Characteristics and Outcomes by Ceiling of Care of Subjects Hospitalized with COVID-19 During Four Waves of the Pandemic in a Metropolitan Area: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: The profiles of patients with COVID-19 have been widely studied, but little is known about differences in baseline characteristics and in outcomes between subjects with a ceiling of care assigned at hospital admission and subjects without a ceiling of care. The aim of this study is to compare, by ceiling of care, clinical features and outcomes of hospitalized subjects during four waves of COVID-19 in a metropolitan area in Catalonia. METHODS: Observational study conducted during the first (March-April 2020), second (October-November 2020), third (January-February 2021), and fourth wave (July-August 2021) of COVID-19 in five centers of Catalonia. All subjects were adults (> 18 years old) hospitalized with a proven SARS-CoV-2 infection and with therapeutic ceiling of care assessed by the attending physician at hospital admission. RESULTS: A total of 5813 subjects were analyzed. Subjects with a ceiling of care were mainly older (difference in median age of 20 years), with more comorbidities (Charlson index 3 points higher) and with fewer clinical signs at baseline than patients without a ceiling of care. Some features of their clinical profiles changed among waves. There were differences in treatments received during hospital admission across waves, but not between subjects with and without a ceiling of care. Subjects with a ceiling of care had a death incidence more than four times the death incidence of subjects a without a ceiling of care (risk ratio (RR) ranging from 3.5 in the first wave to almost 6 in the third and fourth). Incidence of severe pneumonia and complications for subjects with a ceiling of care was around 1.5 times the incidence in subjects without a ceiling of care. DISCUSSION: Analysis of hospitalized subjects with SARS-CoV-2 infection should be stratified according to therapeutic ceiling of care to avoid bias and outcome misestimation.

Persistent COVID-19 symptoms 1 year after hospital discharge: A prospective multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the health status and exercise capacity of COVID-19 survivors one year after hospital discharge. METHODS: This multicenter prospective study included COVID-19 survivors 12 months after hospital discharge. Participants were randomly selected from a large cohort of COVID-19 patients who had been hospitalized until 15th April 2020. They were interviewed about persistent symptoms, underwent a physical examination, chest X-ray, and a 6-minute walk test (6MWT). A multivariate analysis was performed to determine the risk factors for persistent dyspnea. RESULTS: Of the 150 patients included, 58% were male and the median age was 63 (IQR 54-72) years. About 82% reported ≥1 symptoms and 45% had not recovered their physical health. The multivariate regression analysis revealed that the female sex, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and smoking were independent risk factors for persistent dyspnea. Approximately 50% completed less than 80% of the theoretical distance on the 6MWT. Only 14% had an abnormal X-ray, showing mainly interstitial infiltrates. A third of them had been followed up in outpatient clinics and 6% had undergone physical rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: Despite the high rate of survivors of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic with persistent symptomatology at 12 months, the follow-up and rehabilitation of these patients has been really poor. Studies focusing on the role of smoking in the persistence of COVID-19 symptoms are lacking.

Use of failure-to-rescue after emergency surgery as a dynamic indicator of hospital resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. A multicenter retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Surgical failure-to-rescue (FTR, death rate following complications) is a reliable cross-sectional quality of care marker, but has not been evaluated dynamically. We aimed to study changes in FTR following emergency surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Matched cohort study including all COVID-19-non-infected adult patients undergoing emergency general surgery in 25 Spanish hospitals during COVID-19 pandemic peak (March-April 2020), non-peak (May-June 2020), and 2019 control periods. A propensity score-matched comparative analysis was conducted using a logistic regression model, in which period was regressed on observed baseline characteristics. Subsequently, a mixed effects logistic regression model was constructed for each variable of interest. Main variable was FTR. Secondary variables were post-operative complications, readmissions, reinterventions, and length of stay. RESULTS: 5003 patients were included (948, 1108, and 2947 in the pandemic peak, non-peak, and control periods), with comparable clinical characteristics, prognostic scores, complications, reintervention, rehospitalization rates, and length of stay across periods. FTR was greater during the pandemic peak than during non-peak and pre-pandemic periods (22.5% vs. 17.2% and 12.7%), being this difference confirmed in adjusted analysis (odds ratio [OR] 2.13, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.27-3.66). There was sensible inter-hospital variability in FTR changes during the pandemic peak (median FTR change +8.77%, IQR 0-29.17%) not observed during the pandemic non-peak period (median FTR change 0%, IQR -6.01-6.72%). Greater FTR increase was associated with higher COVID-19 incidence (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.31-4.16) and some hospital characteristics, including tertiary level (OR 3.07, 95% CI 1.27-8.00), medium-volume (OR 2.79, 95% CI 1.14-7.34), and high basal-adjusted complication risk (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.07-4.72). CONCLUSION: FTR following emergency surgery experienced a heterogeneous increase during different periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting it to behave as an indicator of hospital resilience. FTR monitoring could facilitate identification of centres in special needs during ongoing health care challenges.

P-POSSUM as mortality predictor in COVID-19-infected patients submitted to emergency digestive surgery. A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 infection is associated with a higher mortality rate in surgical patients, but surgical risk scores have not been validated in the emergency setting. We aimed to study the capacity for postoperative mortality prediction of the P-POSSUM score in COVID-19-positive patients submitted to emergency general and digestive surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing emergency general and digestive surgery from March to June 2020, and from March to June 2019 in 25 Spanish hospitals were included in a retrospective cohort study. MAIN OUTCOME: 30-day mortality. P-POSSUM discrimination was quantified by the area under the curve (AUC) of ROC curves; calibration was assessed by linear regression slope (ß estimator); and sensitivity and specificity were expressed as percentage and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: 4988 patients were included: 177 COVID-19-positive; 2011 intra-pandemic COVID-19-negative; and 2800 pre-pandemic. COVID-19-positive patients were older, with higher surgical risk, more advanced pathologies, and higher P-POSSUM values (1.79% vs. 1.09%, p < 0.001, in both the COVID-19-negative and control cohort). 30-day mortality in the COVID-19-positive, intra-pandemic COVID-19-negative and pre-pandemic cohorts were: 12.9%, 4.6%, and 3.2%. The P-POSSUM predictive values in the three cohorts were, respectively: AUC 0.88 (95% CI 0.81-0.95), 0.89 (95% CI 0.87-0.92), and 0.91 (95% CI 0.88-0.93); ß value 0.97 (95% CI 0.74-1.2), 0.99 (95% CI 0.82-1.16), and 0.78 (95% CI 0.74-0.82); sensitivity 83% (95% CI 61-95), 91% (95% CI 84-96), and 89% (95% CI 80-94); and specificity 81% (95% CI 74-87), 76% (95% CI 74-78), and 80% (95% CI 79-82). CONCLUSION: The P-POSSUM score showed a good predictive capacity for postoperative mortality in COVID-19-positive patients submitted to emergency general and digestive surgery.

Long-term impact of COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the health status, exercise capacity, and health related quality of life (HRQoL) of COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) survivors, 8 months after diagnosis. METHODS: All eligible patients were interviewed and underwent a physical examination, chest X-ray, and 6 min walk test (6MWT). Scales to evaluate post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety, and HRQoL were applied. RESULTS: Of 1295 patients, 365 suffered ARDS and 166 survived to hospital discharge. Five died after discharge and 48 were lost to follow-up. Of the 113 remaining patients, 81% had persistent symptoms. More than 50% of patients completed less than 80% of the theoretical distance on the 6MWT, 50% had an abnormal X-ray and 93% of patients developed psychiatric disorders. Mean SF-36 scores were worse than in the general population. After multivariate regression analysis, female sex, non-Caucasian race, and Charlson index>2 were independent risk factors for a worse mental health component summary score on the SF-36, and age was associated with a better prognosis. Female sex and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were independently associated with a worse physical component summary score. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 associated ARDS survivors have long-term consequences in health status, exercise capacity, and HRQoL. Strategies addressed to prevent these sequelae are needed.

Multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase IV-III study to evaluate the efficacy of cloxacillin plus fosfomycin versus cloxacillin alone in adult patients with methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: study protocol for the SAFO trial.

INTRODUCTION: Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bacteraemia is a frequent condition, with high mortality rates. There is a growing interest in identifying new therapeutic regimens able to reduce therapeutic failure and mortality observed with the standard of care of beta-lactam monotherapy. In vitro and small-scale studies have found synergy between cloxacillin and fosfomycin against S. aureus. Our aim is to test the hypothesis that cloxacillin plus fosfomycin achieves higher treatment success than cloxacillin alone in patients with MSSA bacteraemia. METHODS: We will perform a superiority, randomised, open-label, phase IV-III, two-armed parallel group (1:1) clinical trial at 20 Spanish tertiary hospitals. Adults (≥18 years) with isolation of MSSA from at least one blood culture ≤72 hours before inclusion with evidence of infection, will be randomly allocated to receive either cloxacillin 2 g/4-hour intravenous plus fosfomycin 3 g/6-hour intravenous or cloxacillin 2 g/4-hour intravenous alone for 7 days. After the first week, sequential treatment and total duration of antibiotic therapy will be determined according to clinical criteria by the attending physician.Primary endpoints: (1) Treatment success at day 7, a composite endpoint comprising all the following criteria: patient alive, stable or with improved quick-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, afebrile and with negative blood cultures for MSSA at day 7. (2) Treatment success at test of cure (TOC) visit: patient alive and no isolation of MSSA in blood culture or at another sterile site from day 8 until TOC (12 weeks after randomisation).We assume a rate of treatment success of 74% in the cloxacillin group. Accepting alpha risk of 0.05 and beta risk of 0.2 in a two-sided test, 183 subjects will be required in each of the control and experimental groups to obtain statistically significant difference of 12% (considered clinically significant). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Ethics Committee of Bellvitge University Hospital (AC069/18) and from the Spanish Medicines and Healthcare Product Regulatory Agency (AEMPS, AC069/18), and is valid for all participating centres under existing Spanish legislation. The results will be presented at international meetings and will be made available to patients and funders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The protocol has been approved by AEMPS with the Trial Registration Number EudraCT 2018-001207-37. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03959345; Pre-results.

Immunomodulatory therapy, risk factors and outcomes of hospital-acquired bloodstream infection in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia: a Spanish case-control matched multicentre study (BACTCOVID).

OBJECTIVES: The effect of the use of immunomodulatory drugs on the risk of developing hospital-acquired bloodstream infection (BSI) in patients with COVID-19 has not been specifically assessed. We aim to identify risk factors for, and outcomes of, BSI among hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: We performed a severity matched case-control study (1:1 ratio) nested in a large multicentre prospective cohort of hospitalized adults with COVID-19. Cases with BSI were identified from the cohort database. Controls were matched for age, sex and acute respiratory distress syndrome. A Cox proportional hazard ratio model was performed. RESULTS: Of 2005 patients, 100 (4.98%) presented 142 episodes of BSI, mainly caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci, Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Polymicrobial infection accounted for 23 episodes. The median time from admission to the first episode of BSI was 15 days (IQR 9-20), and the most frequent source was catheter-related infection. The characteristics of patients with and without BSI were similar, including the use of tocilizumab, corticosteroids, and combinations. In the multivariate analysis, the use of these immunomodulatory drugs was not associated with an increased risk of BSI. A Cox proportional hazard ratio (HR) model showed that after adjusting for the time factor, BSI was associated with a higher in-hospital mortality risk (HR 2.59; 1.65-4.07; p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Hospital-acquired BSI in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia was uncommon and the use of immunomodulatory drugs was not associated with its development. When adjusting for the time factor, BSI was associated with a higher mortality risk.