Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 46
Filter
2.
Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis ; : 100025, 2022.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-2165817

ABSTRACT

Background Conflicting results have been reported on platelet activity ex vivo and responsiveness in vitro among COVID-19 patients with or without thromboembolic complications. Objectives To assess platelet reactivity in moderate disease at early stages of COVID-19. Patients/Methods We performed a prospective, descriptive analysis on 100 consecutive patients presenting with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection at the University Medical Center Freiburg during the first or second pandemic wave. Following PCR testing and compliance with study inclusion criteria, 20 SARS-CoV-2 positive and 55 SARS-CoV-2 negative patients (serving as patient controls) were enrolled. In addition, 15 healthy subjects were included. Platelet reactivity was assessed using whole blood impedance aggregometry and flow cytometry in response to various agonists. Results Platelet aggregation was significantly impaired in COVID-19 patients as compared to patient controls or healthy subjects. The reduced platelet responsiveness in COVID-19 patients was associated with impaired activation of GPIIb/IIIa (αIIbβ3). By contrast, low P-selectin expression at baseline and intact secretion upon stimulation in vitro suggest that no pre-activation in vivo leading to "exhausted” platelets had occurred. The proportion of circulating platelet-neutrophil complexes was significantly higher in COVID-19 patients (mean±SD, 41±13%) than in patient controls (18±7%;95% CI:11.1-34.1;P=0.0002) or healthy subjects (17±4%;95% CI:13.8-33.8;P<0.0001). Analysis of neutrophil adhesion receptors revealed up-regulation of CD11b (α-subunit of αMβ2) and CD66b (CEACAM8) but not of CD162 (PSGL-1) in COVID-19 patients. Conclusions Despite reduced platelet responsiveness, platelet-neutrophil complexes are increased at early stages of moderate disease. Thus, this cellular interaction may occur in COVID-19 without preceding platelet activation.

3.
Thromb Res ; 2022 Nov 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2106048

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The benefits of early thromboprophylaxis in symptomatic COVID-19 outpatients remain unclear. We present the 90-day results from the randomised, open-label, parallel-group, investigator-initiated, multinational OVID phase III trial. METHODS: Outpatients aged 50 years or older with acute symptomatic COVID-19 were randomised to receive enoxaparin 40 mg for 14 days once daily vs. standard of care (no thromboprophylaxis). The primary outcome was the composite of untoward hospitalisation and all-cause death within 30 days from randomisation. Secondary outcomes included arterial and venous major cardiovascular events, as well as the primary outcome within 90 days from randomisation. The study was prematurely terminated based on statistical criteria after the predefined interim analysis of 30-day data, which has been previously published. In the present analysis, we present the final, 90-day data from OVID and we additionally investigate the impact of thromboprophylaxis on the resolution of symptoms. RESULTS: Of the 472 patients included in the intention-to-treat population, 234 were randomised to receive enoxaparin and 238 no thromboprophylaxis. The median age was 57 (Q1-Q3: 53-62) years and 217 (46 %) were women. The 90-day primary outcome occurred in 11 (4.7 %) patients of the enoxaparin arm and in 11 (4.6 %) controls (adjusted relative risk 1.00; 95 % CI: 0.44-2.25): 3 events per group occurred after day 30. The 90-day incidence of cardiovascular events was 0.9 % in the enoxaparin arm vs. 1.7 % in controls (relative risk 0.51; 95 % CI: 0.09-2.75). Individual symptoms improved progressively within 90 days with no difference between groups. At 90 days, 42 (17.9 %) patients in the enoxaparin arm and 40 (16.8 %) controls had persistent respiratory symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: In adult community patients with COVID-19, early thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin did not improve the course of COVID-19 neither in terms of hospitalisation and death nor considering COVID-19-related symptoms.

4.
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 9: 880717, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2065478

ABSTRACT

Background: Acute myocarditis is commonly associated with viral infections, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Myocarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination has also been reported, however this is rare and usually resolves within days or weeks. We present a case of acute myocarditis reported after vaccination with mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine (Moderna) diagnosed using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). This report describes the utility of CMR in the diagnosis and follow-up of such patients using parameters which could suggest the clinical course of myocarditis. Case Summary: A 23-year-old male presented in the emergency department with complaints of chest pain radiating to the left arm following vaccination with the second dose of COVID-19 mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna). Patient's history revealed an incidence of myocarditis in the past. CMR showed a mid-range left ventricular ejection fraction (38%) and subepicardial late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) in the inferolateral and apical myocardial segments with diffuse elevation of native T1 mapping relaxation times in all myocardial segments. The patient was admitted briefly in the intensive care unit and after a favorable clinical course was discharged from the hospital in stable condition. A follow-up CMR after 3 months revealed normalization of LVEF (57%) and native T1- times in most segments. Scarred myocardium reflecting chronic myocarditis continued to show elevated T1 times. Conclusions: Our patient presenting with acute myocarditis after recent COVID-19 mRNA vaccination reported a favorable clinical course. CMR revealed increased T1 mapping relaxation times diffusely spread across the myocardium and an impairment of the left ventricular function (LVEF) during the acute phase. However, the LVEF as well as the T1 times normalized at follow-up in all segments except for myocardium affected by chronic myocarditis.

5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 Oct 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2017768

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: At the entry site of respiratory virus infections, the oropharyngeal microbiome has been proposed as a major hub integrating viral and host immune signals. Early studies suggested that infections with Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are associated with changes of the upper and lower airway microbiome, and that specific microbial signatures may predict COVID-19 illness. However, the results are not conclusive, as critical illness can drastically alter a patient's microbiome through multiple confounders. METHODS: To study oropharyngeal microbiome profiles in SARS-CoV-2 infection, clinical confounders, and prediction models in COVID-19, we performed a multi-center, cross-sectional clinical study analyzing oropharyngeal microbial metagenomes in healthy adults, patients with non-SARS-CoV-2 infections, or with mild, moderate and severe COVID-19 (n=322 participants). RESULTS: In contrast to mild infections, patients admitted to a hospital with moderate or severe COVID-19 showed dysbiotic microbial configurations, which were significantly pronounced in patients treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics, receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, or when sampling was performed during prolonged hospitalization. In contrast, specimens collected early after admission allowed us to segregate microbiome features predictive of hospital COVID-19 mortality utilizing machine learning models. Taxonomic signatures were found to perform better than models utilizing clinical variables with Neisseria and Haemophilus species abundances as most important features. CONCLUSION: In addition to the infection per se, several factors shape the oropharyngeal microbiome of severely affected COVID-19 patients and deserve consideration in the interpretation of the role of the microbiome in severe COVID-19. Nevertheless, we were able to extract microbial features that can help to predict clinical outcomes.

6.
J Clin Immunol ; 42(6): 1111-1129, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1942304

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Six to 19% of critically ill COVID-19 patients display circulating auto-antibodies against type I interferons (IFN-AABs). Here, we establish a clinically applicable strategy for early identification of IFN-AAB-positive patients for potential subsequent clinical interventions. METHODS: We analyzed sera of 430 COVID-19 patients from four hospitals for presence of IFN-AABs by ELISA. Binding specificity and neutralizing activity were evaluated via competition assay and virus-infection-based neutralization assay. We defined clinical parameters associated with IFN-AAB positivity. In a subgroup of critically ill patients, we analyzed effects of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) on the levels of IFN-AABs, SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and clinical outcome. RESULTS: The prevalence of neutralizing AABs to IFN-α and IFN-ω in COVID-19 patients from all cohorts was 4.2% (18/430), while being undetectable in an uninfected control cohort. Neutralizing IFN-AABs were detectable exclusively in critically affected (max. WHO score 6-8), predominantly male (83%) patients (7.6%, 18/237 for IFN-α-AABs and 4.6%, 11/237 for IFN-ω-AABs in 237 patients with critical COVID-19). IFN-AABs were present early post-symptom onset and at the peak of disease. Fever and oxygen requirement at hospital admission co-presented with neutralizing IFN-AAB positivity. IFN-AABs were associated with lower probability of survival (7.7% versus 80.9% in patients without IFN-AABs). TPE reduced levels of IFN-AABs in three of five patients and may increase survival of IFN-AAB-positive patients compared to those not undergoing TPE. CONCLUSION: IFN-AABs may serve as early biomarker for the development of severe COVID-19. We propose to implement routine screening of hospitalized COVID-19 patients for rapid identification of patients with IFN-AABs who most likely benefit from specific therapies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Interferon Type I , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Autoantibodies , COVID-19/diagnosis , Critical Illness , Female , Humans , Interferon-alpha/therapeutic use , Male , Oxygen , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Lancet Haematol ; 9(8): e585-e593, 2022 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1915207

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a viral prothrombotic respiratory infection. Heparins exert antithrombotic and anti-inflammatory effects, and might have antiviral properties. We aimed to investigate whether thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin would prevent untoward hospitalisation and death in symptomatic, but clinically stable outpatients with COVID-19. METHODS: OVID was a randomised, open-label, parallel-group, investigator-initiated, phase 3 trial and was done at eight centres in Switzerland and Germany. Outpatients aged 50 years or older with acute COVID-19 were eligible if they presented with respiratory symptoms or body temperature higher than 37·5°C. Eligible participants underwent block-stratified randomisation (by age group 50-70 vs >70 years and by study centre) in a 1:1 ratio to receive either subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg once daily for 14 days versus standard of care (no thromboprophylaxis). The primary outcome was a composite of any untoward hospitalisation and all-cause death within 30 days of randomisation. Analysis of the efficacy outcomes was done in the intention-to-treat population. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04400799) and has been completed. FINDINGS: At the predefined formal interim analysis for efficacy (50% of total study population), the independent Data Safety Monitoring Board recommended early termination of the trial on the basis of predefined statistical criteria having considered the very low probability of showing superiority of thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin for the primary outcome under the initial study design assumptions. Between Aug 15, 2020, and Jan 14, 2022, from 3319 participants prescreened, 472 were included in the intention-to-treat population and randomly assigned to receive enoxaparin (n=234) or standard of care (n=238). The median age was 57 years (IQR 53-62) and 217 (46%) were women. The 30-day risk of the primary outcome was similar in participants allocated to receive enoxaparin and in controls (8 [3%] of 234 vs 8 [3%] of 238; adjusted relative risk 0·98; 95% CI 0·37-2·56; p=0·96). All hospitalisations were related to COVID-19. No deaths were reported during the study. No major bleeding events were recorded. Eight serious adverse events were recorded in the enoxaparin group versus nine in the control group. INTERPRETATION: These findings suggest thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin does not reduce early hospitalisations and deaths among outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19. Futility of the treatment under the initial study design assumptions could not be conclusively assessed owing to under-representation of older patients and consequent low event rates. FUNDING: SNSF (National Research Programme COVID-19 NRP78: 198352), University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Dr-Ing Georg Pollert (Berlin), Johanna Dürmüller-Bol Foundation.

8.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 486, 2022 May 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1862111

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care (POC) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests have the ability to improve testing efficiency in the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, real-world data on POC tests is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency of a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) POC test in a clinical setting and examine the prognostic value of cycle threshold (CT) on admission on the length of hospital stay (LOS) in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Patients hospitalised between January and May 2021 were included in this prospective cohort study. Patients' nasopharyngeal swabs were tested for SARS-CoV-2 with Allplex™2019-nCoV (Seegene Inc.) real-time (RT) PCR assay as gold standard as well as a novel POC test (Bosch Vivalytic SARS-CoV-2 [Bosch]) and the SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test (Roche) accordingly. Clinical sensitivity and specificity as well as inter- and intra-assay variability were analyzed. RESULTS: 120 patients met the inclusion criteria with 46 (38%) having a definite COVID-19 diagnosis by RT-PCR. Bosch Vivalytic SARS-CoV-2 POC had a sensitivity of 88% and specificity of 96%. The inter- and intra- assay variability was below 15%. The CT value at baseline was lower in patients with LOS ≥ 10 days when compared to patients with LOS < 10 days (27.82 (± 4.648) vs. 36.2 (25.9-39.18); p = 0.0191). There was a negative correlation of CT at admission and LOS (r[44]s = - 0.31; p = 0.038) but only age was associated with the probability of an increased LOS in a multiple logistic regression analysis (OR 1.105 [95% CI, 1.03-1.19]; p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that POC testing with Bosch Vivalytic SARS-CoV-2 is a valid strategy to identify COVID-19 patients and decrease turnaround time to definite COVID-19 diagnosis. Also, our data suggest that age at admission possibly with CT value as a combined parameter could be a promising tool for risk assessment of increased length of hospital stay and severity of disease in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Testing , Humans , Point-of-Care Testing , Prospective Studies , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Sensitivity and Specificity
9.
Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine ; 9, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1837089

ABSTRACT

Background Acute myocarditis is commonly associated with viral infections, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Myocarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination has also been reported, however this is rare and usually resolves within days or weeks. We present a case of acute myocarditis reported after vaccination with mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine (Moderna) diagnosed using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). This report describes the utility of CMR in the diagnosis and follow-up of such patients using parameters which could suggest the clinical course of myocarditis. Case Summary A 23-year-old male presented in the emergency department with complaints of chest pain radiating to the left arm following vaccination with the second dose of COVID-19 mRNA-1273 vaccine (Moderna). Patient's history revealed an incidence of myocarditis in the past. CMR showed a mid-range left ventricular ejection fraction (38%) and subepicardial late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) in the inferolateral and apical myocardial segments with diffuse elevation of native T1 mapping relaxation times in all myocardial segments. The patient was admitted briefly in the intensive care unit and after a favorable clinical course was discharged from the hospital in stable condition. A follow-up CMR after 3 months revealed normalization of LVEF (57%) and native T1- times in most segments. Scarred myocardium reflecting chronic myocarditis continued to show elevated T1 times. Conclusions Our patient presenting with acute myocarditis after recent COVID-19 mRNA vaccination reported a favorable clinical course. CMR revealed increased T1 mapping relaxation times diffusely spread across the myocardium and an impairment of the left ventricular function (LVEF) during the acute phase. However, the LVEF as well as the T1 times normalized at follow-up in all segments except for myocardium affected by chronic myocarditis.

10.
Nat Rev Cardiol ; 19(7): 475-495, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1632773

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) predisposes patients to thrombotic and thromboembolic events, owing to excessive inflammation, endothelial cell activation and injury, platelet activation and hypercoagulability. Patients with COVID-19 have a prothrombotic or thrombophilic state, with elevations in the levels of several biomarkers of thrombosis, which are associated with disease severity and prognosis. Although some biomarkers of COVID-19-associated coagulopathy, including high levels of fibrinogen and D-dimer, were recognized early during the pandemic, many new biomarkers of thrombotic risk in COVID-19 have emerged. In this Consensus Statement, we delineate the thrombotic signature of COVID-19 and present the latest biomarkers and platforms to assess the risk of thrombosis in these patients, including markers of platelet activation, platelet aggregation, endothelial cell activation or injury, coagulation and fibrinolysis as well as biomarkers of the newly recognized post-vaccine thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome. We then make consensus recommendations for the clinical use of these biomarkers to inform prognosis, assess disease acuity, and predict thrombotic risk and in-hospital mortality. A thorough understanding of these biomarkers might aid risk stratification and prognostication, guide interventions and provide a platform for future research.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Thrombosis , Biomarkers , COVID-19/complications , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Thrombosis/diagnosis , Thrombosis/etiology
11.
Hamostaseologie ; 41(6): 428-432, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1585711

ABSTRACT

Thrombus formation has been identified as an integral part in innate immunity, termed immunothrombosis. Activation of host defense systems is known to result in a procoagulant environment. In this system, cellular players as well as soluble mediators interact with each other and their dysregulation can lead to the pathological process of thromboinflammation. These mechanisms have been under intensified investigation during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this review, we focus on the underlying mechanisms leading to thromboinflammation as one trigger of venous thromboembolism.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Thrombosis , Venous Thromboembolism , Humans , Immunity, Innate , Inflammation , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
12.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 53(4): 788-797, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1568387

