Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
N Engl J Med ; 385(9): 777-789, 2021 Aug 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1343497

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Thrombosis and inflammation may contribute to morbidity and mortality among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). We hypothesized that therapeutic-dose anticoagulation would improve outcomes in critically ill patients with Covid-19. METHODS: In an open-label, adaptive, multiplatform, randomized clinical trial, critically ill patients with severe Covid-19 were randomly assigned to a pragmatically defined regimen of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in accordance with local usual care. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 among patients who survived to hospital discharge. RESULTS: The trial was stopped when the prespecified criterion for futility was met for therapeutic-dose anticoagulation. Data on the primary outcome were available for 1098 patients (534 assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and 564 assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis). The median value for organ support-free days was 1 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and was 4 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) among the patients assigned to usual-care thromboprophylaxis (adjusted proportional odds ratio, 0.83; 95% credible interval, 0.67 to 1.03; posterior probability of futility [defined as an odds ratio <1.2], 99.9%). The percentage of patients who survived to hospital discharge was similar in the two groups (62.7% and 64.5%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 0.84; 95% credible interval, 0.64 to 1.11). Major bleeding occurred in 3.8% of the patients assigned to therapeutic-dose anticoagulation and in 2.3% of those assigned to usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with Covid-19, an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin did not result in a greater probability of survival to hospital discharge or a greater number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support than did usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. (REMAP-CAP, ACTIV-4a, and ATTACC ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, and NCT04372589.).


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , COVID-19/drug therapy , Heparin/administration & dosage , Thrombosis/prevention & control , Aged , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , COVID-19/mortality , Critical Illness , Female , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Heparin/adverse effects , Heparin/therapeutic use , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Respiration, Artificial , Treatment Failure
2.
Am J Health Syst Pharm ; 77(19): 1598-1605, 2020 09 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1317904

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To describe our medical center's pharmacy services preparedness process and offer guidance to assist other institutions in preparing for surges of critically ill patients such as those experienced during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. SUMMARY: The leadership of a department of pharmacy at an urban medical center in the US epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic proactively created a pharmacy action plan in anticipation of a surge in admissions of critically ill patients with COVID-19. It was essential to create guidance documents outlining workflow, provide comprehensive staff education, and repurpose non-intensive care unit (ICU)-trained clinical pharmacotherapy specialists to work in ICUs. Teamwork was crucial to ensure staff safety, develop complete scheduling, maintain adequate drug inventory and sterile compounding, optimize the electronic health record and automated dispensing cabinets to help ensure appropriate prescribing and effective management of medication supplies, and streamline the pharmacy workflow to ensure that all patients received pharmacotherapeutic regimens in a timely fashion. CONCLUSION: Each hospital should view the COVID-19 crisis as an opportunity to internally review and enhance workflow processes, initiatives that can continue even after the resolution of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Medication Therapy Management/organization & administration , Pharmacy Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Academic Medical Centers/organization & administration , Academic Medical Centers/standards , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitals, Urban/organization & administration , Hospitals, Urban/standards , Humans , Leadership , New York/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/organization & administration , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/standards , Pharmacists/organization & administration , Pharmacy Service, Hospital/standards , Tertiary Care Centers/organization & administration , Tertiary Care Centers/standards , Workflow , Workforce/organization & administration , Workforce/standards
3.
Am J Health Syst Pharm ; 77(18): 1510-1515, 2020 09 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1317902

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To describe our hospital pharmacy department's preparation for an influx of critically ill patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and offer guidance on clinical pharmacy services preparedness for similar crisis situations. SUMMARY: Personnel within the department of pharmacy at a medical center at the US epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic proactively prepared a staffing and pharmacotherapeutic action plan in anticipation of an expected surge in admissions of critically ill patients with COVID-19 and expansion of acute care and intensive care unit (ICU) capacity. Guidance documents focusing on supportive care and pharmacotherapeutic treatment options were developed. Repurposing of non-ICU-trained clinical pharmacotherapy specialists to work collaboratively with clinician teams in ICUs was quickly implemented; staff were prepared for these duties through use of shared tools to facilitate education and practice standardization. CONCLUSION: As challenges were encountered at the initial peak of the pandemic, interdisciplinary collaboration and teamwork was crucial to ensure that all patients were proactively assessed and that their respective pharmacotherapeutic regimens were optimized.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Medication Therapy Management/standards , Pharmacists/organization & administration , Pharmacy Service, Hospital/standards , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Care/organization & administration , Critical Care/standards , Critical Illness , Disaster Planning/organization & administration , Disaster Planning/standards , Emergencies , Humans , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Intensive Care Units/standards , Medication Therapy Management/organization & administration , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Care Team/organization & administration , Patient Care Team/standards , Pharmacy Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Professional Role , Workforce/organization & administration , Workforce/standards
4.
J Med Microbiol ; 69(10): 1228-1234, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-767039

ABSTRACT

Introduction. COVID-19 has rapidly emerged as a pandemic infection that has caused significant mortality and economic losses. Potential therapies and prophylaxis against COVID-19 are urgently needed to combat this novel infection. As a result of in vitro evidence suggesting zinc sulphate may be efficacious against COVID-19, our hospitals began using zinc sulphate as add-on therapy to hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin.Aim. To compare outcomes among hospitalized COVID-19 patients ordered to receive hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin plus zinc sulphate versus hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin alone.Methodology. This was a retrospective observational study. Data was collected from medical records for all patients with admission dates ranging from 2 March 2020 through to 11 April 2020. Initial clinical characteristics on presentation, medications given during the hospitalization, and hospital outcomes were recorded. The study included patients admitted to any of four acute care NYU Langone Health Hospitals in New York City. Patients included were admitted to the hospital with at least one positive COVID-19 test and had completed their hospitalization. Patients were excluded from the study if they were never admitted to the hospital or if there was an order for other investigational therapies for COVID-19.Results. Patients taking zinc sulphate in addition to hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin (n=411) and patients taking hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin alone (n=521) did not differ in age, race, sex, tobacco use or relevant comorbidities. The addition of zinc sulphate did not impact the length of hospitalization, duration of ventilation or intensive care unit (ICU) duration. In univariate analyses, zinc sulphate increased the frequency of patients being discharged home, and decreased the need for ventilation, admission to the ICU and mortality or transfer to hospice for patients who were never admitted to the ICU. After adjusting for the time at which zinc sulphate was added to our protocol, an increased frequency of being discharged home (OR 1.53, 95 % CI 1.12-2.09) and reduction in mortality or transfer to hospice among patients who did not require ICU level of care remained significant (OR 0.449, 95 % CI 0.271-0.744).Conclusion. This study provides the first in vivo evidence that zinc sulphate may play a role in therapeutic management for COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Zinc Sulfate/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/drug effects , COVID-19 , Cell Membrane Permeability/drug effects , Drug Therapy, Combination , Hospitalization , Humans , Ionophores/therapeutic use , Length of Stay , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol ; 40(10): 2539-2547, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-729442

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of D-dimer elevation in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalization, trajectory of D-dimer levels during hospitalization, and its association with clinical outcomes. Approach and Results: Consecutive adults admitted to a large New York City hospital system with a positive polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) between March 1, 2020 and April 8, 2020 were identified. Elevated D-dimer was defined by the laboratory-specific upper limit of normal (>230 ng/mL). Outcomes included critical illness (intensive care, mechanical ventilation, discharge to hospice, or death), thrombotic events, acute kidney injury, and death during admission. Among 2377 adults hospitalized with COVID-19 and ≥1 D-dimer measurement, 1823 (76%) had elevated D-dimer at presentation. Patients with elevated presenting baseline D-dimer were more likely than those with normal D-dimer to have critical illness (43.9% versus 18.5%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.4 [95% CI, 1.9-3.1]; P<0.001), any thrombotic event (19.4% versus 10.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.4-2.6]; P<0.001), acute kidney injury (42.4% versus 19.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.4 [95% CI, 1.9-3.1]; P<0.001), and death (29.9% versus 10.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.6-2.9]; P<0.001). Rates of adverse events increased with the magnitude of D-dimer elevation; individuals with presenting D-dimer >2000 ng/mL had the highest risk of critical illness (66%), thrombotic event (37.8%), acute kidney injury (58.3%), and death (47%). CONCLUSIONS: Abnormal D-dimer was frequently observed at admission with COVID-19 and was associated with higher incidence of critical illness, thrombotic events, acute kidney injury, and death. The optimal management of patients with elevated D-dimer in COVID-19 requires further study.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Disease Progression , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/metabolism , Hospital Mortality/trends , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Adult , Aged , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19 , Cause of Death , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Databases, Factual , Female , Hospitals, Urban , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , New York City/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Prevalence , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/blood , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/mortality , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/physiopathology , Severity of Illness Index
6.
Crit Care Med ; 48(9): 1319-1326, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-632425

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The rate of thromboembolic events among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 is high; however, there is no robust method to identify those at greatest risk. We reviewed thromboelastography studies in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 to characterize their coagulation states. DESIGN: Retrospective. SETTING: Tertiary ICU in New York City. PATIENTS: Sixty-four patients with coronavirus disease 2019 admitted to the ICU with thromboelastography performed. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Fifty percent of patients had a clotting index in the hypercoagulable range (clotting index > 3) (median 3.05). Reaction time and K values were below the lower limit of normal in 43.8% of the population consistent with a hypercoagulable profile. The median α angle and maximum amplitude (75.8° and 72.8 mm, respectively) were in the hypercoagulable range. The α angle was above reference range in 70.3% of patients indicative of rapid clot formation. Maximum amplitude, a factor of fibrinogen and platelet count and function, and a measure of clot strength was above reference range in 60.1% of patients. Thirty-one percent had thromboembolic events; thromboelastography parameters did not correlate with events in our cohort. Those with D-dimer values greater than 2,000 were more likely to have shorter reaction times compared with those with D-dimer levels less than or equal to 2,000 (4.8 vs 5.6 min; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 have hypercoagulable thromboelastography profiles with additional derangements related to fibrinogen and platelet function. As the majority of patients have an elevated thromboelastography maximum amplitude, a follow-up study evaluating platelet aggregation would be instructive.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Thrombelastography , Thrombophilia/etiology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Critical Illness , Female , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysis , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Reference Values , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombophilia/diagnosis , Thrombosis/etiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL