Mild SARS-CoV-2 infection in vulnerable patients: implementation of a clinical pathway for early treatment.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this report is to describe the clinical pathway for early treatment of patients with acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and to evaluate the first results of its implementation. METHODS: This is a descriptive and retrospective study of the implementation of a clinical pathway of treatment in outpatients (January 1 to June 30 2022). Clinical pathway: detection and referral systems from Primary Care, Emergency services, hospital specialities and an automated detection system; clinical evaluation and treatment administration in the COVID-19 day-hospital and subsequent clinical follow-up. Explanatory variables: demographics, comorbidity, vaccination status, referral pathways and treatment administration. OUTCOME VARIABLES: hospitalization and death with 30 days, grade 2-3 toxicity related to treatment. RESULTS: Treatment was administered to 262 patients (53,4% women, median age 60 years). The treatment indication criteria were immunosupression (68,3%), and the combination of age, vaccination status and comorbidity in the rest 47,3% of the patients s received remdesivir, 35,9% nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 13,4% sotrovimab and 2,4% combined treatment with a median of 4 days after symptom onset. Hospital admission was required for 6,1% of the patients, 3,8% related to progression COVID-19. No patient died. Toxicity grade 2-3 toxicity was reported in 18,7%, 89,8% dysgeusia and metallic tasted related nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Seven patients discontinued treatment due to toxicity. CONCLUSION: The creation and implementation of a clinical pathway for non-hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection is effective and it allows early accessibility and equity of currently available treatments.

[Mild SARS-CoV-2 infection in vulnerable patients: implementation of a clinical pathway for early treatment]. / Infección leve por SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes vulnerables: implantación de una vía clínica de tratamiento precoz.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this report is to describe the clinical pathway for early treatment of patients with acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and to evaluate the first results of its implementation. METHODS: This is a descriptive and retrospective study of the implementation of a clinical pathway of treatment in outpatients (January 1 to June 30 2022). Clinical pathway: detection and referral systems from Primary Care, Emergency services, hospital specialities and an automated detection system; clinical evaluation and treatment administration in the COVID-19 day-hospital and subsequent clinical follow-up. Explanatory variables: demographics, comorbidity, vaccination status, referral pathways and treatment administration. OUTCOME VARIABLES: hospitalization and death with 30 days, grade 2-3 toxicity related to treatment. RESULTS: Treatment was administered to 262 patients (53,4% women, median age 60 years). The treatment indication criteria were immunosupression (68,3%), and the combination of age, vaccination status and comorbidity in the rest47,3% of the patients s received remdesivir, 35,9% nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 13,4% sotrovimab and 2,4% combined treatment with a median of 4 days after symptom onset. Hospital admission was required for 6,1% of the patients, 3,8% related to progression COVID-19. No patient died. Toxicity grade 2-3 toxicity was reported in 18,7%, 89,8% dysgeusia and metallic tasted related nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Seven patients discontinued treatment due to toxicity. CONCLUSION: The creation and implementation of a clinical pathway for non-hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection is effective and it allows early accessibility and equity of currently available treatments.

Validación de la escala COVID-19-12O para predecir reingreso/revisita en pacientes con neumonía por SARS-CoV-2 dados de alta desde Urgencias Validation of the COVID-19-12O scale for predicting readmissions/revisits in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia discharged from the emergency department

Objetivo. La escala COVID-19-12O se ha validado para determinar el riesgo de insuficiencia respiratoria en pacientes hospitalizados por COVID-19. Nuestro estudio pretende evaluar si la escala es efectiva en pacientes con neumonía por SARS-CoV-2 dados de alta desde un servicio de urgencias hospitalario (SUH) para predecir el reingreso y revisita. Método. Cohorte retrospectiva de pacientes con neumonía por SARS-CoV-2 dados de alta de forma consecutiva desde un SUH de un hospital terciario, del 7 de enero al 17 de febrero de 2021, donde aplicamos la escala COVID-19-12O, con un punto de corte de 9 puntos para definir el riesgo de ingreso o revisita. La variable de resultado principal fue la revisita con o sin reingreso hospitalario tras los 30 días de su alta desde el SUH. Resultados. Se incluyeron 77 pacientes, con una edad mediana de 59 años, 63,6 % hombres e índice Charlson de 2. El 9,1 % tuvieron revisita a urgencias y en el 15,3 % se produjo un ingreso hospitalario diferido. El riesgo relativo (RR) para revista de urgencias fue 0,46 (0,04-4,62, IC 95 %, p =0,452), y el RR para el reingreso hospitalario de 6,88 (1,20-39,49, IC 95 %, p < 0,005). Conclusiones. La escala COVID-19-12O es efectiva en determinar el riesgo de reingreso hospitalario en pacientes dados de alta desde el SUH con neumonía por SARS-CoV-2, pero no es útil para valorar el riesgo de revisita.

Transient Changes in the Plasma of Astrocytic and Neuronal Injury Biomarkers in COVID-19 Patients without Neurological Syndromes.

The levels of several glial and neuronal plasma biomarkers have been found to increase during the acute phase in COVID-19 patients with neurological symptoms. However, replications in patients with minor or non-neurological symptoms are needed to understand their potential as indicators of CNS injury or vulnerability. Plasma levels of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), neurofilament light chain protein (NfL), and total Tau (T-tau) were determined by Single molecule array (Simoa) immunoassays in 45 samples from COVID-19 patients in the acute phase of infection [moderate (n = 35), or severe (n = 10)] with minor or non-neurological symptoms; in 26 samples from fully recovered patients after ~2 months of clinical follow-up [moderate (n = 23), or severe (n = 3)]; and in 14 non-infected controls. Plasma levels of the SARS-CoV-2 receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), were also determined by Western blot. Patients with COVID-19 without substantial neurological symptoms had significantly higher plasma concentrations of GFAP, a marker of astrocytic activation/injury, and of NfL and T-tau, markers of axonal damage and neuronal degeneration, compared with controls. All these biomarkers were correlated in COVID-19 patients at the acute phase. Plasma GFAP, NfL and T-tau levels were all normalized after recovery. Recovery was also observed in the return to normal values of the quotient between the ACE2 fragment and circulating full-length species, following the change noticed in the acute phase of infection. None of these biomarkers displayed differences in plasma samples at the acute phase or recovery when the COVID-19 subjects were sub-grouped according to occurrence of minor symptoms at re-evaluation 3 months after the acute episode (so called post-COVID or "long COVID"), such as asthenia, myalgia/arthralgia, anosmia/ageusia, vision impairment, headache or memory loss. Our study demonstrated altered plasma GFAP, NfL and T-tau levels in COVID-19 patients without substantial neurological manifestation at the acute phase of the disease, providing a suitable indication of CNS vulnerability; but these biomarkers fail to predict the occurrence of delayed minor neurological symptoms.

Association between Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and clinical presentation and outcomes in older inpatients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a physiological condition characterized by a decreased reserve to stressors. In patients with COVID-19, frailty is a risk factor for in-hospital mortality. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between clinical presentation, analytical and radiological parameters at admission, and clinical outcomes according to frailty, as defined by the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), in old people hospitalized with COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included people aged 65 years and older and admitted with community-acquired COVID-19 from 3 March 2020 to 31 April 2021. Patients were categorized using the CFS. Primary outcomes were symptoms of COVID-19 prior to admission, mortality, readmission, admission in intensive care unit (ICU), and need for invasive mechanical ventilation. Analysis of clinical symptoms, clinical outcomes, and CFS was performed using multivariable logistic regression, and results were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Of the 785 included patients, 326 (41.5%, 95% CI 38.1%-45.0%) were defined as frail (CFS ≥ 5 points): 208 (26.5%, 95% CI 23.5%-29.7%) presented mild-moderate frailty (CFS 5-6 points) and 118 (15.0%, 95% CI 12.7%-17.7%), severe frailty (7-9 points). After adjusting for epidemiological variables (age, gender, residence in a nursing home, and Charlson comorbidity index), frail patients were significantly less likely to present dry cough (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.83), myalgia-arthralgia (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29-0.75), and anosmia-dysgeusia (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.23-0.94). Confusion was more common in severely frail patients (OR 3.14; 95% CI 1.64-5.97). After adjusting for epidemiological variables, the risk of in-hospital mortality was higher in frail patients (OR 2.79, 95% CI 1.79-4.25), including both those with mild-moderate frailty (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.23-3.19) and severe frailty (OR 5.44, 95% CI 3.14-9.42). Readmission was higher in frail patients (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.07-4.16), but only in mild-moderate frailty (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.17-4.75).. CONCLUSION: Frail patients presented atypical symptoms (less dry cough, myalgia-arthralgia, and anosmia-dysgeusia, and more confusion). Frailty was an independent predictor for death, regardless of severity, and mild-moderate frailty was associated with readmission.

Infección leve por SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes vulnerables: implantación de una vía clínica de tratamiento precoz Mild SARS-CoV-2 infection in vulnerable patients: implementation of a clinical pathway for early treatment

Introducción: El objetivo del manuscrito es describir la vía clínica de tratamiento precoz de pacientes con infección aguda por SARS-CoV-2 y evaluar los primeros resultados de su implementación Métodos: Estudio descriptivo y retrospectivo de la implementación de una vía clínica de tratamiento en pacientes no-hospitalizados, (1 de enero al 30 de junio 2022). Elaboración de vía clínica: sistemas detección y derivación desde Atención Primaria, servicio de Urgencias, especialidades médicas y sistema de detección automatizada;evaluación clínica y administración de tratamiento en hospital de día COVID-19, y seguimiento clínico posterior. Variables explicativas: demográficas, comorbilidad, estado vacunal, vías de derivación y administración de tratamiento. Variables de resultado: hospitalización y muerte a los 30 días, toxicidad grado 2-3 relacionada con el tratamiento. Resultados: Se administró tratamiento a 262 pacientes (53,4% mujeres, mediana de edad 60 años). Criterio indicación tratamiento: inmunosupresión (68,3%) y la combinación de edad, estado vacunal y comorbilidad en el resto. El 47,3% de los pacientes recibieron remdesivir, el 35,9% nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, el 13,4% sotrovimab y el 2,4% tratamiento combinado, con una mediana de 4 días tras inicio de síntomas. El 6.1% de los pacientes precisó ingreso hospitalario, 3,8% por progresión COVID-19. Ningún paciente falleció. El 18,7% presentaron toxicidad grado 2-3: 89,8% disgeusia y sabor metálico relacionado con nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Siete pacientes interrumpieron tratamiento por toxicidad. Conclusión: La creación e implementación de una vía clínica para pacientes no-hospitalizados con infección por SARS-CoV-2 es efectiva y permite la accesibilidad temprana y la equidad de los tratamientos actualmente disponibles.

Early carbohydrate antigen 125 as a mortality predictor in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

Background: Carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125) is an indicator of inflammation, immune response, and impaired cardiac function. The aim was to investigate whether CA125 behaves as a biomarker of severity and poor clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: Serum CA125 [Elecsys CA125 II assay-(Roche Diagnostics GmbH)] was measured in stored biobank samples from COVID-19 hospitalized patients between 01 March 2020 and 17 October 2021. Multiple logistic regression models were built to explore the association between CA125 and clinical outcomes [in-hospital all-cause mortality, need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), or non-invasive respiratory support (non-IRS)], estimating odds ratios (ORs; 95% CI). The gradient of risk of CA125 was evaluated by fractional polynomials. Results: A total of 691 patients were included, median age of 63 years (50-76), men (57.2%), with high comorbidity. At admission, 85.8% had pneumonia. Median CA125 was 10.33 U/ml (7.48-15.50). The in-hospital mortality rate was 7.2%. After adjusting for confounding factors, CA125 ≥ 15.5 U/ml (75th percentile) showed an increased risk of death [OR 2.85(1.21-6.71)], as age ≥ 65 years, diabetes, and immunosuppression. Furthermore, CA125 as a continuous variable was positive and significantly associated with the risk of death after multivariate adjustment. The mean hospital stay of the patients with CA125 ≥ 15.5 U/ml was longer than the rest of the study population. Conclusion: CA125 in the first 72 h of hospital admission seems a useful biomarker of mortality in hospitalized patients with moderate-severe COVID-19. If our findings are confirmed, the wide availability of this biomarker would make easy its widespread implementation in clinical practice.

Pathological Findings Associated With SARS-CoV-2 on Postmortem Core Biopsies: Correlation With Clinical Presentation and Disease Course.

Background: Autopsies can shed light on the pathogenesis of new and emerging diseases. Aim: To describe needle core necropsy findings of the lung, heart, and liver in decedents with COVID-19. Material: Cross-sectional study of needle core necropsies in patients who died with virologically confirmed COVID-19. Histopathological analyses were performed, and clinical data and patient course evaluated. Results: Chest core necropsies were performed in 71 decedents with a median age of 81 years (range 52-97); 47 (65.3%) were men. The median interval from symptoms onset to death was 17.5 days (range 1-84). Samples of lung (n = 62, 87.3%), heart (n = 48, 67.6%) and liver (n = 39, 54.9%) were obtained. Fifty-one lung samples (82.3%) were abnormal: 19 (30.6%) showed proliferative diffuse alveolar damage (DAD), 12 (19.4%) presented exudative DAD, and 10 (16.1%) exhibited proliferative plus exudative DAD. Of the 46 lung samples tested for SARS-CoV-19 by RT-PCR, 39 (84.8%) were positive. DAD was associated with premortem values of lactate dehydrogenase of 400 U/L or higher [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 21.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.22-146] and treatment with tocilizumab (AOR 6.91; 95% CI 1.14-41.7). Proliferative DAD was associated with an onset-to-death interval of over 15 days (AOR 7.85, 95% CI 1.29-47.80). Twenty-three of the 48 (47.9%) heart samples were abnormal: all showed fiber hypertrophy, while 9 (18.8%) presented fibrosis. Of the liver samples, 29/39 (74.4%) were abnormal, due to steatosis (n = 12, 30.8%), cholestasis (n = 6, 15.4%) and lobular central necrosis (n = 5, 12.8%). Conclusion: Proliferative DAD was the main finding on lung core needle necropsy in people who died from COVID-19; this finding was related to a longer disease course. Changes in the liver and heart were common.

Hospitalized patients with breakthrough COVID-19: Clinical features and poor outcome predictors.

OBJECTIVES: To describe breakthrough COVID-19 infection in patients who needed hospitalization and the factors associated with poor outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between December 27, 2020, and October 17, 2021, with either a complete vaccination (CV) scheme (diagnosed 2 weeks after the second dose of the Pfizer/Moderna/AstraZeneca or first dose of the Janssen vaccine was administered) or a partial vaccination (PV) scheme. The main outcomes were all-cause mortality and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The baseline factors associated with the outcomes were analyzed by multiple logistic regression to estimate the odds ratios (odds ratio [OR]; 95% confidence interval [CI]). RESULTS: A total of 145 (101 CV) patients were included. The CV subgroup was mainly composed of older males with high comorbidity (Charlson Index ≥3, 72%; immunosuppression, 20%) and with bilateral pneumonia in 63.4%. Limited therapeutic effort (LTE) was agreed upon for 28% of the patients. In the CV subgroup, endotracheal intubation was required in 10.9% of patients, reaching 15.3% when excluding LTE patients; the global mortality was 22.8%, reaching 41.4% in the subgroup with LTE. Although the patients with PV were younger and had fewer comorbidities, the main outcomes did not differ significantly between the CV and PV groups. The predictors of poor outcomes were age ≥ 65 years, confusion, ferritin > 500 mg/L, extensive lung infiltrates, and a Charlson Index ≥ 3. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CV hospitalized because of breakthrough COVID-19 infection tend to be older persons, with comorbidities, and have a high mortality.

Nasopharyngeal Microbiota as an early severity biomarker in COVID-19 hospitalised patients.

This study aimed to analyse the diversity and taxonomic composition of the nasopharyngeal microbiota, to determine its association with COVID-19 clinical outcome. To study the microbiota, we utilized 16S rRNA sequencing of 177 samples that came from a retrospective cohort of COVID-19 hospitalized patients. Raw sequences were processed by QIIME2. The associations between microbiota, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and all-cause mortality were analysed by multiple logistic regression, adjusted for age, gender, and comorbidity. The microbiota α diversity indexes were lower in patients with a fatal outcome, whereas the ß diversity analysis showed a significant clustering in these patients. After multivariate adjustment, the presence of Selenomonas spp., Filifactor spp., Actinobacillus spp., or Chroococcidiopsis spp., was associated with a reduction of more than 90% of IMV. Higher diversity and the presence of certain genera in the nasopharyngeal microbiota seem to be early biomarkers of a favourable clinical evolution in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Modelo asistencial ambulatorio de alta resolución COVID-A2R: una solución efectiva en el servicio de urgencias para pacientes con COVID-19 y riesgo de evolución desfavorable

Objective. To evaluate the effectiveness of a care pathway (Spanish acronym, COVID-A2R) through which patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were referred by a hospital emergency department (ED) for fast-track in-person outpatient clinic care if they did not have respiratory insufficiency but were at high risk for complications and poor outcome. Methods. Retrospective cohort of patients referred to the COVID-A2R pathway after being diagnosed with COVID-19 by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assay in a tertiary care hospital ED between January 7 and February 17, 2021. The inclusion criteria were 1) absence of pneumonia but presence of serious comorbidity and/or elevated biomarkers of inflammation, and 2) pneumonia with or without elevated inflammatory markers but without respiratory insufficiency. The main outcome was need for an emergency department revisit with hospital admission and time from ED evaluation to hospitalization. Secondary outcomes were the number of COVID-A2R visits and the potential economic impact. Results. We included 278 patients with a median age of 57 years (57.9% men) and a median Charlson Comorbidity Index of 1. The median time since onset of symptoms was 7 days (interquartile range, 4--11 days). Pneumonia was diagnosed in 71.8%, and 64.7% required only 1 in-person visit in the COVID-A2R pathway. No revisits to the ED were needed by 87.8% (83.4%--91.1%) of the patients. Of the 34 patients who were hospitalized, 88.2% were admitted within 5 days. The COVID-A2R model potentially saved 1708 days of hospitalization. Conclusion. The fast-track ambulatory care model was effective after emergency department discharge of patients with COVID-19 without respiratory insufficiency but with clinical or laboratory indicators of risk for poor outcome. Objetivo. Evaluar la efectividad de un modelo asistencial basado en la derivación desde el servicio de urgencias hospitalarios (SUH) a una consulta presencial precoz de alta resolución (COVID-A2R), para pacientes con infección por SARS-CoV-2 sin insuficiencia respiratoria, pero con factor de riesgo de complicación/deterioro clínico. Método. Cohorte retrospectiva de pacientes remitidos por COVID-19 (RT-PCR) desde el SUH de un hospital terciario a COVID-A2R (7 de enero - 17 de febrero de 2021). Los criterios de inclusión son presencia de alta comorbilidad y elevación de biomarcadores inflamatorios en pacientes sin neumonía, o la presencia de neumonía con elevación de biomarcadores inflamatorios sin insuficiencia respiratoria. La variable de resultado principal fue el no requerimiento de revisita en el SUH con ingreso hospitalario y su distribución temporal. Los objetivos secundarios son la frecuentación en COVID-A2R y el impacto económico potencial. Resultados. Se incluyeron 278 pacientes, edad mediana de 57 años, 57,9% hombres e índice de Charlson de 1. Consultaron en el SUH tras 7 (4-11) días de clínica y un 71,8% de los casos presentaban neumonía. El 64,7% de los pacientes requirió una visita única en COVID-A2R. No se produjo una revisita a urgencias con ingreso en el 87,8% (83,4-91,1) de los pacientes. De los 34 pacientes que ingresaron, el 88,2% lo hizo en menos de 5 días. El ahorro po- tencial del modelo fue de 1.708 días de ingreso hospitalario. Conclusiones. Un modelo asistencial ambulatorio con una consulta de alta resolución tras el alta de urgencias es efec- tivo para pacientes con COVID-19 sin insuficiencia respiratoria con marcadores clínicos o analíticos de evolución desfavorable.

[Valproic Acid Could Help in the Fight Against COVID-19: a case-control study]. / El ácido valproico podría ayudar en la lucha contra el COVID-19: un estudio de casos y controles.

OBJECTIVE: There is early evidence about Valproic acid (VPA) antiviral effect. Our aim was to investigate the incidence and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in VPA users as compared with the general population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A case-control study nested within a cohort, carried out between March 1 and December 17, 2020. Retrospectively, we identified confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection patients exposed to VPA in our health department (defined as case). We ascertained VPA regimen (all the time (AT)(292 days) or at least 20% of the study period (notAT)(≥58 days) and if VPA levels were in therapeutic range (ATR) (50-100 mcg/mL) in the last 24 months. We calculated the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospital admission in the cases, comparing it with the general unexposed VPA population (controls). RESULTS: During the study period, 6183 PCR+ were detected among 281035 inhabitants, of these, 746 were hospitalized. 691 patients were on VPA notAT and 628 (90.1%) AT. The indication for VPA use was epilepsy in 54.9%. The incidence of PCR+ was 1.736 % (OR 0.785 (95%CI 0.443-1.390) and 1.910 % (OR 0.865 (95%CI 0.488-1.533), on VPA notAT and VPA AT patients, respectively vs. 2.201% in people without VPA regimen. Those patients with VPA ATR had a lower risk of PCR + (OR 0.233 (95%CI 0.057-0.951) notAT; OR 0.218 (95%CI 0.053-0.890) AT). Hospital admission incidence was lower in patient on VPA (OR was 0.543 (95% CI 0.076 to 3.871). CONCLUSION: Patients with VPA within the therapeutic range had a reduction of SARS-Cov-2 infection incidence greater than 75%. There is a downward trend in the risk of COVID-19 admission by SARS-CoV-2 in patients on VPA therapy. These findings warrant further investigation.

El ácido valproico podría ayudar en la lucha contra el COVID-19: un estudio de casos y controles Valproic Acid Could Help in the Fight Against COVID-19: a case-control study

Objetivo: Existe evidencia preliminar sobre el efecto antiviral del ácido valproico (VPA). Nuestro objetivo fue investigar la incidencia y la gravedad de la infección por SARS-CoV-2 en usuarios de VPA en comparación con la población general. Material y métodos: Estudio de casos – controles anidado en una cohorte, realizado entre el 1 de marzo y el 17 de diciembre de 2020. De forma retrospectiva, identificamos en nuestro departamento de salud a las personas con infección confirmada por SARS-CoV-2 usuarias de VPA (definido como caso). Comprobamos el régimen de VPA (todo el tiempo (TT) (292 días) o al menos el 20% del período de estudio (no-TT) (≥58 días) y si los niveles de VPA estaban en rango terapéutico (RT) (50-100 mcg / mL) en los últimos 24 meses. Calculamos la incidencia acumulada de infección por SARS-CoV-2 e ingreso en los casos, comparándola con la población general no expuesta a VPA (controles). Resultados: Durante el período de estudio se detectaron 6183 PCR + entre 281 035 habitantes, de estos, 746 fueron hospitalizados. 691 pacientes estaban en VPA no-TT y 628 (90,1%) TT. La indicación para el uso de VPA fue la epilepsia en el 54,9%. La incidencia de PCR + fue 1,736% (OR 0,785 (IC 95% 0,443-1,390) y 1,910% (OR 0,865 (IC 95% 0,488-1,533), en pacientes con VPA no-TT y VPA TT, respectivamente, frente a 2,201% en personas sin indicación de VPA. Los pacientes con VPA en RT tenían un riesgo menor de PCR + (OR 0,233 (IC del 95%: 0,057-0,951) no-TT;OR 0,218 (IC del 95%: 0,053-0,890) TT). La incidencia de ingreso hospitalario fue menor en pacientes con VPA (OR 0,543 (IC del 95%: 0,076 a 3,871). Conclusión: Los pacientes con VPA dentro del rango terapéutico tuvieron una reducción de la incidencia de infección por SARS-Cov-2 superior al 75%. Existe una tendencia a la baja en el riesgo de admisión por COVID-19 por SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes en terapia con VPA. Estos hallazgos justifican una mayor investigación.

[Application of validated severity scores for pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2]. / Aplicación de escalas pronósticas de gravedad en la neumonía por SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVES: Compare the accuracy of PSI, CURB-65, MuLBSTA and COVID-GRAM prognostic scores to predict mortality, the need for invasive mechanical ventilation in patients with pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2 and assess the coexistence of bacterial respiratory tract infection during admission. METHODS: Retrospective observational study that included hospitalized adults with pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2 from 15/03 to 15/05/2020. We excluded immunocompromised patients, nursing home residents and those admitted in the previous 14 days for another reasons. Analysis of ROC curves was performed, calculating the area under the curve for the different scales, as well as sensitivity, specificity and predictive values. RESULTS: A total of 208 patients were enrolled, aged 63±17 years, 57,7% were men; 38 patients were admitted to ICU (23,5%), of these patients 33 required invasive mechanical ventilation (86,8%), with an overall mortality of 12,5%. Area under the ROC curves for mortality of the scores were: PSI 0,82 (95% CI: 0,73-0,91), CURB-65 0,82 (0,73-0,91), MuLBSTA 0,72 (0,62-0,81) and COVID-GRAM 0,86 (0,70-1). Area under the curve for needing invasive mechanical ventilation was: PSI 0,73 (95% CI: 0,64-0,82), CURB-65 0,66 (0,55-0,77), MuLBSTA 0,78 (0,69-0,86) and COVID-GRAM 0,76 (0,67-0,85), respectively. Patients with bacterial co-infections of the respiratory tract were 20 (9,6%), the most frequent strains being Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumoniae. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, the COVID-GRAM score was the most accurate to identify patients with higher mortality with pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2; however, none of these scores accurately predicts the need for invasive mechanical ventilation with ICU admission. The 10% of patients admitted presented bacterial respiratory co-infection.

Palliative Sedation in COVID-19 End-of-Life Care. Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background and Objectives: Descriptions of end-of-life in COVID-19 are limited to small cross-sectional studies. We aimed to assess end-of-life care in inpatients with COVID-19 at Alicante General University Hospital (ALC) and compare differences according to palliative and non-palliative sedation. Material and Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study in inpatients included in the ALC COVID-19 Registry (PCR-RT or antigen-confirmed cases) who died during conventional admission from 1 March to 15 December 2020. We evaluated differences among deceased cases according to administration of palliative sedation. Results: Of 747 patients evaluated, 101 died (13.5%). Sixty-eight (67.3%) died in acute medical wards, and 30 (44.1%) received palliative sedation. The median age of patients with palliative sedation was 85 years; 44% were women, and 30% of cases were nosocomial. Patients with nosocomial acquisition received more palliative sedation than those infected in the community (81.8% [9/11] vs 36.8% [21/57], p = 0.006), and patients admitted with an altered mental state received it less (20% [6/23] vs. 53.3% [24/45], p = 0.032). The median time from admission to starting palliative sedation was 8.5 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3.0-14.5). The main symptoms leading to palliative sedation were dyspnea at rest (90%), pain (60%), and delirium/agitation (36.7%). The median time from palliative sedation to death was 21.8 h (IQR 10.4-41.1). Morphine was used in all palliative sedation perfusions: the main regimen was morphine + hyoscine butyl bromide + midazolam (43.3%). Conclusions: End-of-life palliative sedation in patients with COVID-19 was initiated quite late. Clinicians should anticipate the need for palliative sedation in these patients and recognize the breathlessness, pain, and agitation/delirium that foreshadow death.

Latin American Origin Is Not Associated with Worse Outcomes among Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 in a Public Healthcare System.

Exploring differences in clinical outcomes based on race and origin among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 is a controversial issue. The ALC COVID-19 Registry includes all confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to hospital from 3 March 2020 to 17 December 2020. The data were obtained from electronic health records in order to evaluate the differences in the clinical features and outcomes among European and Latin American patients. The follow-ups occurred after 156 days. A propensity score weighting (PSW) logistic regression model was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR, 95% CI) for Latin American origin and outcome associations. Of the 696 patients included, 46.7% were women, with a median age of 65 (IQR 53-67) years, 614 (88.2%) were European, and 82 (11.8%) were Latin American. Latin American patients were younger, with fewer comorbidities, and a higher incidence of extensive pneumonia. After adjusting for residual confounders, Latin American origin was not associated with an increased risk of death (PSW OR 0.85 (0.23-3.14)) or with the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (PSW OR 0.35 (0.12-1.03)). Latin American origin was associated with a shorter hospital stay, but without differences in how long the patient remained on mechanical ventilation. In a public healthcare system, the rates of death or mechanical ventilation in severe COVID-19 cases were found to be comparable between patients of European and Latin American origins.

Clinical Frailty Score vs Hospital Frailty Risk Score for predicting mortality and other adverse outcome in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: Spanish case series.

OBJECTIVES: Frailty can be used as a predictor of adverse outcomes in people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of the study was to analyse the prognostic value of two different frailty scores in patients hospitalised for COVID-19. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult (≥18 years) inpatients with COVID-19 and took place from 3 March to 2 May 2020. Patients were categorised by Clinical Frailty Score (CFS) and Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and secondary outcomes were tocilizumab treatment, length of hospital stay, admission in intensive care unit (ICU) and need for invasive mechanical ventilation. Results were analysed by multivariable logistic regression and expressed as odds ratios (ORs), adjusting for age, sex, kidney function and comorbidity. RESULTS: Of the 290 included patients, 54 were frail according to the CFS (≥5 points; prevalence 18.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.4-23.7) vs 65 by HFRS (≥5 points; prevalence: 22.4%, 95% CI 17.8-27.7). Prevalence of frailty increased with age according to both measures: 50-64 years, CFS 1.9% vs HFRS 12.3%; 65-79 years, CFS 31.5% vs HFRS 40.0%; and ≥80 years, CFS 66.7% vs HFRS 40.0% (P < .001). CFS-defined frailty was independently associated with risk of death (OR 3.67, 95% CI 1.49-9.04) and less treatment with tocilizumab (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08-0.93). HFRS-defined frailty was independently associated with length of hospital stay over 10 days (OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.53-5.44), ICU admission (OR 4.18, 95% CI 1.84-9.52) and invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 5.93, 95% CI 2.33-15.10). CONCLUSION: In the spring 2020 wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain, CFS-defined frailty was an independent predictor for death, while frailty as measured by the HFRS was associated with length of hospital stay over 10 days, ICU admission and use of invasive mechanical ventilation.

Application of validated severity scores for pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVES: Compare the accuracy of PSI, CURB-65, MuLBSTA and COVID-GRAM prognostic scores to predict mortality, the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in patients with pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2 and assess the coexistence of bacterial respiratory tract infection during admission. METHODS: Retrospective observational study that included hospitalized adults with pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2 from 15/03 to 15/05/2020. We excluded immunocompromised patients, nursing home residents and those admitted in the previous 14 days for another reasons. Analysis of ROC curves was performed, calculating the area under the curve for the different scales, as well as sensitivity, specificity and predictive values. RESULTS: 208 patients were enrolled, aged 63 ± 17 years, 577% were men. 38 patients were admitted to ICU (235%), of these patients 33 required IMV (868%), with an overall mortality of 125%. Area under the ROC curves for mortality of the scores were: PSI 082 (95% CI 073-091), CURB-65 082 (073-091), MuLBSTA 072 (062-081) and COVID-GRAM 086 (070-1). Area under the curve for needing IMV was: PSI 073 (95% CI 064-082), CURB-65 066 (055-077), MuLBSTA 078 (069-086) and COVID-GRAM 076 (067-085), respectively. Patients with bacterial co-infections of the respiratory tract were 20 (9,6%), the most frequent strains being Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumoniae. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, the COVID-GRAM score was the most accurate to identify patients with higher mortality with pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2; however, none of these scores accurately predicts the need for IMV with ICU admission. 10% of patients admitted presented bacterial respiratory co-infection.

OBJETIVOS: Comparar el rendimiento de las escalas pronósticas PSI, CURB-65, MuLBSTA y COVID-GRAM para predecir mortalidad y necesidad de ventilación mecánica invasiva (VMI) en pacientes con neumonía por SARS-CoV-2. Valorar la existencia de coinfección bacteriana respiratoria durante el ingreso. MÉTODO: Estudio observacional retrospectivo que incluyó adultos hospitalizados con neumonía por SARS-CoV-2 del 15/03 al 15/05/2020. Se excluyeron aquellos inmunodeprimidos, institucionalizados e ingresados en los 14 días previos por otro motivo. Se realizó un análisis de curvas ROC, calculando el área bajo la curva para las diferentes escalas, así como sensibilidad, especificidad y valores predictivos. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 208 pacientes, con edad de 63 ± 17 años; el 57,7% eran hombres. Ingresaron en UCI 38 (23,5%), precisando de estos VMI 33 (86,8%), con una mortalidad global del 12,5%. Las áreas bajo las curvas ROC para mortalidad de los scores fueron: PSI 0,82 (95% IC 0,73­0,91), CURB-65 0,82 (0,73­0,91), MuLBSTA 0,72 (0,62­0,81) y COVID-GRAM 0,86 (0,70­1). Las áreas para necesidad de VMI fueron: PSI 0,73 (95% IC 0,64­0,82), CURB-65 0,66 (0,55­0,77), MuLBSTA 0,78 (0,69­0,86) y COVID-GRAM 0,76 (0,67­0,85), respectivamente. Los pacientes que presentaron coinfección bacteriana respiratoria fueron 20 (9.6%) siendo los gérmenes más frecuentes Pseudomonas aeruginosa y Klebsiella pneumoniae. CONCLUSIONES: En nuestro estudio el score COVID-GRAM fue el más preciso para identificar los pacientes con mayor mortalidad ingresados con neumonía por SARS-CoV-2, no obstante, ninguno de estos scores predice de forma precisa la necesidad de VMI con ingreso en UCI. El 10% de los pacientes presentó coinfección bacteriana respiratoria.