ABSTRACT

The complement system (CS) plays a pivotal role in Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pathophysiology. The objective of this study was to provide a comparative, prospective data analysis of CS components in an all-comers cohort and COVID-19 patients. Patients with suspected COVID-19 infection admitted to the Emergency department were grouped for definite diagnosis of COVID-19 and no COVID-19 accordingly. Clinical presentation, routine laboratory and von Willebrand factor (vWF) antigen as well as CS components 3, 4 and activated 5 (C5a) were assessed. Also, total complement activity via the classical pathway (CH50) was determined. Levels of calprotectin in serum were measured using an automated quantitative lateral flow assay. We included 80 patients in this prospective trial. Of those 19 (23.7%) were tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Patients with COVID-19 had higher levels of CS components 5a and 4 (54.79 [24.14-88.79] ng/ml vs. 35 [23.15-46.1] ng/ml; p = 0.0433 and 0.3772 [± 0.1056] g/L vs. 0.286 [0.2375-0.3748] g/L; p = 0.0168). COVID-19 patients had significantly higher levels of vWF antigen when compared to the control group (288.3 [± 80.26] % vs. 212 [151-320] %; p = 0.0469). There was a significant correlation between CS C3 and 5a with vWF antigen (rs = 0.5957 [p = 0.0131] and rs = 0.5015 [p = 0.042]) in COVID-19 patients. There was no difference in calprotectin plasma levels (4.786 [± 2.397] µg/ml vs. 4.233 [± 2.142] µg/ml; p = 0.4175) between both groups. This prospective data from a single centre all-comers cohort accentuates altered levels of CS components as a distinct feature of COVID-19 disease. Deregulation of CS component 3 and C5a are associated with increased vWF antigen possibly linking vascular damage to alternative CS activation in COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/diagnosis , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Immunologic Factors , Leukocyte L1 Antigen Complex , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , von Willebrand Factor/analysis
13.
Clin Res Cardiol ; 111(3): 322-332, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1427245

ABSTRACT

AIMS: Coagulopathy and venous thromboembolism are common findings in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and are associated with poor outcome. Timely initiation of anticoagulation after hospital admission was shown to be beneficial. In this study we aim to examine the association of pre-existing oral anticoagulation (OAC) with outcome among a cohort of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed the data from the large multi-national Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 infected patients (LEOSS) from March to August 2020. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were eligible for inclusion. We retrospectively analysed the association of pre-existing OAC with all-cause mortality. Secondary outcome measures included COVID-19-related mortality, recovery and composite endpoints combining death and/or thrombotic event and death and/or bleeding event. We restricted bleeding events to intracerebral bleeding in this analysis to ensure clinical relevance and to limit reporting errors. A total of 1 433 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients were analysed, while 334 patients (23.3%) had an existing premedication with OAC and 1 099 patients (79.7%) had no OAC. After risk adjustment for comorbidities, pre-existing OAC showed a protective influence on the endpoint death (OR 0.62, P = 0.013) as well as the secondary endpoints COVID-19-related death (OR 0.64, P = 0.023) and non-recovery (OR 0.66, P = 0.014). The combined endpoint death or thrombotic event tended to be less frequent in patients on OAC (OR 0.71, P = 0.056). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-existing OAC is protective in COVID-19, irrespective of anticoagulation regime during hospital stay and independent of the stage and course of disease.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Blood Coagulation Disorders/drug therapy , COVID-19/mortality , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Thromboembolism/drug therapy , Aged , Blood Coagulation Disorders/virology , Comorbidity , Europe , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Thromboembolism/virology
14.
J Infect Dis ; 224(2): 367-368, 2021 07 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1413536
16.
Artif Organs ; 45(9): 1050-1060, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1361914

ABSTRACT

Prognosis of patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is poor. This is especially true for immunosuppressed patients. It is controverisal whether these patients should receive veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV ECMO) while evidence on this topic is sparse. We report retrospective data of a single-center registry of patients with severe ARDS requiring ECMO support between October 2010 and June 2019. Patients were analyzed by their status of immunosuppression. ECMO weaning success and hospital survival were analyzed before and after propensity score matching (PSM). Moreover, ventilator free days (VFD) were compared. A total of 288 patients were analyzed (age 55 years, 67% male), 88 (31%) presented with immunosuppression. Survival rates were lower in immunosuppressed patients (27% vs. 53%, P < .001 and 27% vs. 48% after PSM, P = .006). VFD (60 days) were lower for patients with immunosuppression (11.9 vs. 22.4, P < .001), and immunosuppression was an independent predictor for mortality in multivariate analysis. Hospital survival was 20%, 14%, 35%, and 46% for patients with oncological malignancies, solid organ transplantation, autoimmune diseases, and HIV, respectively. In this analysis immunosuppression was an independent predictor for mortality. However, there were major differences in the weaning and survival rates between the etiologies of immunosuppression which should be considered in decision making.


Subject(s)
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Adult , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Propensity Score , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate
17.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(8): 863-872, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1340915

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 entry in human cells depends on angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, which can be upregulated by inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS). We aimed to test our hypothesis that discontinuation of chronic treatment with ACE-inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) mitigates the course o\f recent-onset COVID-19. METHODS: ACEI-COVID was a parallel group, randomised, controlled, open-label trial done at 35 centres in Austria and Germany. Patients aged 18 years and older were enrolled if they presented with recent symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and were chronically treated with ACEIs or ARBs. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to discontinuation or continuation of RAS inhibition for 30 days. Primary outcome was the maximum sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score within 30 days, where death was scored with the maximum achievable SOFA score. Secondary endpoints were area under the death-adjusted SOFA score (AUCSOFA), mean SOFA score, admission to the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, and death. Analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04353596. FINDINGS: Between April 20, 2020, and Jan 20, 2021, 204 patients (median age 75 years [IQR 66-80], 37% females) were randomly assigned to discontinue (n=104) or continue (n=100) RAS inhibition. Within 30 days, eight (8%) of 104 died in the discontinuation group and 12 (12%) of 100 patients died in the continuation group (p=0·42). There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint between the discontinuation and continuation group (median [IQR] maximum SOFA score 0·00 (0·00-2·00) vs 1·00 (0·00-3·00); p=0·12). Discontinuation was associated with a significantly lower AUCSOFA (0·00 [0·00-9·25] vs 3·50 [0·00-23·50]; p=0·040), mean SOFA score (0·00 [0·00-0·31] vs 0·12 [0·00-0·78]; p=0·040), and 30-day SOFA score (0·00 [10-90th percentile, 0·00-1·20] vs 0·00 [0·00-24·00]; p=0·023). At 30 days, 11 (11%) in the discontinuation group and 23 (23%) in the continuation group had signs of organ dysfunction (SOFA score ≥1) or were dead (p=0·017). There were no significant differences for mechanical ventilation (10 (10%) vs 8 (8%), p=0·87) and admission to intensive care unit (20 [19%] vs 18 [18%], p=0·96) between the discontinuation and continuation group. INTERPRETATION: Discontinuation of RAS-inhibition in COVID-19 had no significant effect on the maximum severity of COVID-19 but may lead to a faster and better recovery. The decision to continue or discontinue should be made on an individual basis, considering the risk profile, the indication for RAS inhibition, and the availability of alternative therapies and outpatient monitoring options. FUNDING: Austrian Science Fund and German Center for Cardiovascular Research.


Subject(s)
Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors , COVID-19 , Hypertension , Renin-Angiotensin System , SARS-CoV-2 , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/adverse effects , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/metabolism , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/adverse effects , Area Under Curve , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/metabolism , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Humans , Hypertension/drug therapy , Hypertension/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Organ Dysfunction Scores , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Renin-Angiotensin System/drug effects , Renin-Angiotensin System/physiology , Risk Adjustment/methods , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Severity of Illness Index , Withholding Treatment/statistics & numerical data
18.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(7): 755-762, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1337041

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We sought to clarify the benefit of cytokine adsorption in patients with COVID-19 supported with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). METHODS: We did a single-centre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial to investigate cytokine adsorption in adult patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring ECMO. Patients with COVID-19 selected for ECMO at the Freiburg University Medical Center (Freiburg, Germany) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive cytokine adsorption using the CytoSorb device or not. Randomisation was computer-generated, allocation was concealed by opaque, sequentially numbered sealed envelopes. The CytoSorb device was incorporated into the ECMO circuit before connection to the patient circuit, replaced every 24 h, and removed after 72 h. The primary endpoint was serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) concentration 72 h after initiation of ECMO analysed by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints included 30-day survival. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04324528) and the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00021300) and is closed. FINDINGS: From March 29, 2020, to Dec 29, 2020, of 34 patients assessed for eligibility, 17 (50%) were treated with cytokine adsorption and 17 (50%) without. Median IL-6 decreased from 357·0 pg/mL to 98·6 pg/mL in patients randomly assigned to cytokine adsorption and from 289·0 pg/mL to 112·0 pg/mL in the control group after 72 h. One patient in each group died before 72 h. Adjusted mean log IL-6 concentrations after 72 h were 0·30 higher in the cytokine adsorption group (95% CI -0·70 to 1·30, p=0·54). Survival after 30 days was three (18%) of 17 with cytokine adsorption and 13 (76%) of 17 without cytokine adsorption (p=0·0016). INTERPRETATION: Early initiation of cytokine adsorption in patients with severe COVID-19 and venovenous ECMO did not reduce serum IL-6 and had a negative effect on survival. Cytokine adsorption should not be used during the first days of ECMO support in COVID-19. FUNDING: None.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Cytokines , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Adsorption , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
19.
Blood ; 138(14): 1269-1277, 2021 10 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1317119

ABSTRACT

Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is a severe adverse effect of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 COVID-19 vaccine (Vaxzevria) and Janssen Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine, and it is associated with unusual thrombosis. VITT is caused by anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4) antibodies activating platelets through their FcγRIIa receptors. Antibodies that activate platelets through FcγRIIa receptors have also been identified in patients with COVID-19. These findings raise concern that vaccination-induced antibodies against anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein cause thrombosis by cross-reacting with PF4. Immunogenic epitopes of PF4 and SARS-CoV-2 spike protein were compared using in silico prediction tools and 3D modeling. The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and PF4 share at least 1 similar epitope. Reactivity of purified anti-PF4 antibodies from patients with VITT was tested against recombinant SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. However, none of the affinity-purified anti-PF4 antibodies from 14 patients with VITT cross-reacted with SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Sera from 222 polymerase chain reaction-confirmed patients with COVID-19 from 5 European centers were tested by PF4-heparin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays and PF4-dependent platelet activation assays. We found anti-PF4 antibodies in sera from 19 (8.6%) of 222 patients with COVID-19. However, only 4 showed weak to moderate platelet activation in the presence of PF4, and none of those patients developed thrombotic complications. Among 10 (4.5%) of 222 patients who had COVID-19 with thrombosis, none showed PF4-dependent platelet-activating antibodies. In conclusion, antibodies against PF4 induced by vaccination do not cross-react with the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, indicating that the intended vaccine-induced immune response against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is not the trigger of VITT. PF4-reactive antibodies found in patients with COVID-19 in this study were not associated with thrombotic complications.


Subject(s)
Antibodies/adverse effects , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Cross Reactions/immunology , Platelet Factor 4/immunology , Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic/etiology , Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Blood Platelets/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Cohort Studies , Epitopes/immunology , Female , Heparin/metabolism , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , Protein Binding , Protein Domains , Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic/blood , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/chemistry , Young Adult
20.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 52(1): 76-84, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1310591

ABSTRACT

Subpleural consolidations have been found in lung ultrasound in patients with COVID-19, possibly deriving from pulmonary embolism (PE). The diagnostic utility of impact of lung ultrasound in critical-ill patients with COVID-19 for PE diagnostics however is unclear. We retrospectively evaluated all SARS-CoV2-associated ARDS patients admitted to our ICU between March 8th and May 31th 2020. They were enrolled in this study, when a lung ultrasound and a computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) were documented. In addition, wells score was calculated to estimate the probability of PE. The CTPA was used as the gold standard for the detection of PE. Twenty out of 25 patients met the inclusion criteria. In 12/20 patients (60%) (sub-) segmental PE were detected by CT-angiography. Lung ultrasound found subpleural consolidations in 90% of patients. PE-typical large supleural consolidations with a size ≥ 1 cm were detectable in 65% of patients and were significant more frequent in patients with PE compared to those without (p = 0.035). Large consolidations predicted PE with a sensitivity of 77% and a specificity of 71%. The Wells score was significantly higher in patients with PE compared to those without (2.7 ± 0.8 and 1.7 ± 0.5, respectively, p = 0.042) and predicted PE with an AUC of 0.81. When combining the two modalities, comparing patients with considered/probable PE using LUS plus a Wells score ≥ 2 to patients with possible/unlikely PE in LUS plus a Wells score < 2, PE could be predicted with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 80%. Large consolidations detected in lung ultrasound were found frequently in COVID-19 ARDS patients with pulmonary embolism. In combination with a Wells score > 2, this might indicate a high-risk for PE in COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Clinical Decision Rules , Computed Tomography Angiography , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Pulmonary Artery/diagnostic imaging , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnostic imaging , Ultrasonography , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , Critical Illness , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multimodal Imaging , Predictive Value of Tests , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Registries , Reproducibility of Results , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL