Severe COVID-19-associated sepsis is different from classical sepsis induced by pulmonary infection with carbapenem-resistant klebsiella pneumonia (CrKP).

PURPOSE: COVID-19 is also referred to as a typical viral septic pulmonary infection by 2019-nCoV. However, little is known regarding its characteristics in terms of systemic inflammation and organ injury, especially compared with classical bacterial sepsis. This article aims to investigate the clinical characteristics and prognosis between COVID-19-associated sepsis and classic bacterial-induced sepsis. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, septic patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU) of a government-designed therapy center in Shenzhen, China between January 14, 2020 and March 10, 2020, and septic patients induced by carbapenem-resistant klebsiella pneumonia (CrKP) admitted to the ICU of the Second People's Hospital of Shenzhen, China between January 1, 2014 and October 30, 2019 were enrolled. Demographic and clinical parameters including comorbidities, critical illness scores, treatment, and laboratory data, as well as prognosis were compared between the two groups. Risk factors for mortality and survival rate were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression and survival curve, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients with COVID-19 and 63 patients with CrKP were enrolled. A direct comparison between the two groups demonstrated more serious degrees of primary lung injury following 2019-nCoV infection (indicated by lower PaO2/FiO2), but milder systemic inflammatory response, lower sequential organ failure assessment score and better functions of the organs like heart, liver, kidney, coagulation, and circulation. However, the acquired immunosuppression presented in COVID-19 patients was more severe, which presented as lower lymphocyte counts (0.8×109/L vs. 0.9×109/L). Moreover, the proportion of COVID-19 patients treated with corticosteroid therapy and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was larger compared with CrKP patients (78.5% vs. 38.1% and 6.5% vs. 0, respectively) who required less invasive mechanical ventilation (31.6% vs. 54.0%). The incidence of hospitalized mortality and length of ICU stay and total hospital stay were also lower or shorter in viral sepsis (12.1% vs. 39.7%, 6.5 days vs. 23.0 days and 21.0 days vs. 33.0 days, respectively) (all p < 0.001). Similar results were obtained after being adjusted by age, gender, comorbidity and PaO2/FiO2. Lymphocytopenia and high acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II scores were common risk factors for in-hospital death. While the death cases of COVID-19 sepsis mostly occurred at the later stages of patients' hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Critical COVID-19 shares clinical characteristics with classical bacterial sepsis, but the degree of systemic inflammatory response, secondary organ damage and mortality rate are less severe. However, following 2019-nCoV infection, the level of immunosuppression may be increased and thus induce in more death at the later stage of patients' hospitalstay.

Severe COVID-19-associated sepsis is different from classical sepsis induced by pulmonary infection with carbapenem-resistant klebsiella pneumonia (CrKP)

Purpose COVID-19 is also referred to as a typical viral septic pulmonary infection by 2019-nCoV. However, little is known regarding its characteristics in terms of systemic inflammation and organ injury, especially compared with classical bacterial sepsis. This article aims to learn the clinical characteristics and prognosis between COVID-19-associated sepsis and classic bacterial-induced sepsis. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, septic patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU) of a government-designed therapy center in Shenzhen, China between Jan 14, 2020 and Mar 10, 2020, and septic patients induced by carbapenem-resistant klebsiella pneumonia (CrKP) admitted at the ICU of the Second People’s Hospital of Shenzhen, China between Jan 1, 2014 and Oct 30, 2019, were enrolled. Demographic & clinical parameters including comorbidities, critical illness scores, treatment, and laboratory data, as well as prognosis were compared between the two groups. Risk factors for mortality and survival rate were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression and survival curve. Results A total of 107 patients with COVID-19 and 63 patients with CrKP were enrolled. A direct comparison between the two groups demonstrated more serious degrees of primary lung injury following 2019-nCoV infection (indicated by lower PaO2/FiO2) but milder systemic inflammatory response, lower sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score and better functions of the organs like heart, liver, kidney, coagulation, and circulation. However, the acquired immunosuppression presented in COVID-19 patients was more severe, which presented as lower lymphocyte counts. Moreover, the proportion of COVID-19 patients treated with corticosteroid therapy and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was larger compared with CrKP patients who required less invasive mechanical ventilation. The incidence of hospitalized mortality and length of ICU stay and total hospital stay were also lower or shorter in viral sepsis. Similar results were obtained after being adjusted by age, gender, comorbidity and PaO2/FiO2. Lymphocytopenia and high acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACH II) scores were common risk factors for in-hospital death. While the death cases of COVID-19 sepsis mostly occurred at the later stages of patients’ hospital stay. Conclusion Critical COVID-19 shares clinical characteristics with classical bacterial sepsis, but the degree of systemic inflammatory response, secondary organ damage and mortality rate are less severe. However, following 2019-nCoV infection, the level of immunosuppression may be increased and thus induce in more death at the later stage of patients’ hospital stay.

Thymosin α1 therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 characterized by refractory hypoxemia increases patient mortality because of immunosuppression effects. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of immunomodulatory with thymosin α1 for critical COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed in 8 government-designated treatment centers for COVID-19 patients in China from Dec. 2019 to Mar. 2020. Thymosin α1 was administrated with 1.6 mg qd or q12 h for >5 days. The primary outcomes were the 28-day and 60-day mortality, the secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay and the total duration of the disease. Subgroup analysis was carried out according to clinical classification. RESULTS: Of the 334 enrolled COVID-19 patients, 42 (12.6%) died within 28 days, and 55 (16.5%) died within 60 days of hospitalization. There was a significant difference in the 28-day mortality between the thymosin α1 and non-thymosin α1-treated groups in adjusted model (P = 0.016), without obvious differences in the 60-day mortality and survival time in the overall cohort (P > 0.05). In the subgroup analysis, it was found that thymosin α1 therapy significantly reduced 28-day mortality (Hazards Ratios HR, 0.11, 95% confidence interval CI 0.02-0.63, P=0.013) via improvement of Pa02/FiO2 (P = 0.036) and prolonged the hospital length of stay (P = 0.024) as well as the total duration of the disease (P=0.001) in the critical type patients, especially those aged over 64 years, with white blood cell >6.8×109/L, neutrophil >5.3×109/L, lymphocyte < 0.73 × 109/L, PaO2/FiO2 < 196, SOFA > 3, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II > 7. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that treatment with thymosin α1 can markedly decrease 28-day mortality and attenuate acute lung injury in critical type COVID-19 patients.