Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
Respir Care ; 2021 Nov 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2294765

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a diagnostic tool in patients with COVID-19, we sought to investigate the association between LUS findings and the composite in-hospital outcome of ARDS incidence, ICU admission, and all-cause mortality. METHODS: In this prospective, multi-center, observational study, adults with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were enrolled from non-ICU in-patient units. Subjects underwent an LUS evaluating a total of 8 zones. Images were analyzed off-line, blinded to clinical variables and outcomes. A LUS score was developed to integrate LUS findings: ≥ 3 B-lines corresponded to a score of 1, confluent B-lines to a score of 2, and subpleural or lobar consolidation to a score of 3. The total LUS score ranged from 0-24 per subject. RESULTS: Among 215 enrolled subjects, 168 with LUS data and no current signs of ARDS or ICU admission (mean age 59 y, 56% male) were included. One hundred thirty-six (81%) subjects had pathologic LUS findings in ≥ 1 zone (≥ 3 B-lines, confluent B-lines, or consolidations). Markers of disease severity at baseline were higher in subjects with the composite outcome (n = 31, 18%), including higher median C-reactive protein (90 mg/L vs 55, P < .001) and procalcitonin levels (0.35 µg/L vs 0.13, P = .033) and higher supplemental oxygen requirements (median 4 L/min vs 2, P = .001). However, LUS findings and score did not differ significantly between subjects with the composite outcome and those without, and were not associated with outcomes in unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic findings on LUS were common a median of 3 d after admission in this cohort of non-ICU hospitalized subjects with COVID-19 and did not differ among subjects who experienced the composite outcome of incident ARDS, ICU admission, and all-cause mortality compared to subjects who did not. These findings should be confirmed in future investigations. The study is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04377035).

2.
Front Nutr ; 10: 1131192, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2286864

ABSTRACT

Background: COVID-19 is associated with subclinical myocardial injury. Exogenous ketone esters acutely improve left myocardial function in healthy participants and patients with heart failure, but the effects have not been investigated in participants previously hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: This is a randomized placebo-controlled double-blind crossover study comparing a single oral ketone ester dose of 395 mg/kg with placebo. Fasting participants were randomized to either placebo in the morning and oral ketone ester in the afternoon or vice versa. Echocardiography was performed immediately after intake of the corresponding treatment. Primary outcome was left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Secondary outcomes were absolute global longitudinal strain (GLS), cardiac output and blood oxygen saturation. Linear mixed effects models were used to assess differences. Results: We included 12 participants previously hospitalized for COVID-19 with a mean (±SD) age of 60 ± 10 years. The mean time from hospitalization was 18 ± 5 months. Oral ketone esters did not increase LVEF between placebo and oral ketone ester [mean difference: -0.7% (95% CI -4.0 to 2.6%), p = 0.66], but increased GLS [1.9% (95% CI: 0.1 to 3.6%), p = 0.04] and cardiac output [1.2 L/min (95% CI: -0.1 to 2.4 L/min), p = 0.07], although non-significant. The differences in GLS remained significant after adjustment for change in heart rate (p = 0.01). There was no difference in blood oxygen saturation. Oral ketone esters increased blood ketones over time (peak level 3.1 ± 4.9 mmol/L, p < 0.01). Ketone esters increased blood insulin, c-peptide, and creatinine, and decreased glucose and FFA (all p ≤ 0.01) but did not affect glucagon, pro-BNP, or troponin I levels (all p > 0.05). Conclusion: In patients previously hospitalized with COVID-19, a single oral dose of ketone ester had no effect on LVEF, cardiac output or blood oxygen saturation, but increased GLS acutely. Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier NCT04377035.

3.
Cardiology ; 2022 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2255083

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 has spread globally in waves, and Danish treatment guidelines have been updated following the first wave. We sought to investigate whether the prognostic values of echocardiographic parameters changed with updates in treatment guidelines and the emergence of novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants, 20E (EU1) and Alpha (B.1.1.7), and further to compare cardiac parameters between patients from the first and second wave. METHODS: A total of 305 patients hospitalised with COVID-19 were prospectively included, 215 and 90 during the first and second wave, respectively. Treatment in the study was defined as treatment with remdesivir, dexamethasone, or both. Patients were assumed to be infected with the dominant SARS-CoV-2 variant at the time of their hospitalisation. RESULTS: Mean age for the first vs. second wave was 68.7±13.6 vs. 69.7±15.8 years and 55% vs. 62% were male. Left ventricular (LV) systolic and diastolic function was worse in patients hospitalised during the second wave (LV ejection fraction (LVEF) for first vs. second wave = 58.5±8.1% vs. 52.4±10.6%, p<0.001) and global longitudinal strain (GLS) = 16.4±4.3% vs. 14.2±4.3%, p<0.001). In univariable cox regressions, reduced LVEF (HR=1.07 per 1% decrease, p=0.002), GLS (HR=1.21 per 1% decrease, p<0.001), and TAPSE (HR=1.18 per 1mm decrease, p<0.001) were associated with covid-related mortality, but only GLS remained significant in fully adjusted analysis (HR=1.14, p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Reduced GLS was associated with covid-related mortality independently of wave, treatment, and SARS-CoV-2 variant. LV function was significantly impaired in patients hospitalised during the second wave.

4.
ERJ Open Res ; 8(4)2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2043108

ABSTRACT

Background: In this study we aimed to assess if a focused lung ultrasound examination predicts the need for mechanical ventilation, admission to an intensive care unit, high-flow oxygen treatment, death from COVID-19 within 30 days and 30-day all-cause mortality in patients with clinical suspicion of COVID-19 or PCR-verified SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: A multicentre prospective cohort trial was performed. Film clips from focused lung ultrasound examinations were recorded and rated by blinded observers using different scoring systems. A prediction model was built and used to test relationship between lung ultrasound scores and clinical outcomes. Diagnostic performance of scoring systems was analysed. Results: A total of 3889 film clips of 398 patients were analysed. Patients who had any of the outcomes of interest had a significantly higher ultrasound score than those who did not. Multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that lung ultrasound predicts mechanical ventilation (relative risk 2.44, 95% CI 1.32-5.52), admission to intensive care (relative risk 2.55, 95% CI 1.41-54.59) and high-flow oxygen treatment (relative risk 1.95, 95% CI 1.5-2.53) but not survival when adjusting for sex, age and relevant comorbidity. There was no diagnostic difference in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve between a scoring system using only anterolateral thorax zones and a scoring system that also included dorsal zones. Conclusion: Focused lung ultrasound in patients with clinical suspicion of COVID-19 predicts respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, admission to intensive care units and the need for high-flow oxygen treatment. Thus, focused lung ultrasound may be used to risk stratify patients with COVID-19 symptoms.

5.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 11(19): e026571, 2022 10 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2038400

ABSTRACT

Background COVID-19 infection has been hypothesized to affect left ventricular function; however, the underlying mechanisms and the association to clinical outcome are not understood. The global work index (GWI) is a novel echocardiographic measure of systolic function that may offer insights on cardiac dysfunction in COVID-19. We hypothesized that GWI was associated with disease severity and all-cause death in patients with COVID-19. Methods and Results In a multicenter study of patients admitted with COVID-19 (n=305), 249 underwent pressure-strain loop analyses to quantify GWI at a median time of 4 days after admission. We examined the association of GWI to cardiac biomarkers (troponin and NT-proBNP [N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide]), disease severity (oxygen requirement and CRP [C-reactive protein]), and all-cause death. Patients with elevated troponin (n=71) exhibited significantly reduced GWI (1508 versus 1707 mm Hg%; P=0.018). A curvilinear association to NT-proBNP was observed, with increasing NT-proBNP once GWI decreased below 1446 mm Hg%. Moreover, GWI was significantly associated with a higher oxygen requirement (relative increase of 6% per 100-mm Hg% decrease). No association was observed with CRP. Of the 249 patients, 37 died during follow-up (median, 58 days). In multivariable Cox regression, GWI was associated with all-cause death (hazard ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 1.01-1.15], per 100-mm Hg% decrease), but did not increase C-statistics when added to clinical parameters. Conclusions In patients admitted with COVID-19, our findings indicate that NT-proBNP and troponin may be associated with lower GWI, whereas CRP is not. GWI was independently associated with all-cause death, but did not provide prognostic information beyond readily available clinical parameters. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04377035.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Natriuretic Peptide, Brain , Biomarkers , C-Reactive Protein/metabolism , Humans , Oxygen , Peptide Fragments , Prognosis , Troponin
7.
J Ultrasound ; 25(3): 457-467, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1293488

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Several studies have reported thromboembolic events to be common in severe COVID-19 cases. We sought to investigate the relationship between lung ultrasound (LUS) findings in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and the development of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). METHODS: A total of 203 adults were included from a COVID-19 ward in this prospective multi-center study (mean age 68.6 years, 56.7% men). All patients underwent 8-zone LUS, and all ultrasound images were analyzed off-line blinded. Several LUS findings were investigated (total number of B-lines, B-line score, and LUS-scores). RESULTS: Median time from admission to LUS examination was 4 days (IQR: 2, 8). The median number of B-lines was 12 (IQR: 8, 18), and 44 (21.7%) had a positive B-line score. During hospitalization, 17 patients developed VTE (4 deep-vein thrombosis, 15 pulmonary embolism), 12 following and 5 prior to LUS. In fully adjusted multivariable Cox models (excluding participants with VTE prior to LUS), all LUS parameters were significantly associated with VTE (total number of B-lines: HR = 1.14, 95% CI (1.03, 1.26) per 1 B-line increase), positive B-line score: HR = 9.79, 95% CI (1.87, 51.35), and LUS-score: HR = 1.51, 95% CI (1.10, 2.07), per 1-point increase). The B-line score and LUS-score remained significantly associated with VTE in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: In hospitalized COVID-19 patients, pathological LUS findings were common, and the total number of B-lines, B-line score, and LUS-score were all associated with VTE. These findings indicate that the LUS examination may be useful in risk stratification and the clinical management of COVID-19. These findings should be considered hypothesis generating. GOV ID: NCT04377035.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Venous Thromboembolism , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Male , Prospective Studies , Ultrasonography/methods , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnostic imaging
8.
Int J Infect Dis ; 108: 370-376, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1253013

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Hydroxychloroquine has been proposed as a primary prophylactic agent against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study aimed to investigate if patients treated with hydroxychloroquine for a non-COVID-19 indication had a lower risk of verified infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) compared with matched controls. METHODS: A cohort comprising all persons in Denmark collecting hydroxychloroquine prescriptions in 2020 and 2019 (i.e., both during and before SARS-CoV-2 was confirmed in Denmark), matched by age and sex with controls, was studied. Data were collected using the Danish national registries, which contain complete information on patient health data, prescriptions and microbiological test results. The main outcome was microbiologically verified SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: In total, 5488 hydroxychloroquine users were matched with 54,486 non-users. At baseline, the groups differed in terms of diagnoses of pulmonary disease, cardiovascular disease, renal disease, gastrointestinal/metabolic disease and dementia, as well as treatment with antirheumatic drugs. The final model was adjusted for these potential confounders. Use of hydroxychloroquine for non-COVID-19 indications was not associated with any change in confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (hazard ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.76-1.07). This result was robust in the propensity-score-matched sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: This study, which is the largest to date to investigate the primary prophylactic effect of hydroxychloroquine against SARS-CoV-2, does not support any prophylactic benefit of hydroxychloroquine in the prevention of infection with SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Hydroxychloroquine , Cohort Studies , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2
10.
ESC Heart Fail ; 7(6): 4189-4197, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-885052

ABSTRACT

AIMS: The present study had two aims: (i) compare echocardiographic parameters in COVID-19 patients with matched controls and (2) assess the prognostic value of measures of left (LV) and right ventricular (RV) function in relation to COVID-19 related death. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prospective multicentre cohort study, 214 consecutive hospitalized COVID-19 patients underwent an echocardiographic examination (by pre-determined research protocol). All participants were successfully matched 1:1 with controls from the general population on age, sex, and hypertension. Mean age of the study sample was 69 years, and 55% were male participants. LV and RV systolic function was significantly reduced in COVID-19 cases as assessed by global longitudinal strain (GLS) (16.4% ± 4.3 vs. 18.5% ± 3.0, P < 0.001), tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) (2.0 ± 0.4 vs. 2.6 ± 0.5, P < 0.001), and RV strain (19.8 ± 5.9 vs. 24.2 ± 6.5, P = 0.004). All parameters remained significantly reduced after adjusting for important cardiac risk factors. During follow-up (median: 40 days), 25 COVID-19 cases died. In multivariable Cox regression reduced TAPSE [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.07-1.31], P = 0.002, per 1 mm decrease], RV strain (HR = 1.64, 95%CI[1.02;2.66], P = 0.043, per 1% decrease) and GLS (HR = 1.20, 95%CI[1.07-1.35], P = 0.002, per 1% decrease) were significantly associated with COVID-19-related death. TAPSE and GLS remained significantly associated with the outcome after restricting the analysis to patients without prevalent heart disease. CONCLUSIONS: RV and LV function are significantly impaired in hospitalized COVID-19 patients compared with matched controls. Furthermore, reduced TAPSE and GLS are independently associated with COVID-19-related death.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL