ABSTRACT
Background and aims: HDL particles may act to buffer host cells from excessive inflammatory mediators. The aim of this study is to investigate if the lipid profile provides a prognostic biomarker for COVID-19 outcomes. Methods: This was a prospective study of the characteristics of 125 adult COVID-19 patients with a lipid profile performed on the day of admission analyzed with regard to clinical outcomes. Results: Seventy-seven patients (61.2%) were men, with a mean age of 66.3 (15.6) years. 54.1% had bilateral pneumonia. The all-cause mortality rate during hospitalization was 20.8%. We found a direct association between more severe disease assessed by the WHO classification, admission to the ICU and death with more pronounced lymphopenia, higher levels of CRP, ferritin (p < 0.001), D-dímer and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) all statistically significant. Lower leves of HDL-c and LDL-c were also associated with a worse WHO classification, ICU admission, and death,. HDL-c levels were inversely correlated with inflammatory markers CRP (r = -0.333; p < 0.001), ferritin (r = -0.354; p < 0.001), D-dímer (r = -0.214; p < 0.001), LDH (r = -0.209; p < 0.001. LDL-c levels were significantly associated with CRP (r = -0.320; p < 0.001) and LDH (r = -0.269; p < 0.001). ROC curves showed that HDL [AUC = 0.737(0.586-0.887), p = 0.005] and lymphocytes [AUC = 0.672(0.497-0.847], p < 0.043] had the best prognostic accuracy to predict death. In a multivariate analysis, HDL-c (ß = -0.146(0.770-0.971), p = 0.014) and urea (ß = 0.029(1.003-1.057), p = 0.027) predicted mortality. Conclusion: Hypolipidemia including HDL levels at admission identifies patients with a higher risk of death and worse clinical manifestations who may require more intensive care.
ABSTRACT
Many countries have seen a two-wave pattern in reported cases of coronavirus disease-19 during the 2020 pandemic, with a first wave during spring followed by the current second wave in late summer and autumn. Empirical data show that the characteristics of the effects of the virus do vary between the two periods. Differences in age range and severity of the disease have been reported, although the comparative characteristics of the two waves still remain largely unknown. Those characteristics are compared in this study using data from two equal periods of 3 and a half months. The first period, between 15th March and 30th June, corresponding to the entire first wave, and the second, between 1st July and 15th October, corresponding to part of the second wave, still present at the time of writing this article. Two hundred and four patients were hospitalized during the first period, and 264 during the second period. Patients in the second wave were younger and the duration of hospitalization and case fatality rate were lower than those in the first wave. In the second wave, there were more children, and pregnant and post-partum women. The most frequent signs and symptoms in both waves were fever, dyspnea, pneumonia, and cough, and the most relevant comorbidities were cardiovascular diseases, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and chronic neurological diseases. Patients from the second wave more frequently presented renal and gastrointestinal symptoms, were more often treated with non-invasive mechanical ventilation and corticoids, and less often with invasive mechanical ventilation, conventional oxygen therapy and anticoagulants. Several differences in mortality risk factors were also observed. These results might help to understand the characteristics of the second wave and the behaviour and danger of SARS-CoV-2 in the Mediterranean area and in Western Europe. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings.