Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg ; 38(4): 364-368, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1625880

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Outpatient visits and surgeries for nonurgent indications in ophthalmology have intermittently been restricted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Telemedicine services have rapidly gained acceptance during this period, and could improve patient access for routine oculoplastic evaluations in the future. The objective of this study is to investigate interobserver and intraobserver reliability of eyelid and brow position assessment and surgical plan when comparing photography-based and face-to-face evaluation. METHODS: This was an observational study conducted at a single academic center. Thirty randomly selected patients who had completed an in-office evaluation for chief complaint of "drooping eyelids" between June 2019 and March 2020 were included. Virtual assessment of brow position, dermatochalasis, blepharoptosis, and margin-reflex distance 1 was performed by 2 oculoplastic surgeons based on external photographs, and a surgical plan was formulated. Fraction of agreement and Cohen's κ were determined to evaluate reliability of the virtual assessment compared to face-to-face examination. RESULTS: For 60 eyes from 30 study subjects, diagnostic reliability for observer A was near perfect for brow ptosis, substantial for blepharoptosis and moderate for dermatochalasis (κ = 0.86, 0.67, and 0.57, respectively); for observer B, reliability was moderate for brow and blepharoptosis and substantial for dermatochalasis (0.47, 0.59, and 0.79). Fraction of agreement for blepharoptosis was 94% in eyes where the eyelid margin was visible, and 66% in eyes where the eyelid margin was obscured by overhanging skin. Virtual margin-reflex distance 1 measurements were highly correlated with those obtained face to face (r = 0.77, p < 0.01). Fraction of agreement for surgical plan after virtual examination by observer A/B, respectively, was 100%/94% for brow lift, 90%/87% for blepharoptosis repair and 83%/83% for functional upper blepharoplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual evaluation of upper eyelid and brow malposition can be performed with acceptable reliability. Co-existing dermatochalasis or brow ptosis may require special photographic technique or video examination to ensure an appropriate diagnosis. A photography-based preliminary surgical plan offers a viable alternative to face-to-face encounters.


Subject(s)
Blepharoplasty , Blepharoptosis , COVID-19 , Telemedicine , Blepharoplasty/methods , Blepharoptosis/diagnosis , Blepharoptosis/surgery , COVID-19/epidemiology , Eyebrows , Eyelids/surgery , Humans , Pandemics , Reproducibility of Results
2.
J Clin Invest ; 130(9): 4791-4797, 2020 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1365265

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUNDConvalescent plasma is the only antibody-based therapy currently available for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It has robust historical precedence and sound biological plausibility. Although promising, convalescent plasma has not yet been shown to be safe as a treatment for COVID-19.METHODSThus, we analyzed key safety metrics after transfusion of ABO-compatible human COVID-19 convalescent plasma in 5000 hospitalized adults with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, with 66% in the intensive care unit, as part of the US FDA expanded access program for COVID-19 convalescent plasma.RESULTSThe incidence of all serious adverse events (SAEs), including mortality rate (0.3%), in the first 4 hours after transfusion was <1%. Of the 36 reported SAEs, there were 25 reported incidences of related SAEs, including mortality (n = 4), transfusion-associated circulatory overload (n = 7), transfusion-related acute lung injury (n = 11), and severe allergic transfusion reactions (n = 3). However, only 2 of 36 SAEs were judged as definitely related to the convalescent plasma transfusion by the treating physician. The 7-day mortality rate was 14.9%.CONCLUSIONGiven the deadly nature of COVID-19 and the large population of critically ill patients included in these analyses, the mortality rate does not appear excessive. These early indicators suggest that transfusion of convalescent plasma is safe in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov NCT04338360.FUNDINGMayo Clinic, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (75A50120C00096), National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1TR002377), National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (5R35HL139854 and R01 HL059842), National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (5T32DK07352), Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (PDF-532926-2019), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (R21 AI145356, R21 AI152318, and AI152078), Schwab Charitable Fund, United Health Group, National Basketball Association, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, and Octapharma USA Inc.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Compassionate Use Trials , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Female , Humans , Immunization, Passive/adverse effects , Immunization, Passive/mortality , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Safety , Transfusion Reaction/epidemiology , Transfusion Reaction/etiology , Transfusion-Related Acute Lung Injury/epidemiology , Transfusion-Related Acute Lung Injury/etiology , United States/epidemiology , United States Food and Drug Administration , Young Adult
3.
Clin Chem ; 67(8): 1080-1089, 2021 08 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1189445

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist on high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) for risk-stratification in COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective, observational, US-based study of COVID-19 patients undergoing hs-cTnT. Outcomes included short-term mortality (in-hospital and 30-days post-discharge) and a composite of major adverse events, including respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, cardiac arrest, and shock within the index presentation and/or mortality during the index hospitalization or within 30-days post-discharge. RESULTS: Among 367 COVID-19 patients undergoing hs-cTnT, myocardial injury was identified in 46%. They had a higher risk for mortality (20% vs 12%, P < 0.0001; unadjusted HR 4.44, 95% CI 2.13-9.25, P < 0.001) and major adverse events (35% vs. 11%, P < 0.0001; unadjusted OR 4.29, 95% CI 2.50-7.40, P < 0.0001). Myocardial injury was associated with major adverse events (adjusted OR 3.84, 95% CI 2.00-7.36, P < 0.0001) but not mortality. Baseline (adjusted OR 1.003, 95% CI 1.00-1.007, P = 0.047) and maximum (adjusted OR 1.005, 95% CI 1.001-1.009, P = 0.0012) hs-cTnT were independent predictors of major adverse events. Most (95%) increases were due to myocardial injury, with 5% (n = 8) classified as type 1 or 2 myocardial infarction. A single hs-cTnT <6 ng/L identified 26% of patients without mortality, with a 94.9% (95% CI 87.5-98.6) negative predictive value and 93.1% sensitivity (95% CI 83.3-98.1) for major adverse events in those presenting to the ED. CONCLUSIONS: Myocardial injury is frequent and prognostic in COVID-19. While most hs-cTnT increases are modest and due to myocardial injury, they have important prognostic implications. A single hs-cTnT <6 ng/L at presentation may facilitate the identification of patients with a favorable prognosis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Cardiomyopathies/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Troponin T/blood , Biomarkers/blood , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cardiomyopathies/blood , Cardiomyopathies/etiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/blood , Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Pandemics , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2
4.
N Engl J Med ; 384(11): 1015-1027, 2021 03 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1057739

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) under the presumption that such plasma contains potentially therapeutic antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that can be passively transferred to the plasma recipient. Whether convalescent plasma with high antibody levels rather than low antibody levels is associated with a lower risk of death is unknown. METHODS: In a retrospective study based on a U.S. national registry, we determined the anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels in convalescent plasma used to treat hospitalized adults with Covid-19. The primary outcome was death within 30 days after plasma transfusion. Patients who were enrolled through July 4, 2020, and for whom data on anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels in plasma transfusions and on 30-day mortality were available were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Of the 3082 patients included in this analysis, death within 30 days after plasma transfusion occurred in 115 of 515 patients (22.3%) in the high-titer group, 549 of 2006 patients (27.4%) in the medium-titer group, and 166 of 561 patients (29.6%) in the low-titer group. The association of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels with the risk of death from Covid-19 was moderated by mechanical ventilation status. A lower risk of death within 30 days in the high-titer group than in the low-titer group was observed among patients who had not received mechanical ventilation before transfusion (relative risk, 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 0.91), and no effect on the risk of death was observed among patients who had received mechanical ventilation (relative risk, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with Covid-19 who were not receiving mechanical ventilation, transfusion of plasma with higher anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels was associated with a lower risk of death than transfusion of plasma with lower antibody levels. (Funded by the Department of Health and Human Services and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04338360.).


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Male , Middle Aged , Registries , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Time-to-Treatment , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
5.
Mayo Clin Proc ; 95(9): 1888-1897, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-654169

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update on key safety metrics after transfusion of convalescent plasma in hospitalized coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) patients, having previously demonstrated safety in 5000 hospitalized patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From April 3 to June 2, 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration Expanded Access Program for COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfused a convenience sample of 20,000 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 convalescent plasma. RESULTS: The incidence of all serious adverse events was low; these included transfusion reactions (n=78; <1%), thromboembolic or thrombotic events (n=113; <1%), and cardiac events (n=677, ~3%). Notably, the vast majority of the thromboembolic or thrombotic events (n=75) and cardiac events (n=597) were judged to be unrelated to the plasma transfusion per se. The 7-day mortality rate was 13.0% (12.5%, 13.4%), and was higher among more critically ill patients relative to less ill counterparts, including patients admitted to the intensive care unit versus those not admitted (15.6 vs 9.3%), mechanically ventilated versus not ventilated (18.3% vs 9.9%), and with septic shock or multiple organ dysfunction/failure versus those without dysfunction/failure (21.7% vs 11.5%). CONCLUSION: These updated data provide robust evidence that transfusion of convalescent plasma is safe in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and support the notion that earlier administration of plasma within the clinical course of COVID-19 is more likely to reduce mortality.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Patient Safety , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Critical Illness , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Immunization, Passive/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , United States , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL