Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Biomedicines ; 9(12)2021 Dec 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1785519

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The wide availability of monoclonal antibodies for the add-on therapy of severe asthma currently allows for the personalization of biologic treatment by selecting the most appropriate drug for each patient. However, subjects with overlapping allergic and eosinophilic phenotypes can be often eligible to more than one biologic, so that the first pharmacologic choice can be quite challenging for clinicians. Within such a context, the aim of our real-life investigation was to verify whether allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, not adequately controlled by an initial biologic treatment with omalizumab, could experience better therapeutic results from a pharmacologic shift to benralizumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, unsuccessfully treated with omalizumab and then switched to benralizumab, were assessed for at least 1 year in order to detect eventual changes in disease exacerbations, symptom control, oral corticosteroid intake, lung function, and blood eosinophils. RESULTS: In comparison to the previous omalizumab therapy, after 1 year of treatment with benralizumab our patients experienced significant improvements in asthma exacerbation rate (p < 0.01), rescue medication need (p < 0.001), asthma control test (ACT) score (p < 0.05), forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) (p < 0.05), and blood eosinophil count (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, with respect to the end of omalizumab treatment, the score of sino-nasal outcome test-22 (SNOT-22) significantly decreased after therapy with benralizumab (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The results of this real-life study suggest that the pharmacologic shift from omalizumab to benralizumab can be a valuable therapeutic approach for allergic patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, not adequately controlled by anti-IgE treatment.

2.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-307781

ABSTRACT

Purpose: Hypovitaminosis D is a highly spread condition correlated with increased risk of respiratory tract infections. Nowadays, the world is in the grip of the Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID 19) pandemic. In these patients, cytokine storm is associated with disease severity. In consideration of the role of vitamin D in the immune system, aim of this study was to analyse vitamin D levels in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and to assess any correlations with disease severity and prognosis. Methods: : In this retrospective, observational study, we analysed demographic, clinical and laboratory data of 42 patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19, treated in Respiratory Intermediate Care Unit (RICU) of the Policlinic of Bari from March, 11 to April 30, 2020. Results: : Eighty one percent of patients had hypovitaminosis D. Based on vitamin D levels, the population was stratified into four groups: no hypovitaminosis D, insufficiency, moderate deficiency, and severe deficiency. No differences regarding demographic and clinical characteristics were found. A survival analysis highlighted that, after 10 days of hospitalization, severe vitamin D deficiency patients had a 50% mortality probability, while those with vitamin D ≥10 had a 5% mortality risk (p=0.019). Conclusions: : High prevalence of hypovitaminosis D was found in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure, treated in a RICU. Patients with severe vitamin D deficiency had a significantly higher mortality risk. Severe vitamin D deficiency may be a marker of poor prognosis in these patients, suggesting that adjunctive treatment might improve disease outcomes.

3.
Sensors (Basel) ; 21(24)2021 Dec 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1580509

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected hundreds of millions of individuals and caused millions of deaths worldwide. Predicting the clinical course of the disease is of pivotal importance to manage patients. Several studies have found hematochemical alterations in COVID-19 patients, such as inflammatory markers. We retrospectively analyzed the anamnestic data and laboratory parameters of 303 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 who were admitted to the Polyclinic Hospital of Bari during the first phase of the COVID-19 global pandemic. After the pre-processing phase, we performed a survival analysis with Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox Regression, with the aim to discover the most unfavorable predictors. The target outcomes were mortality or admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). Different machine learning models were also compared to realize a robust classifier relying on a low number of strongly significant factors to estimate the risk of death or admission to ICU. From the survival analysis, it emerged that the most significant laboratory parameters for both outcomes was C-reactive protein min; HR=17.963 (95% CI 6.548-49.277, p < 0.001) for death, HR=1.789 (95% CI 1.000-3.200, p = 0.050) for admission to ICU. The second most important parameter was Erythrocytes max; HR=1.765 (95% CI 1.141-2.729, p < 0.05) for death, HR=1.481 (95% CI 0.895-2.452, p = 0.127) for admission to ICU. The best model for predicting the risk of death was the decision tree, which resulted in ROC-AUC of 89.66%, whereas the best model for predicting the admission to ICU was support vector machine, which had ROC-AUC of 95.07%. The hematochemical predictors identified in this study can be utilized as a strong prognostic signature to characterize the severity of the disease in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Machine Learning , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Survival Analysis
4.
Respir Investig ; 59(5): 602-607, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1270631

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients hospitalized for COVID-19-related pneumonia often need several degrees of ventilatory support, which are performed between Respiratory Intermediate Care Units (RICUs) and Intensive Care Units (ICUs), and which depend on the severity of acute respiratory distress syndrome. There is no firm consensus on transfer predictors from the RICU to the ICU. METHODS: In this retrospective observational single center study, we evaluated 96 COVID-19 patients referred to the RICU for acute respiratory failure (ARF) according to their transferal to the ICU or their stay at the RICU. We compared demographic data, baseline laboratory profile, and final clinical outcomes to identify early risk factors for transfer. RESULTS: The best predictors for transfer to the ICU were elevated C-reactive protein and lymphopenia. The mortality rate was lower in the RICU than in the ICU, where transferred patients who died were mostly younger men and with less comorbidities than those in the RICU. CONCLUSIONS: Few inflammatory markers can predict the need for transfer from the RICU to the ICU. Due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, we urge better clinical stratification by early and meaningful profiles in patients admitted to the RICU who are at risk of transferal to the ICU.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Pandemics , Respiratory Insufficiency/epidemiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Expert Rev Respir Med ; 15(6): 853-857, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-990448

ABSTRACT

Objectives: In the present single-centered, retrospective, observational study, we reported findings from 78 consecutive laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) hospitalized in an intermediate Respiratory Intensive Care Unit, subdividing the patients into two groups according to their clinical outcome, dead patients and discharged patients.Methods: We further subdivided patients depending on the noninvasive respiratory support used during hospitalization.Results: In those patients who died, we found significant older age and higher multimorbidity and higher values of serum lactate dehydrogenase, C-reactive protein, and D-dimer. Among patients who were submitted to bilevel positive airway pressure (BPAP), those who died had a significant shorter number of days in overall length of stay and lower values of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen ratio (PaO2/FiO2 ratio) compared to those who survived. No difference in all-cause mortality was observed between the two different noninvasive respiratory support groups [48% for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and 52% for BPAP].Conclusion: In COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS using BPAP in an intermediate level of hospital care had more factors associated to all-cause mortality (shorter length of stay and lower baseline PaO2/FiO2 ratio) compared to those who underwent CPAP.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure/methods , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/etiology , COVID-19/pathology , Cause of Death , Comorbidity , Critical Care/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Oxygen/therapeutic use , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/physiology
6.
Multidiscip Respir Med ; 15(1): 704, 2020 Jan 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-962430

ABSTRACT

The recent Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, first in China and then also in Italy, brought to the attention the problem of the saturation of Intensive Care Units (ICUs). Almost all previous reports showed that in ICU less than half of patients were treated with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and the rest of them with non-invasive respiratory support. This highlighted the role of respiratory intensive care units (RICUs), where patients with moderate to severe respiratory failure can be treated with non-invasive respiratory support, avoiding ICU admission. In this report, we describe baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of 97 patients with moderate to severe respiratory failure due to COVID-19 admitted to the RICU of the Policlinico of Bari from March 11th to May 31st 2020. In our population, most of the subjects were male (72%), non-smokers (76%), with a mean age of 69.65±14 years. Ninety-one percent of patients presented at least one comorbidity and 60% had more than two comorbidities. At admission, 40% of patients showed PaO2/FiO2 ratio between 100 and 200 and 17% showed Pa02/FiO2 ratio <100. Mean Pa02/FiO2 ratio at admission was 186.4±80. These patients were treated with non-invasive respiratory support 40% with CPAP, 38% with BPAP, 3% with HFNC, 11% with standard oxygen therapy or with IMV through tracheostomy (patients in step down from ICU, 8%). Patients discharged to general ward (GW) were 51%, 30% were transferred to ICU and 19% died. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the few described experiences of patients with respiratory failure due to COVID-19 treated outside the ICU, in a RICU. Outcomes of our patients, characterized by several risk factors for disease progression, were satisfactory compared with other experiences regarding patients treated with non-invasive respiratory support in ICU. The strategical allocation of our RICU, between ED and ICU, might have positively influenced clinical outcomes of our patients.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL