Choice of respiratory therapy for COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a retrospective case series study.

Background: In the treatment of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) due to coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), physicians choose respiratory management ranging from low-flow oxygen therapy to more invasive methods, depending on the severity of the patient's symptoms. Recently, the ratio of oxygen saturation (ROX) index has been proposed as a clinical indicator to support the decision for either high-flow nasal cannulation (HFNC) or mechanical ventilation (MV). However, the reported cut-off value of the ROX index ranges widely from 2.7 to 5.9. The objective of this study was to identify indices to achieve empirical physician decisions for MV initiation, providing insights to shorten the delay from HFNC to MV. We retrospectively analyzed the ROX index 6 hours after initiating HFNC and lung infiltration volume (LIV) calculated from chest computed tomography (CT) images in COVID-19 patients with AHRF. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data for 59 COVID-19 patients with AHRF in our facility to determine the cut-off value of the ROX index for respiratory therapeutic decisions and the significance of radiological evaluation of pneumonia severity. The physicians chose either HFNC or MV, and the outcomes were retrospectively analyzed using the ROX index for initiating HFNC. LIV was calculated using chest CT images at admission. Results: Among the 59 patients who required high-flow oxygen therapy with HFNC at admission, 24 were later transitioned to MV; the remaining 35 patients recovered. Four of the 24 patients in the MV group died, and the ROX index values of these patients were 9.8, 7.3, 5.4, and 3.0, respectively. These index values indicated that the ROX index of half of the patients who died was higher than the reported cut-off values of the ROX index, which range from 2.7-5.99. The cut-off value of the ROX index 6 hours after the start of HFNC, which was used to classify the management of HFNC or MV as a physician's clinical decision, was approximately 6.1. The LIV cut-off value on chest CT between HFNC and MV was 35.5%. Using both the ROX index and LIV, the cut-off classifying HFNC or MV was obtained using the equation, LIV = 4.26 × (ROX index) + 7.89. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, as an evaluation metric of the classification, improved to 0.94 with a sensitivity of 0.79 and specificity of 0.91 using both the ROX index and LIV. Conclusion: Physicians' empirical decisions associated with the choice of respiratory therapy for HFNC oxygen therapy or MV can be supported by the combination of the ROX index and the LIV index calculated from chest CT images.

Adverse reactions to the first and second doses of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers.

INTRODUCTION: In the current coronavirus infection 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the messenger RNA vaccines have been shown to help protect high-risk groups from COVID-19. Among healthcare workers vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, a survey was conducted to analyze the relationship between the incidence and severity of adverse reactions after vaccination. METHODS: We conducted a prospective self-reported survey of adverse reactions among healthcare workers vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (Comirnaty®) in Japan. After the first and second dose of vaccine, local and systemic reactions for 8 days after vaccination were reported by volunteer participants using a website. After receiving vaccination, 374 respondents participated in this matched-pair study. RESULTS: Both the incidence and severity of adverse reactions tended to be higher after the second vaccine dose than after the first dose. However, the incidence and numeric rating scale (NRS) score of muscle and skin pain were nearly the same after the first and second doses. In a comparison by sex, women had significantly higher incidence and NRS scores for adverse reactions such as headache, skin pain, erythema, and itching. The results also showed that younger age groups had higher incidence rates and NRS scores for all adverse reactions investigated, except for muscle pain, compared with older age groups. CONCLUSION: Some adverse reactions to the Pfizer-BioNTech Comirnaty® COVID-19 vaccine showed gender and age differences. However, generally speaking, all side reactions disappear within a week. Therefore, these side reactions are not a significant concern in recommending vaccination.

Impact of untreated diabetes and COVID-19-related diabetes on severe COVID-19.

Diabetes is a common comorbidity in patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and contributes significantly to COVID-19 severity. We aimed to investigate the association between diabetic status and severe COVID-19. This prospective study included all COVID-19 patients admitted to our hospital, who were divided into four groups according to their diabetic status: no diabetes, treated diabetes, untreated diabetes, and COVID-19-related diabetes. Severe COVID-19 was defined as a condition that required the use of a ventilator. Of the 114 patients included in this study, 26 had severe COVID-19. The adjusted odds ratio (OR; 95% confidence interval [CI]) for severe COVID-19 was significantly higher in the treated diabetes, untreated diabetes, and COVID-19-related diabetes groups than in the no diabetes group (OR: 5.9, 95% CI [1.2-27.9]; OR 12.6, 95% CI [1.8-86.4]; and OR: 9.3, 95% [1.1-81.4], respectively). Findings from this study showed that the risk of severe COVID-19 was increased in treated diabetes, untreated diabetes, and COVID-19-related diabetes compared to no diabetes. Furthermore, the OR for severe COVID-19 was greater in untreated diabetes and COVID-19-related diabetes than in treated diabetes.