Efficacy of Sildenafil in Patients with Severe COVID-19 and Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension.

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is common in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and worsens the prognosis. Sildenafil, a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor, is approved for PAH treatment but little is known about its efficacy in cases of severe COVID-19 with PAH. This study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy of sildenafil in patients with severe COVID-19 and PAH. Intensive care unit (ICU) patients were randomly assigned to receive sildenafil or a placebo, with 75 participants in each group. Sildenafil was administered orally at 0.25 mg/kg t.i.d. for one week in a placebo-controlled, double-blind manner as an add-on therapy alongside the patient's routine treatment. The primary endpoint was one-week mortality, and the secondary endpoints were the one-week intubation rate and duration of ICU stay. The mortality rate was 4% vs. 13.3% (p = 0.078), the intubation rate was 8% and 18.7% (p = 0.09), and the length of ICU stay was 15 vs. 19 days (p < 0.001) for the sildenafil and placebo groups, respectively. If adjusted for PAH, sildenafil treatment significantly reduced mortality and intubation risks: OR = 0.21 (95% CI: 0.05-0.89) and OR = 0.26 (95% CI: 0.08-0.86), respectively. Sildenafil demonstrated some clinical efficacy in patients with severe COVID-19 and PAH and should be considered as an add-on therapy in these patients.

Retrospective Analysis of the Effectiveness of Remdesivir in COVID-19 Treatment during Periods Dominated by Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 Variants in Clinical Settings.

Continuous evaluation of real-world treatment effectiveness of COVID-19 medicines is required due to the ongoing evolution of SARS-CoV-2 and the possible emergence of resistance. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze, in a retrospective manner, the outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during the pandemic waves dominated by Delta and Omicron variants and treated with remdesivir (RDV) (n = 762) in comparison to a demographically and clinically matched group not treated with any antivirals (n = 1060). A logistic regression analysis revealed that RDV treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of death during both Delta wave (OR = 0.42, 95%CI: 0.29-0.60; p < 0.0001) and Omicron-dominated period (OR = 0.56, 95%CI: 0.35-0.92; p = 0.02). Moreover, RDV-treated groups were characterized by a lower percentage of patients requiring mechanical ventilation, but the difference was not statistically significant. This study is the first real-world evidence that RDV remains effective during the dominance of more pathogenic SARS-CoV-2 variants and those that cause a milder course of the disease, and continues to be an essential element of COVID-19 therapy.

Variability in the Clinical Course of COVID-19 in a Retrospective Analysis of a Large Real-World Database.

The COVID-19 pandemic proceeds in waves, with variable characteristics of the clinical picture resulting from the evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This study aimed to compare the epidemiological characteristics, symptomatology, and outcomes of the disease in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during periods of different variants dominance. Comparing the periods of dominance of variants preceding the Delta variant, the Delta period was characterized by a higher share of hospitalized females, less frequent comorbidities among patients, and a different age distribution. The lowest need for oxygen therapy and mechanical ventilation was observed under Omicron dominance. The triad of classic COVID-19 symptoms, cough, fever, dyspnoea, and fatigue, were most prevalent during the Delta period, and significantly less common under the Omicron dominance. During the Omicron period, nearly twice as many patients as in the previous periods could be discharged from the hospital within 7 days; the overall 28-day mortality was significantly lower compared to that of the Delta period. It also did not differ between periods that were dominated by the BA.1 and BA.2 subvariants. The study indicates that the Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant that dominated between January and June 2022 caused a disease which resembled the common cold, and was caused by seasonal alpha and beta-coronaviruses with a low pathogenicity for humans. However, one should note that this effect may not only have been related to biological features of the Omicron lineage, but may additionally have been driven by the increased levels of immunization through natural infections and vaccinations, for which we could not account for due to a lack of sufficient data.

The association of airborne particulate matter and benzo[a]pyrene with the clinical course of COVID-19 in patients hospitalized in Poland.

Air pollution can adversely affect the immune response and increase the severity of the viral disease. The present study aimed to explore the relationship between symptomatology, clinical course, and inflammation markers of adult patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalized in Poland (n = 4432) and air pollution levels, i.e., mean 24 h and max 24 h level of benzo(a)pyrene (B(a)P) and particulate matter <10 µm (PM10) and <2.5 µm (PM2.5) during a week before their hospitalization. Exposures to PM2.5 and B(a)P exceeding the limits were associated with higher odds of early respiratory symptoms of COVID-19 and hyperinflammatory state: interleukin-6 > 100 pg/mL, procalcitonin >0.25 ng/mL, and white blood cells count >11 × 103/mL. Except for the mean 24 h PM10 level, the exceedance of other air pollution parameters was associated with increased odds for oxygen saturation <90%. Exposure to elevated PM2.5 and B(a)P levels increased the odds of oxygen therapy and death. This study evidences that worse air quality is related to increased severity of COVID-19 and worse outcome in hospitalized patients. Mitigating air pollution shall be an integral part of measures undertaken to decrease the disease burden during a pandemic of viral respiratory illness.

The Course of COVID-19 in Patients with Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases.

Patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD) have increased susceptibility to viral infections, including SARS-CoV-2. The aim of this study was to analyse the SARD patient population with COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) in terms of baseline characteristics, severity, course and outcomes of the disease compared with the non-SARD group, and to identify factors associated with prognosis, including remdesivir therapy efficacy. Retrospective study comprised 8220 COVID-19 cases from the SARSTer database, including 185 with SARD. Length of hospitalisation, duration of oxygen therapy, mortality and the need for HFNO (high-flow nasal oxygen) and/or NIV (noninvasive ventilation) were significantly higher in the SARD versus non-SARD group. There was no difference in clinical features on admission to hospital. Patients with SARD were older and more likely to have cardiovascular, pulmonary and chronic kidney diseases. Age, the presence of cardiovascular disease, more severe conditions on admission and higher inflammatory marker values were found to be risk factors for death in the SARD group. In patients with SARD treated with remdesivir, there was a trend towards improved mortality but without statistical significance. Length of hospitalisation, 28-day mortality and the need for HFNO and/or NIV were higher in the SARD group. These patients often had other chronic diseases and were older.

Remdesivir Decreases Mortality in COVID-19 Patients with Active Malignancy.

Data on the use of remdesivir, the first antiviral agent against SARS-CoV-2, are limited in oncologic patients. We aimed to analyze contributing factors for mortality in patients with malignancies in the real-world CSOVID-19 study. In total, 222 patients with active oncological disorders were selected from a nationwide COVID-19 study of 4890 subjects. The main endpoint of the current study was the 28-day in-hospital mortality. Approximately half of the patients were male, and the majority had multimorbidity (69.8%), with a median age of 70 years. Baseline SpO2 < 85% was observed in 25%. Overall, 59 (26.6%) patients died before day 28 of hospitalization: 29% due to hematological, and 20% due to other forms of cancers. The only factor increasing the odds of death in the multivariable model was eGFR < 60 mL/min/m2 (4.621, p = 0.02), whereas SpO2 decreased the odds of death at baseline (0.479 per 5%, p = 0.002) and the use of remdesivir (0.425, p = 0.03). This study shows that patients with COVID-19 and malignancy benefit from early remdesivir therapy, resulting in a decrease in early mortality by 80%. The prognosis was worsened by low glomerular filtration rate and low peripheral oxygen saturation at baseline underlying the role of kidney protection and early hospitalization.

Real-world experience with molnupiravir during the period of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant dominance.

BACKGROUND: The real-world effectiveness of molnupiravir (MOL) during the dominance of Omicron SARS-CoV-2 lineage is urgently needed since the available data relate to the period of circulation of other viral variants. Therefore, this study assessed the efficacy of MOL in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in a real-world clinical practice during the wave of Omicron infections. METHODS: Among 11,822 patients hospitalized after 1 March 2020 and included in the SARSTer national database, 590 were treated between 1 January and 30 April 2022, a period of dominance of the Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant. MOL was administered to 203 patients, whereas 387 did not receive any antiviral regimen. Both groups were similar in terms of sex, BMI and age allowing for direct comparisons. RESULTS: Patients who did not receive antiviral therapy significantly more often required the use of Dexamethasone and Baricitinib. Treatment with MOL resulted in a statistically significant reduction in mortality during the 28-day follow-up (9.9 vs. 16.3%), which was particularly evident in the population of patients over 80 years of age treated in the first 5 days of the disease (14.6 vs. 35.2%). MOL therapy did not affect the frequency of the need for mechanical ventilation, but patients treated with MOL required oxygen supplementation less frequently than those without antivirals (31.7 vs. 49.2%). The time of hospitalization did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of molnupiravir in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during the dominance of Omicron variant reduced mortality. This effect is particularly evident in patients over 80 years of age.

EASIX, Modified EASIX and Simplified EASIX as an Early Predictor for Intensive Care Unit Admission and Mortality in Severe COVID-19 Patients.

COVID-19 receives a lot of attention due to its threat to global public health. Research is ongoing to find universal methods to assess the baseline health status of a patient to determine prognosis and management strategies. This study aims to assess the predictive potential of the EASIX (Endothelial Activation and Stress Index) and two of its modifications (mEASIX and sEASIX) in terms of the need for admission to the ICU (intensive care unit), the use of IMV (invasive mechanical ventilation) and death due to COVID-19. The medical data of 370 severely ill patients hospitalised in the COVID-19 departments of the Regional Specialist Hospital in Wroclaw (Poland), including the ICU, were analysed retrospectively. The mortality rate in the group studied was 65.7% (243 cases). In the case of all three indices, EASIX, mEASIX and sEASIX, there was a statistically significant correlation between the need for admission to the ICU (p = 0.026, p = 0.019, p = 0.001, respectively) and the risk of death (p < 0.001). In terms of the risk of death, the high values of the assessed indices (EASIX ≥ 2.36, mEASIX ≥ 704.03, sEASIX ≥ 3.81) were characterised by low sensitivity (≤40%), high specificity (approximately 90%) and low NPV (negative predictive value) (approximately 40%) with high PPV (positive predictive value) (approximately 80%). Due to the ease of implementation and the low cost of performing basic laboratory tests, the above-mentioned indices can be used as an additional, but not universal tool for the initial assessment of the health condition of patients admitted to the hospital.

Inflammatory and thrombotic parameters associated with the COVID-19 course in Poland (SARSTer study).

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to assess the coagulation and inflammatory markers connected with severe course of COVID-19 and no clinical improvement. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study population included 2590 adult patients, diagnosed with COVID-19, selected from the SARSTer national database - an ongoing project led by the Polish Association of Epidemiologists and Infectiologists and supported by the Medical Research Agency. Clinical and laboratory parameters, such as C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cells (WBCs), neutrophil and lymphocyte count, procalcitonin, ferritin, interleukin-6 (IL-6), D-dimer concentration and platelet (PLT) count were analyzed before and after treatment (remdesivir, tocilizumab, dexamethasone, anticoagulants). RESULTS: Significant differences between patients with mild and severe course of the disease were observed in all examined parameters before treatment (p â€‹< â€‹0.05). After treatment only ferritin concentration did not differ significantly. In patients with pulmonary embolism, CRP concentration, neutrophil count, D-dimer and IL-6 concentration were significantly higher than in patients without embolism (p â€‹< â€‹0.05). The significant differences between the groups with and without fatal outcome were observed within all analyzed parameters. Significant differences in all examined parameters before treatment were observed between patients with and without clinical improvement (p â€‹< â€‹0.05). Multivariate logistic regression showed that no clinical improvement was associated with: IL-6>100 â€‹pg/ml (OR-2.14), D-dimer concentration over 1000 â€‹ng/ml (OR-1.62) and PLT count below 150,000/µl (OR-1.57). CONCLUSIONS: Severe course of the disease is associated with lower PLT and lymphocyte count, higher D-dimer, CRP, neutrophil count and IL-6 concentration. The best predictors of no clinical improvement in COVID-19 are: IL-6>100 â€‹pg/ml, D-dimer>1000 â€‹ng/ml and PLT<150,000/µl.

Lack of Difference in Tocilizumab Efficacy in the Treatment of Severe COVID-19 Caused by Different SARS-CoV-2 Variants.

Tocilizumab (TOC) is presumed to be an effective and safe treatment for severe COVID-19, but its usefulness has not been yet investigated for different SARS-CoV-2 variants. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of TOC on mortality in patients with severe COVID-19 caused by Delta and non-Delta SARS-CoV-2 variants. In a retrospective analysis, we compared the medical records of 78 and 224 patients with severe COVID-19 due to Delta and non-Delta variants, respectively. A total of 30 patients with Delta and 84 with non-Delta variants were treated with TOC in addition to standard therapy. There were no statistically significant differences in mortality rate when comparing Delta vs. non-Delta patients nor when comparing those treated with TOC vs. not treated with TOC in both variants. Using a logistic regression model, in the examined population as a whole, we found an increased (p < 0.05) risk of death as leukocyte and erythrocyte counts decreased and as procalcitonin increased. Increased procalcitonin was significant for mortality in the Delta group, while decreased IL-6, leukocytes, and platelets and increased fibrinogen and procalcitonin were significant in the non-Delta group. Tocilizumab efficacy in severe COVID-19 does not differ between Delta or non-Delta virus variants. The Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 does not increase mortality when compared to other virus strains.

EASIX, Modified EASIX and Simplified EASIX as an Early Predictor for Intensive Care Unit Admission and Mortality in Severe COVID-19 Patients

COVID-19 receives a lot of attention due to its threat to global public health. Research is ongoing to find universal methods to assess the baseline health status of a patient to determine prognosis and management strategies. This study aims to assess the predictive potential of the EASIX (Endothelial Activation and Stress Index) and two of its modifications (mEASIX and sEASIX) in terms of the need for admission to the ICU (intensive care unit), the use of IMV (invasive mechanical ventilation) and death due to COVID-19. The medical data of 370 severely ill patients hospitalised in the COVID-19 departments of the Regional Specialist Hospital in Wroclaw (Poland), including the ICU, were analysed retrospectively. The mortality rate in the group studied was 65.7% (243 cases). In the case of all three indices, EASIX, mEASIX and sEASIX, there was a statistically significant correlation between the need for admission to the ICU (p = 0.026, p = 0.019, p = 0.001, respectively) and the risk of death (p < 0.001). In terms of the risk of death, the high values of the assessed indices (EASIX ≥2.36, mEASIX ≥704.03, sEASIX ≥3.81) were characterised by low sensitivity (≤40%), high specificity (approximately 90%) and low NPV (negative predictive value) (approximately 40%) with high PPV (positive predictive value) (approximately 80%). Due to the ease of implementation and the low cost of performing basic laboratory tests, the above-mentioned indices can be used as an additional, but not universal tool for the initial assessment of the health condition of patients admitted to the hospital.

Does Hospitalization Change the Perception of COVID-19 Vaccines among Unvaccinated Patients?

The COVID-19 vaccination has been the subject of unprecedented misinformation, false news, and public concerns. This study presents a unique analysis comprising persons who were not vaccinated and became ill. It investigates reasons for not vaccinating and evaluates how the personal experience of COVID-19 affected further attitudes and decisions related to health. The study included 730 consecutive unvaccinated patients hospitalized in 12 centers in Poland during the autumn 2021 pandemic wave. The most frequent reason behind the refusal to receive the vaccine was concern over the adverse effects, disbelief that the vaccine was sufficiently tested, and one's conviction that COVID-19 will not affect a patient. Online information, friends, spouse, children/grandchildren, and other family members were most often the source of discouragement from vaccination. Most individuals regretted their decision not to receive a vaccine (66.0%), declared to promote COVID-19 vaccination after discharge (64.0%), and to receive a COVID-19 vaccine in the time recommended for convalescents (69.5%). Individuals expressing no regrets of vaccine refusal more frequently revealed conspiracy beliefs. The study shows that personal experience with severe COVID-19 can influence the perception of vaccination, but approximately one-third of unvaccinated hospitalized patients still appear to express vaccine hesitancy.

SARS-CoV-2 Viral RNA Is Detected in the Bone Marrow in Post-Mortem Samples Using RT-LAMP.

Since the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in late 2019, viral RNA has been detected in several different human tissues and organs. This study reports the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the bone marrow. Post-mortem samples were taken in a sterile manner during two forensic autopsies from the nasopharyngeal region, vitreous humor, cerebrospinal fluid, and bone marrow. SARS-CoV-2 was subsequently diagnosed via Genomtec® SARS-CoV-2 EvaGreen® RT-LAMP CE-IVD Duo Kit. In both postmortem patients, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in bone marrow samples. However, both the vitreous humor and cerebrospinal fluid from the same patients gave negative results using the same test system. The evidence of viral RNA in the bone marrow, along with other reports supports the thesis that SARS-CoV-2 infections are systemic in nature, the consequences of which would profoundly influence both the testing and survival of patients.

Demographic and Clinical Overview of Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients during the First 17 Months of the Pandemic in Poland.

Long-term analyses of demographical and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 patients can provide a better overview of the clinical course of the disease. They can also help understand whether changes in infection symptomatology, disease severity, and outcome occur over time. We aimed to analyze the demographics, early symptoms of infection, laboratory parameters, and clinical manifestation of COVID-19 patients hospitalized during the first 17 months of the pandemic in Poland (March 2020-June 2021). The patients' demographical and clinical data (n = 5199) were extracted from the national SARSTer database encompassing 30 medical centers in Poland and statistically assessed. Patients aged 50-64 were most commonly hospitalized due to COVID-19 regardless of the pandemic period. There was no shift in the age of admitted patients and patients who died throughout the studied period. Men had higher C-reactive protein and interleukin-6 levels and required oxygenation and mechanical ventilation more often. No gender difference in fatality rate was seen, although the age of males who died was significantly lower. A share of patients with baseline SpO2 < 91%, presenting respiratory, systemic and gastrointestinal symptoms was higher in the later phase of a pandemic than in the first three months. Cough, dyspnea and fever were more often presented in men, while women had a higher frequency of anosmia, diarrhea, nausea and vomiting. This study shows some shifts in SARS-CoV-2 pathogenicity between March 2020 and July 2021 in the Polish cohort of hospitalized patients and documents various gender-differences in this regard. The results represent a reference point for further analyses conducted under the dominance of different SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Tocilizumab Improves the Prognosis of COVID-19 in Patients with High IL-6.

Despite direct viral effect, the pathogenesis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) includes an overproduction of cytokines including interleukin 6 (IL-6). Therefore, tocilizumab (TOC), a monoclonal antibody against IL-6 receptors, was considered as a possible therapeutic option. Patients were selected from the SARSTer database, containing 2332 individuals with COVID-19. Current study included 825 adult patients with moderate to severe course. Analysis was performed in 170 patients treated with TOC and 655 with an alternative medication. The end-points of treatment effectiveness were death rate, need for mechanical ventilation, and clinical improvement. Patients treated with TOC were balanced compared to non-TOC regarding gender, age, BMI, and prevalence of coexisting conditions. Significant effect of TOC on death was demonstrated in patients with baseline IL-6 > 100 pg/mL (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08-0.57). The best effectiveness of TOC was achieved in patients with a combination of baseline IL-6 > 100 pg/mL and either SpO2 ≤ 90% (HR: 0.07) or requiring oxygen supplementation (HR: 0.18). Tocilizumab administration in COVID-19 reduces mortality and speeds up clinical improvement in patients with a baseline concentration of IL-6 > 100 pg/mL, particularly if they need oxygen supplementation owing to the lower value of SpO2 ≤ 90%.

When Conventional Oxygen Therapy Fails-The Effectiveness of High-Flow Nasal Oxygen Therapy in Patients with Respiratory Failure in the Course of COVID-19.

High-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is recommended as a first-line treatment in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19. We assessed the effectiveness of HFNO and predictors of failure and death. The medical records of 200 consecutive adult patients treated with HFNO were analysed. Ninety-two patients (46%) were successfully cured, 52 (26%) required noninvasive ventilation, and 61 (30.5%) received intubation. Overall mortality was 40.5%. Risk factors of HFNO ineffectiveness were: SpO2 ≤ 90% with conventional oxygen therapy (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.19-0.53, p < 0.001), SpO2 ≤ 74% without oxygen therapy (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27-0.71, p < 0.001), an age ≥ 60, comorbidities, biomarkers (C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, creatinine, lactate dehydrogenase), duration of symptoms before admission to hospital ≤ 9 days, start of treatment with HFNO ≤ 4 days. The multivariate logistic regression models (age ≥ 60, comorbidities, C-reactive protein concentration and SpO2 with oxygen therapy) revealed a high predictive value of death and HFNO failure (AUC 0.851, sensitivity 0.780, specificity 0.802; AUC 0.800, sensitivity 0.776, specificity 0.739, respectively). HFNO is a safe method for treating acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, with effectiveness reaching nearly 50%. Low values of SpO2 without and during oxygen therapy seem to be good diagnostic tools for predicting death and HFNO failure.

Comparison of the Effect of Unfractionated Heparin and Enoxaparin Sodium at Different Doses on the Course of COVID-19-Associated Coagulopathy.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19-associated coagulopathy (CAC) exacerbates the course of coronavirus infection and contributes to increased mortality. Current recommendations for CAC treatment include the use of low-molecular weight heparins (LMWH) at prophylactic or therapeutic doses, as well as the use of unfractionated heparin (UFH). METHODS: A randomised, controlled trial enrolled 126 patients hospitalised in the intensive care unit with severe COVID-19 complicated by CAC. The effects of LMWH at preventive and therapeutic doses and UFH at therapeutic doses on mortality and intubation rates were compared. RESULTS: The number of intubations and deaths showed no significant difference depending on the anticoagulant therapy used. However, multivariate logistic regression models revealed an increased risk of intubation (p = 0.026, odds ratio (OR) = 3.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-9.59), and an increased risk of death (p = 0.046, OR = 3.01, 95% CI 1.02-8.90), for patients treated with LMWH at a prophylactic dose but not at a therapeutic dose as compared to patients treated with UFH when controlling for other risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The use of unfractionated heparin in the treatment of COVID-19-associated coagulopathy seems to be more effective at reducing the risk of intubation and death than enoxaparin at prophylactic doses.

The chest radiographic scoring system in initial diagnosis of COVID-19: Is a radiologist needed?

BACKGROUND: Lung imaging, next to a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test, is a key diagnostic tool in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The degree of abnormalities correlates with clinical outcome. Imaging of the lungs using chest radiography (CXR) at the peak of a pandemic is considered a basic diagnostic tool at the triage stage. The CXR images are less characteristic than computed tomography (CT) and should be interpreted with a combination of clinical findings. OBJECTIVES: Comparison of the usefulness of 2 CXR severity scores to evaluate the presence/severity of inflammation in the course of COVID-19 and the possibility of a non-radiologist to interpret the image independently. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of the medical records of 152 consecutive patients (aged 19-96, 73 men), infected with SARS-CoV-2, confirmed using real-time PCR (RT-PCR). Five-point and twelve-point CXR severity scoring systems were used (independently by a radiologist and a referring physician) to assess the severity of inflammation. RESULTS: In 77 of 152 cases, the CXR revealed features of inflammation. Bilateral abnormalities were found in 48/77 (62.3%) cases. Statistically, the lower lobes were involved more often than the upper ones (p < 0.001) and the left lobe more often than the right one (p < 0.001). The intensity of the abnormalities using both scales correlated with the persistence of symptoms (p = 0.0133 and p = 0.0403). A positive and statistically significant correlation was found between both scales and dyspnea, decreased oxygen saturation, elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, D-dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, and alanine aminotransferase activity. The interobserver agreement analysis did not show a statistically significant difference in the CXR severity score using the five-point (B = 0.8345, kappa = 0.82; p = 0.1480) or the twelve-point scale (B = 0.8219, kappa = 0.77; p = 0.0502). CONCLUSIONS: The CXR severity score is a useful tool to assess the inflammation in the initial diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Quantifying lung abnormalities accurately may be performed by a referring physician. Both CXR severity scales correlate well with clinical parameters.

Effectiveness of Tocilizumab with and without Dexamethasone in Patients with Severe COVID-19: A Retrospective Study.

PURPOSE: The pathogenesis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is complicated, and in addition to antiviral therapy and combating coagulopathy, treatment should also include inhibition of the proinflammatory cytokines overproduction. The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of tocilizumab (TCZ) and dexamethasone (DEX) administered alone or in combination in patients with severe COVID-19. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were selected from the SARSTer database, containing 3330 individuals with COVID-19 treated between 1 March 2020 and 10 March 2021. The current study included adult patients with baseline oxygen saturation (SpO2) ≤90%, requiring regular or non-invasive high-flow oxygen supplementation. RESULTS: Among included 460 patients, 59 were treated with TCZ, 125 with TCZ and DEX, 169 with DEX, and 107 did not receive TCZ nor DEX. The groups were balanced regarding demographics, coexisting diseases, baseline SpO2, and comedications with remdesivir or low-molecular-weight heparin. The death rate of 6.8% was significantly lower in patients receiving TCZ alone than each arm (19.6%-23.1%), particularly in patients with interleukin-6 concentration exceeding 100pg/mL (5% vs 22.9%-51.7%, respectively). Analysis of clinical improvement demonstrated doubled, significantly higher rate after 21 and 28 days in patients treated with TCZ alone (60% and 75%, respectively) compared to DEX (27.6% and 37.9%, respectively). The need for mechanical ventilation was similar in all arms. CONCLUSION: In patients with severe course of COVID-19, particularly those developing cytokine storm, administration of TCZ provides a significantly better effect than DEX regarding survival, clinical improvement, and hospital discharge rate. The combination of TCZ and DEX does not improve therapy effectiveness in patients with severe COVID-19 compared to the administration of TCZ alone.