Effect of High-Risk Obstructive Sleep Apnea on Clinical Outcomes in Adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Clinical Trial.

Rationale: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an ongoing pandemic, in which obesity, hypertension, and diabetes have been linked to poor outcomes. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with these conditions and may influence the prognosis of adults with COVID-19. Objectives: To determine the effect of OSA on clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Methods: The current prospective observational study was conducted in three hospitals in Istanbul, Turkey from March 10 to June 22, 2020. The participants were categorized as high-risk or low-risk OSA according to the Berlin questionnaire that was administered in the out-patient clinic, in hospital, or shortly after discharge from hospital blinded to the clinical outcomes. A modified high-risk (mHR)-OSA score based on the snoring patterns (intensity and/or frequency), breathing pauses, and morning/daytime sleepiness, without taking obesity and hypertension into account, were used in the regression models. Results: The primary outcome was the clinical improvement defined as a decline of two categories from admission on a 7-category ordinal scale that ranges from 1 (discharged with normal activity) to 7 (death) on Days 7, 14, 21, and 28, respectively. Secondary outcomes included clinical worsening (an increase of 1 category), need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, and intensive care. In total, 320 eligible patients (median [interquartile range] age, 53.2 [41.3-63.0] yr; 45.9% female) were enrolled. In all, 121 (37.8%) were categorized as known (n = 3) or high-risk OSA (n = 118). According to the modified scoring, 70 (21.9%) had mHR-OSA. Among 242 patients requiring hospitalization, clinical improvement within 2 weeks occurred in 75.4% of the mHR-OSA group compared with 88.4% of the modified low-risk-OSA group (P = 0.014). In multivariate regression analyses, mHR-OSA (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19-0.92) and male sex (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.17-0.86) predicted the delayed clinical improvement. In the entire study population (n = 320), including the nonhospitalized patients, mHR-OSA was associated with clinical worsening (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.00-2.39) and with the need for supplemental oxygen (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.06-3.59). Snoring patterns, especially louder snoring, significantly predicted delayed clinical improvement, worsening, need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, and intensive care. Conclusions: Adults with mHR-OSA in our COVID-19 cohort had poorer clinical outcomes than those with modified low-risk OSA independent of age, sex, and comorbidities. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04363333).

COVID-19 Pneumonia and Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: A Novel Combination.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a game changer in many aspects of clinical practice. Acute exacerbations of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) are known as serious events, which can reach a mortality rate of 50%, where viral infections may play a role. We describe the case of a 64-year-old male patient with a diagnosis of IPF under antifibrotic treatment for 1 year; the patient tested positive for COVID-19 with polymerase chain reaction test of the nasopharyngeal swab, and his chest computed tomography results were compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia described in the literature as well as the findings compatible with interstitial lung disease. The patient was successfully treated in the pulmonology ward according to official guidelines about COVID-19 along with antifibrotic treatment and required only a short course of oxygen therapy. We experienced no drug interactions, serious side effects, or complications during treatment. The patient was discharged after 1 week, and he is still in a good condition after 3 weeks. COVID-19 pneumonia in a patient with IPF who survived under antifibrotic treatment without serious deterioration is a new experience. Such cases will probably change our perspective in treating patients with IPF.

Bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic: A survey study.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the attitudes and behaviors of physicians performing bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Between March 2020 and May 2020, a total of 153 physicians were included in the study. An invitation letter for the participation in the study with a structured questionnaire of 18 questions were sent to the mail groups twice with five-day intervals. Participation in the study was allowed, until the third day after the second mail was sent. RESULTS: All participants completed the questionnaire. According to the results, 33% of the physicians did not perform bronchoscopy and the majority of the physicians performed very few procedures during the outbreak, although the participants mostly worked at the tertiary hospitals (mean: 7.2±9.3). A total of 20% of the physicians performed bronchoscopy in potential or proven COVID-19 patients. Almost all of the physicians who participated in the survey reported the use of personal protective equipment such as masks and goggles during the procedure. During the pandemic, 9.7% of the physicians who performed bronchoscopy to potential or proven COVID-19 patients and 4.1% of the participants who did not perform bronchoscopy to any potential or proven COVID-19 patients were found to be infected with the virus (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Physicians who perform bronchoscopy during pandemic act in accordance with the recommendations of guidelines. Although there was no statistically significant difference between the SARS-CoV-2 transmission rates of the teams who performed and did not perform bronchoscopy in potential or proven COVID-19 patients in our study, the high rate of personal protective equipment utilization might have played a role in this result.

Appropriate use of tocilizumab in COVID-19 infection.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the effectiveness and optimum use of tocilizumab (TCZ) treatment by the support of clinical, laboratory and radiologic observations. METHODS: All patients were followed up in the hospital with daily interleukin-6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, d-dimer, full blood count, and procalcitonin. Thoracic computed tomography (CT) was performed on admission, when oxygen support was necessary, and seven days after TCZ started. Disease course of the patients was grouped as severe or critical, according to their clinical, laboratory and radiologic evaluations. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were included: 70% were male; the median age was 64 years (minimum-maximum: 27-94); and six (14%) patients died. The median duration of oxygen support before the onset of TCZ was shorter among the severe patient group than the critical patient group (1 vs. 4 days, p < 0.001). Three cases of 21 (14%) who received TCZ in the ward were transferred to ICU, and none of them died. The levels of IL-6, CRP, ferritin, d-dimer, and procalcitonin were significantly lower in the severe cases group than the critical cases group (p = 0.025, p = 0.002, p = 0.008, p = 0.002, and p = 0.001, respectively). Radiological improvement was observed in severe cases on the seventh day of TCZ. Secondary bacterial infection was detected in 41% of critical cases, but none of the severe ones. CONCLUSION: Earlier use of TCZ in COVID-19 infection was beneficial for survival, length of hospitalization and duration of oxygen support. The recommendation for administration of TCZ was based on an increase in requirement of oxygen support, progression in thoracic CT, and elevation of inflammation markers, including IL-6, CRP, ferritin, and d-dimer, and decrease in % lymphocytes.