Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 8: 633539, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1266656

ABSTRACT

Background: Lung injury is a common condition among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, whether lung ultrasound (LUS) score predicts all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 is unknown. The aim of the present study was to explore the predictive value of lung ultrasound score for mortality in patients with COVID-19. Methods: Patients with COVID-19 who underwent lung ultrasound were prospectively enrolled from three hospitals in Wuhan, China between February 2020 and March 2020. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected from digital patient records. Lung ultrasound scores were analyzed offline by two observers. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Results: Of the 402 patients, 318 (79.1%) had abnormal lung ultrasound. Compared with survivors (n = 360), non-survivors (n = 42) presented with more B2 lines, pleural line abnormalities, pulmonary consolidation, and pleural effusion (all p < 0.05). Moreover, non-survivors had higher global and anterolateral lung ultrasound score than survivors. In the receiver operating characteristic analysis, areas under the curve were 0.936 and 0.913 for global and anterolateral lung ultrasound score, respectively. A cutoff value of 15 for global lung ultrasound score had a sensitivity of 92.9% and specificity of 85.3%, and 9 for anterolateral score had a sensitivity of 88.1% and specificity of 83.3% for prediction of death. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that both global and anterolateral scores were strong predictors of death (both p < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that global lung ultrasound score was an independent predictor (hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.16; p = 0.03) of death together with age, male sex, C-reactive protein, and creatine kinase-myocardial band. Conclusion: Lung ultrasound score as a semiquantitative tool can be easily measured by bedside lung ultrasound. It is a powerful predictor of in-hospital mortality and may play a crucial role in risk stratification of patients with COVID-19.

2.
Hypertension ; 77(6): 2014-2022, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1221676

ABSTRACT

Presence of heart failure is associated with a poor prognosis in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of the present study was to examine whether first-phase ejection fraction (EF1), the ejection fraction measured in early systole up to the time of peak aortic velocity, a sensitive measure of preclinical heart failure, is associated with survival in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. A retrospective outcome study was performed in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who underwent echocardiography (n=380) at the West Branch of the Union Hospital, Wuhan, China and in patients admitted to King's Health Partners in South London, United Kingdom. Association of EF1 with survival was performed using Cox proportional hazards regression. EF1 was compared in patients with COVID-19 and in historical controls with similar comorbidities (n=266) who had undergone echocardiography before the COVID-19 pandemic. In patients with COVID-19, EF1 was a strong predictor of survival in each patient group (Wuhan and London). In the combined group, EF1 was a stronger predictor of survival than other clinical, laboratory, and echocardiographic characteristics including age, comorbidities, and biochemical markers. A cutoff value of 25% for EF1 gave a hazard ratio of 5.23 ([95% CI, 2.85-9.60]; P<0.001) unadjusted and 4.83 ([95% CI, 2.35-9.95], P<0.001) when adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, hs-cTnI (high-sensitive cardiac troponin), and CRP (C-reactive protein). EF1 was similar in patients with and without COVID-19 (23.2±7.3 versus 22.0±7.6%, P=0.092, adjusted for prevalence of risk factors and comorbidities). Impaired EF1 is strongly associated with mortality in COVID-19 and probably reflects preexisting, preclinical heart failure.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Echocardiography , Heart Failure , Stroke Volume , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , China/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Echocardiography/methods , Echocardiography/statistics & numerical data , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Predictive Value of Tests , Prevalence , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Survival Analysis , United Kingdom/epidemiology
3.
Crit Care ; 24(1): 700, 2020 12 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-992530

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Bedside lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a useful and non-invasive tool to detect lung involvement and monitor changes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical significance of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19. METHOD: The LUS protocol consisted of 12 scanning zones and was performed in 280 consecutive patients with COVID-19. The LUS score based on B-lines, lung consolidation and pleural line abnormalities was evaluated. RESULTS: The median time from admission to LUS examinations was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3-10). Patients in the highest LUS score group were more likely to have a lower lymphocyte percentage (LYM%); higher levels of D-dimer, C-reactive protein, hypersensitive troponin I and creatine kinase muscle-brain; more invasive mechanical ventilation therapy; higher incidence of ARDS; and higher mortality than patients in the lowest LUS score group. After a median follow-up of 14 days [IQR, 10-20 days], 37 patients developed ARDS, and 13 died. Patients with adverse outcomes presented a higher rate of bilateral involvement; more involved zones and B-lines, pleural line abnormalities and consolidation; and a higher LUS score than event-free survivors. The Cox models adding the LUS score as a continuous variable (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.05, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.02 ~ 1.08; P < 0.001; Akaike information criterion [AIC] = 272; C-index = 0.903) or as a categorical variable (HR 10.76, 95% CI 2.75 ~ 42.05; P = 0.001; AIC = 272; C-index = 0.902) were found to predict poor outcomes more accurately than the basic model (AIC = 286; C-index = 0.866). An LUS score cut-off > 12 predicted adverse outcomes with a specificity and sensitivity of 90.5% and 91.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The LUS score devised by our group performs well at predicting adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and is important for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Point-of-Care Systems , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Ultrasonography/methods , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Time-to-Treatment , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL