Clinical Characteristics Associated with Bacterial Bloodstream Coinfection in COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Inappropriate antibiotic use in COVID-19 is often due to treatment of presumed bacterial coinfection. Predictive factors to distinguish COVID-19 from COVID-19 with bacterial coinfection or bloodstream infection are limited. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 595 COVID-19 patients admitted between March 8, 2020, and April 4, 2020, to describe factors associated with a bacterial bloodstream coinfection (BSI). The primary outcome was any characteristic associated with BSI in COVID-19, with secondary outcomes including 30-day mortality and days of antibiotic therapy (DOT) by antibiotic consumption (DOT/1000 patient-days). Variables of interest were compared between true BSI (n = 25) and all other COVID-19 cases (n = 570). A secondary comparison was performed between positive blood cultures with true BSI (n = 25) and contaminants (n = 33) on antibiotic use. RESULTS: Fever (> 38 °C) (as a COVID-19 symptom) was not different between true BSI (n = 25) and all other COVID-19 patients (n = 570) (p = 0.93), although it was different as a reason for emergency department (ED) admission (p = 0.01). Neurological symptoms (ED reason or COVID-19 symptom) were significantly higher in the true BSI group (p < 0.01, p < 0.01) and were independently associated with true BSI (ED reason: OR = 3.27, p < 0.01; COVID-19 symptom: OR = 2.69, p = 0.03) on multivariate logistic regression. High (15-19.9 × 109/L) white blood cell (WBC) count at admission was also higher in the true BSI group (p < 0.01) and was independently associated with true BSI (OR = 2.56, p = 0.06) though was not statistically significant. Thirty-day mortality was higher among true BSI (p < 0.01). Antibiotic consumption (DOT/1000 patient-days) between true BSI and contaminants was not different (p = 0.34). True bloodstream coinfection was 4.2% (25/595) over the 28-day period. CONCLUSION: True BSI in COVID-19 was associated with neurological symptoms and nonsignificant higher WBC, and led to overall higher 30-day mortality and worse patient outcomes.

COVID-19: Before the Fall, An Evidence-Based Narrative Review of Treatment Options.

The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has quickly become one of the most dire international pandemic crises since the 1918 Spanish flu. Evidence for COVID-19 pharmacological therapies has shown rapid growth and a diverse array of results, but an assessment of the value of each piece of evidence must be reinforced. This article aims to review utilized therapies, the evidence level supporting these therapies, as well as drugs under investigation for the treatment of COVID-19. Primary scrutinized therapies include antiviral regimens, such as remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, immunomodulating drugs, such as corticosteroids and interleukin (IL) inhibitors, and other therapies including convalescent plasma. Only one therapy, dexamethasone, has shown a mortality benefit in randomized controlled trials and summarized evidence for other therapies show limited positive results. Reviewing these therapies in a historical way shows how limited evidence can drive therapy decisions. A broad summary of available evidence can assist clinicians in a return to hierarchical assessments of evidence which can lead to safer patient outcomes, improved distribution of resources, and better targets for appropriate therapy decisions.