Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
J Clin Med ; 11(18)2022 Sep 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2033029

ABSTRACT

Discovering novel risk and prognostic factors for COVID-19 may help not only in reducing severity and mortality but also in creating targeted therapies considering patients' individual features. Liver fibrosis is considered a complication in Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD), it is a feature of steatohepatitis (NASH), and it has already been related to an increased risk for a wide range of diseases. Here, we aimed to define if any parameter assessing metabolic status has predictive power in identifying inpatients at risk for poorer prognosis and an increased mortality from COVID-19. This retrospective study was conducted at the Sub-Intensive Medicine Care Unit of the Presidio Maxi-Emergenze Fiera del Levante, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Policlinico di Bari, Italy. We evaluated 271 inpatients with moderate-to-severe SARS-CoV-2-related respiratory failure by comparing biochemical features and non-invasive liver fibrosis scores among discharged, transferred to Intensive Care Units (ICU) and non-survivor patients. Moreover, by performing ROC curves, we defined cut-off values to predict mortality and disease severity for each score. We found that non-invasive scores of liver fibrosis, obtained at day of admission, such as AAR (p < 0.001), FIB-4 and mFIB-4, FORNS, and AARPRI (p < 0.05) strongly predict not only in-hospital mortality but also the length of hospitalization and eventual admission to ICU. FIB-4 was the best score to identify non-survivor patients (sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 63%) and predict the need for ICU or mortality (71% of sensitivity and 65% of specificity), with a cut-off value of 1.94. Therefore, we present the predictive power and the cut-off values of several liver fibrosis scores here for disease severity and mortality in SARS-CoV-2 in-patients and we proposed the use of the present scores to identify ab initio the clinical therapeutic and diagnostic protocols for high-risk patients.

2.
Ultrasound J ; 14(1): 21, 2022 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1875024

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Lung Ultrasound Score (LUS) identifies and monitors pneumonia by assigning increasing scores. However, it does not include parameters, such as inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter and index of collapse, diaphragmatic excursions and search for pleural and pericardial effusions. Therefore, we propose a new improved scoring system, termed "integrated" lung ultrasound score (i-LUS) which incorporates previously mentioned parameters that can help in prediction of disease severity and survival, choice of oxygenation mode/ventilation and assignment to subsequent areas of care in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: Upon admission at the sub-intensive section of the emergency medical department (SEMD), 143 consecutively examined COVID-19 patients underwent i-LUS together with all other routine analysis. A database for anamnestic information, laboratory data, gas analysis and i-LUS parameters was created and analyzed. RESULTS: Of 143 enrolled patients, 59.4% were male (mean age 71 years) and 40.6% female. (mean age 79 years: p = 0.005). Patients that survived at 1 month had i-LUS score of 16, which was lower than that of non-survivors (median 20; p = 0.005). Survivors had a higher PaO2/FiO2 (median 321.5) compared to non-survivors (median 229, p < 0.001). There was a correlation between i-LUS and PaO2/FiO2 ratio (rho:-0.4452; p < 0.001), PaO2/FiO2 and survival status (rho:-0.3452; p < 0.001), as well as i-LUS score and disease outcome (rho:0.24; p = 0.005). In non-survivors, the serum values of different significant COVID indicators were severely expressed. The i-LUS score was higher (median 20) in patients who required non-invasive ventilation (NIV) than in those treated only by oxygen therapy (median 15.42; p = 0.003). The odds ratio for death outcome was 1.08 (confidence interval 1.02-1.15) for each point increased. At 1-month follow-up, 65 patients (45.5%) died and 78 (54.5%) survived. Patients admitted to the high critical ward had higher i-LUS score than those admitted to the low critical one (p < 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: i-LUS could be used as a helpful clinical tool for early decision-making in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL