acute liver failure. Importantly, COVID-19-associated liver injury (16.0%, p < .001), abnormal liver chemistries and liver-related mortality (6.5%, p < .001) were most frequent among 40-69 years old patients. Elevated AST and BIL after the first positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR independently predicted mortality in the overall cohort and in 40-69 years old patients. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of the COVID-19 patients exhibit abnormal hepatocellular and cholestasis-related liver chemistries with 40-69 years old patients being at particularly high risk for COVID-19-related liver injury and liver-related mortality. Elevated AST and BIL after SARS-CoV-2 infection are independent predictors of mortality, especially in patients aged 40-69 years.

Can We Protect Those We Care for in A Pandemic? - Prevalence of Neutralizing Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in Nursing Homes.

In December 2019, the People's Republic of China and the World Health Organization first reported on a cluster of pneumonia with an unknown cause. Nine months later more than 1.4 million people have died from COVID 19. In this work, the effects of the COVID 19 pandemic on five nursing homes in Austria, which cared for 889 residents in the first half of 2020, were examined. The research question was whether the measures taken were appropriate to prevent an outbreak within the individual facilities. To detect previously unrecognized infections, the present study evaluated the prevalence of neutralizing antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 virus in residents and employees of the nursing homes. Following the analysis of blood samples, the prospectively collected data was connected to data from screening examinations and data from contact tracing. The present study demonstrated an overall prevalence of neutralizing antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 virus in nursing homes of 3.7%. Whereas the prevalence in those facilities that have never been hit by an outbreak is 0%, the prevalence in those facilities with an outbreak is up to 4.9%. Neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were detected in 35 persons. A retrospective analysis of all 5 included nursing homes demonstrated that upon regular clinical screening in combination with PCRs an infection with SARS-COV-2 was detected in 66 residents and 24 employees from different professional groups. In only 25 of the 35 persons with neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 an infection was proven in advance. This study suggests that specific measures can prevent transmission within a health care facility. Nevertheless, the results also show that a risk reduction to 0% cannot be achieved. In preparation for further pandemic waves there is still the need to reduce the probability of a transmission in nursing homes with specific test strategies.

Outcomes of non-COVID-19 critically ill patients during the COVID-19 pandemic : A retrospective propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disrupts routine care and alters treatment pathways in every medical specialty, including intensive care medicine, which has been at the core of the pandemic response. The impact of the pandemic is inevitably not limited to patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and their outcomes; however, the impact of COVID-19 on intensive care has not yet been analyzed. METHODS: The objective of this propensity score-matched study was to compare the clinical outcomes of non-COVID-19 critically ill patients with the outcomes of prepandemic patients. Critically ill, non-COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) during the first wave of the pandemic were matched with patients admitted in the previous year. Mortality, length of stay, and rate of readmission were compared between the two groups after matching. RESULTS: A total of 211 critically ill SARS-CoV­2 negative patients admitted between 13 March 2020 and 16 May 2020 were matched to 211 controls, selected from a matching pool of 1421 eligible patients admitted to the ICU in 2019. After matching, the outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups: ICU mortality was 5.2% in 2019 and 8.5% in 2020, p = 0.248, while intrahospital mortality was 10.9% in 2019 and 14.2% in 2020, p = 0.378. The median ICU length of stay was similar in 2019: 4 days (IQR 2-6) compared to 2020: 4 days (IQR 2-7), p = 0.196. The rate of ICU readmission was 15.6% in 2019 and 10.9% in 2020, p = 0.344. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective single center study, mortality, ICU length of stay, and rate of ICU readmission did not differ significantly between patients admitted to the ICU during the implementation of hospital-wide COVID-19 contingency planning and patients admitted to the ICU before the pandemic.

Female Pelvic Floor Dysfunction Continues to Negatively Impact Quality-of-Life during the COVID-19 Lockdown.

The COVID-19 pandemic led to dramatical changes in elective medical care. We analysed its impact on patients with female pelvic floor dysfunction during the 6 weeks of lockdown in Austria. A cross-sectional study was conducted: All 99 women who presented at the urogynaecologic outpatient clinic of the Medical University of Vienna with pelvic organ prolapse (POP) or urinary incontinence (UI) from December 2019 up to the lockdown in March 2020 were included and contacted. 97% of these women (96 participants) agreed to participate in the survey conducted to asses pelvic floor related quality of life (QoL) through telephone- interrogation. The mean age was 59 ± 14.8 years, the POP group consisted of 42 women while the UI group included 54 women. Most participants (83% of POP and 81% of UI cases) stated that their female pelvic floor dysfunction had remained equally relevant or had become even more significant during the lockdown. Associated symptoms and psychological strain also maintained their relevance during the lockdown (UI: p = 0.229; POP: p = 0.234). Furthermore, 97% of all interviewed women indicated to be strongly willing to continue their treatment. A generalised linear model regression revealed no clinical or demographic risk factors for psychological strain during the lockdown (p > 0.05). Our results demonstrate that women's QoL remains significantly impaired by their pelvic-floor disorders even during a worldwide crisis such as COVID-19. Therefore, elective disciplines such as urogynaecology urgently require novel and innovative strategies for continued patient care even in times of a lockdown.