Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 19(8): 1346-1354, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1974363

ABSTRACT

Rationale: During the first wave of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in New York City, the number of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients rapidly surpassed the capacity of traditional intensive care units (ICUs), resulting in health systems utilizing other areas as expanded ICUs to provide critical care. Objectives: To evaluate the mortality of patients admitted to expanded ICUs compared with those admitted to traditional ICUs. Methods: Multicenter, retrospective, cohort study of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICUs at 11 Northwell Health hospitals in the greater New York City area between March 1, 2020 and April 30, 2020. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality up to 28 days after intubation of COVID-19 patients. Results: Among 1,966 mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19, 1,198 (61%) died within 28 days after intubation, 46 (2%) were transferred to other hospitals outside of the Northwell Health system, 722 (37%) survived in the hospital until 28 days or were discharged after recovery. The risk of mortality of mechanically ventilated patients admitted to expanded ICUs was not different from those admitted to traditional ICUs (hazard ratio [HR], 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95-1.20; P = 0.28), while hospital occupancy for critically ill patients itself was associated with increased risk of mortality (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.12-1.45; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Although increased hospital occupancy for critically ill patients itself was associated with increased mortality, the risk of 28-day in-hospital mortality of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to expanded ICUs was not different from those admitted to traditional ICUs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Critical Illness , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , New York City/epidemiology , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies
2.
PLoS One ; 17(8): e0267505, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1974302

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate racial and ethnic differences in mortality among patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after adjusting for baseline characteristics and comorbidities. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study at 13 acute care facilities in the New York City metropolitan area included sequentially hospitalized patients between March 1, 2020, and April 27, 2020. Last day of follow up was July 31, 2020. Patient demographic information, including race/ethnicity and comorbidities, were collected. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 10 869 patients were included in the study (median age, 65 years [interquartile range (IQR) 54-77; range, 18-107 years]; 40.5% female). In adjusted time-to-event analysis, increased age, male sex, insurance type (Medicare and Self-Pay), unknown smoking status, and a higher score on the Charlson Comorbidity Index were significantly associated with higher in-hospital mortality. Adjusted risk of hospital mortality for Black, Asian, Hispanic, multiracial/other, and unknown race/ethnicity patients were similar to risk for White patients. CONCLUSIONS: In a large diverse cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19, patients from racial/ethnic minorities experienced similar mortality risk as White patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospital Mortality , Aged , Ethnicity , Female , Hospital Mortality/ethnology , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Medicare , Middle Aged , Racial Groups , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , Whites
3.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 42(10): 1257-1259, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1541092

ABSTRACT

We performed a prospective study of 501 patients, regardless of symptoms, admitted to the hospital, to estimate the predictive value of a negative nasopharyngeal swab for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). At a positivity rate of 10.2%, the estimated negative predictive value (NPV) was 97.2% and the NPV rose as prevalence decreased during the study.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Hospitalization , Humans , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
4.
JAMA Intern Med ; 181(12): 1612-1620, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1453495

ABSTRACT

Importance: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 are at risk for venous and arterial thromboembolism and death. Optimal thromboprophylaxis dosing in high-risk patients is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the effects of therapeutic-dose low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) vs institutional standard prophylactic or intermediate-dose heparins for thromboprophylaxis in high-risk hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: The HEP-COVID multicenter randomized clinical trial recruited hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 with D-dimer levels more than 4 times the upper limit of normal or sepsis-induced coagulopathy score of 4 or greater from May 8, 2020, through May 14, 2021, at 12 academic centers in the US. Interventions: Patients were randomized to institutional standard prophylactic or intermediate-dose LMWH or unfractionated heparin vs therapeutic-dose enoxaparin, 1 mg/kg subcutaneous, twice daily if creatinine clearance was 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 or greater (0.5 mg/kg twice daily if creatinine clearance was 15-29 mL/min/1.73 m2) throughout hospitalization. Patients were stratified at the time of randomization based on intensive care unit (ICU) or non-ICU status. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy outcome was venous thromboembolism (VTE), arterial thromboembolism (ATE), or death from any cause, and the principal safety outcome was major bleeding at 30 ± 2 days. Data were collected and adjudicated locally by blinded investigators via imaging, laboratory, and health record data. Results: Of 257 patients randomized, 253 were included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 66.7 [14.0] years; men, 136 [53.8%]; women, 117 [46.2%]); 249 patients (98.4%) met inclusion criteria based on D-dimer elevation and 83 patients (32.8%) were stratified as ICU-level care. There were 124 patients (49%) in the standard-dose vs 129 patients (51%) in the therapeutic-dose group. The primary efficacy outcome was met in 52 of 124 patients (41.9%) (28.2% VTE, 3.2% ATE, 25.0% death) with standard-dose heparins vs 37 of 129 patients (28.7%) (11.7% VTE, 3.2% ATE, 19.4% death) with therapeutic-dose LMWH (relative risk [RR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49-0.96; P = .03), including a reduction in thromboembolism (29.0% vs 10.9%; RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.21-0.66; P < .001). The incidence of major bleeding was 1.6% with standard-dose vs 4.7% with therapeutic-dose heparins (RR, 2.88; 95% CI, 0.59-14.02; P = .17). The primary efficacy outcome was reduced in non-ICU patients (36.1% vs 16.7%; RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.27-0.81; P = .004) but not ICU patients (55.3% vs 51.1%; RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.62-1.39; P = .71). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, therapeutic-dose LMWH reduced major thromboembolism and death compared with institutional standard heparin thromboprophylaxis among inpatients with COVID-19 with very elevated D-dimer levels. The treatment effect was not seen in ICU patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04401293.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , COVID-19/diagnosis , Enoxaparin/administration & dosage , Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight/administration & dosage , Heparin/administration & dosage , Hospital Mortality , Inpatients , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysis , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
5.
J Public Health (Oxf) ; 43(3): e438-e445, 2021 Sep 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1276215

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-sanctioned prevention strategies have included frequent handwashing with soap and water, covering the mouth and nose with a mask when around others, cleaning and disinfecting maintaining a distance of at least 6 feet from others, etc. Although many of these recommendations are based upon observation and past infection control practices, it is important to combine and explore public data sets to identify predictors of infection, morbidity and mortality to develop more finely honed interventions, based on sociodemographic factors. METHOD: Cross-sectional study of both states in the US and counties in NY state. RESULTS: Population density was found to be significantly associated with state-level coronavirus infection and mortality rate (b = 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.34, 0.64, P < .0001). States that have lower socioeconomic status, lower mean age and denser populations are associated with higher incidence rates. In regard to NY state, counties with a higher percentage of minority residents had higher COVID-19 mortality rates (b = 2.61, 95% CI: 0.36, 4.87, P = 0.023). Larger population cohorts were associated with lower COVID-19 mortality rates after adjusting for other variables in the model (b = -1.39, 95% CI: -2.07, -0.71, P < 0.001). Population density was not significantly associated with COVID-19 mortality rates after adjustment across counties in the NY state. Public ridership was not indicative of cases or mortality across states in the USA; however, it is a significant factor associated with incidence (but not mortality) in NY counties. CONCLUSION: Population density was the only significant predictor of mortality across states in the USA. Lower mean age, lower median household incomes and more densely populated states were at higher risk of COVID-19 infection. Population density was not found to be a significant independent variable compared to minority status and socioeconomic factors in the New York epicenter. Meanwhile, public ridership was found to be a significant factor associated with incidence in New York counties.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Incidence , Minority Groups , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
6.
J Womens Health (Larchmt) ; 30(4): 492-501, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1196965

ABSTRACT

Background: Smaller studies suggest lower morbidity and mortality associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in women. Our aim is to assess the impact of female sex on outcomes in a large cohort of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective observational cohort study of 10,630 adult patients hospitalized with a confirmed COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction between March 1, 2020 and April 27, 2020, with follow-up conducted through June 4, 2020. Logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between sex and the primary outcomes, including length of stay, admission to intensive care unit (ICU), need for mechanical ventilation, pressor requirement, and all-cause mortality as well as major adverse events and in-hospital COVID-19 treatments. Results: In the multivariable analysis, women had 27% lower odds of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.81; p < 0.001), 24% lower odds of ICU admission (OR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.69-0.84; p < 0.001), 26% lower odds of mechanical ventilation (OR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.66-0.82; p < 0.001), and 25% lower odds of vasopressor requirement (OR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.67-0.84; p < 0.001). Women had 34% less odds of having acute cardiac injury (OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.59-0.74; p < 0.001; n = 7,289), 16% less odds of acute kidney injury (OR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.76-0.92; p < 0.001; n = 9,840), and 27% less odds of venous thromboembolism (OR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.56-0.96; p < 0.02; c-statistic 0.85, n = 9,407). Conclusions: Female sex is associated with lower odds of in-hospital outcomes, major adverse events, and all-cause mortality. There may be protective mechanisms inherent to female sex, which explain differences in COVID-19 outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , New York/epidemiology , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Sex Distribution , Sex Factors , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
8.
Thromb Haemost ; 121(12): 1684-1695, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1171416

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) has been associated with significant risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), arterial thromboembolism (ATE), and mortality particularly among hospitalized patients with critical illness and elevated D-dimer (Dd) levels. Conflicting data have yet to elucidate optimal thromboprophylaxis dosing. HEP-COVID (NCT04401293) is a phase 3, multicenter, pragmatic, prospective, randomized, pseudo-blinded, active control trial to evaluate efficacy and safety of therapeutic-dose low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) versus prophylactic-/intermediate-dose LMWH or unfractionated heparin (UFH) for prevention of a primary efficacy composite outcome of VTE, ATE, and all-cause mortality 30 ± 2 days post-enrollment. Eligible patients have COVID-19 diagnosis by nasal swab or serologic testing, requirement for supplemental oxygen per investigator judgment, and Dd >4 × upper limit of normal (ULN) or sepsis-induced coagulopathy score ≥4. Subjects are randomized to enoxaparin 1 mg/kg subcutaneous (SQ)/two times a day (BID) (creatinine clearance [CrCl] ≥ 30 mL/min) or 0.5 mg/kg (CrCl 15-30 mL/min) versus local institutional prophylactic regimens including (1) UFH up to 22,500 IU (international unit) daily (divided BID or three times a day), (2) enoxaparin 30 and 40 mg SQ QD (once daily) or BID, or (3) dalteparin 2,500 IU or 5,000 IU QD. The principal safety outcome is major bleeding. Events are adjudicated locally. Based on expected 40% relative risk reduction with treatment-dose compared with prophylactic-dose prophylaxis, 308 subjects will be enrolled (assuming 20% drop-out) to achieve 80% power. Distinguishing design features include an enriched population for the composite endpoint anchored on Dd >4 × ULN, stratification by intensive care unit (ICU) versus non-ICU, and the ability to capture asymptomatic proximal deep venous thrombosis via screening ultrasonography prior to discharge.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , COVID-19/drug therapy , Enoxaparin/administration & dosage , Thromboembolism/drug therapy , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/diagnosis , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic , Enoxaparin/adverse effects , Humans , Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Thromboembolism/etiology , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , United States , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control
9.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 51(4): 897-901, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1118256

ABSTRACT

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) has emerged as an important issue in patients with COVID-19. The purpose of this study is to identify the incidence of VTE and mortality in COVID-19 patients initially presenting to a large health system. Our retrospective study included adult patients (excluding patients presenting with obstetric/gynecologic conditions) across a multihospital health system in the New York Metropolitan Region from March 1-April 27, 2020. VTE and mortality rates within 8 h of assessment were described. In 10,871 adults with COVID-19, 118 patients (1.09%) were diagnosed with symptomatic VTE (101 pulmonary embolism, 17 deep vein thrombosis events) and 28 patients (0.26%) died during initial assessment. Among these 146 patients, 64.4% were males, 56.8% were 60 years or older, 15.1% had a BMI > 35, and 11.6% were admitted to the intensive care unit. Comorbidities included hypertension (46.6%), diabetes (24.7%), hyperlipidemia (14.4%), chronic lung disease (12.3%), coronary artery disease (11.0%), and prior VTE (7.5%). Key medications included corticosteroids (22.6%), statins (21.2%), antiplatelets (20.6%), and anticoagulants (20.6%). Highest D-Dimer was greater than six times the upper limit of normal in 51.4%. Statin and antiplatelet use were associated with decreased VTE or mortality (each p < 0.01). In COVID-19 patients who initially presented to a large multihospital health system, the overall symptomatic VTE and mortality rate was over 1.0%. Statin and antiplatelet use were associated with decreased VTE or mortality. The potential benefits of antithrombotics in high risk COVID-19 patients during the pre-hospitalization period deserves study.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Pulmonary Embolism , Venous Thrombosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/analysis , Humans , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Incidence , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality , New York/epidemiology , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Protective Factors , Pulmonary Embolism/blood , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnosis , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Pulmonary Embolism/mortality , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Venous Thrombosis/blood , Venous Thrombosis/diagnosis , Venous Thrombosis/etiology , Venous Thrombosis/mortality
10.
BMJ Open ; 11(2): e042965, 2021 02 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1072759

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe the pattern of hydroxychloroquine use and examine the association between hydroxychloroquine use and clinical outcomes arising from changes in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s recommendation during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. DESIGN: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We included hospitalised adult patients at Northwell Health hospitals with confirmed COVID-19 infections between 1 March 2020 and 11 May 2020. We categorised changes in the FDA's recommendation as pre-FDA approval (1 March 2020-27 March 2020), FDA approval (28 March 2020-23 April 2020), and FDA warning (24 April 2020-11 May 2020). The hydroxychloroquine-treated group received at least one dose within 48 hours of hospital admission. PRIMARY OUTCOME: A composite of intubation and inpatient death. RESULTS: The percentages of patients who were treated with hydroxychloroquine were 192/2202 (8.7%) pre-FDA approval, 2902/6741 (43.0%) FDA approval, and 176/1066 (16.5%) FDA warning period (p<0.001). Using propensity score matching, there was a higher rate of the composite outcome among patients treated with hydroxychloroquine (49/192, 25.5%) compared with no hydroxychloroquine (66/384, 17.2%) in the pre-FDA approval period (p=0.03) but not in the FDA approval period (25.5% vs 22.6%, p=0.08) or the FDA warning (21.0% vs 15.1%, p=0.11) periods. Coincidently, there was an increase in number of patients with COVID-19 and disease severity during the FDA approval period (24.1% during FDA approval vs 21.4% during pre-FDA approval period had the composite outcome). Hydroxychloroquine use was associated with increased odds of the composite outcome during the pre-FDA approval period (OR=1.65 (95% CI 1.09 to 2.51)) but not during the FDA approval (OR=1.17 (95% CI 0.99 to 1.39)) and FDA warning (OR=1.50 (95% CI 0.94 to 2.39)) periods. CONCLUSIONS: Hydroxychloroquine use was associated with adverse clinical outcomes only during the pre-FDA approval period but not during the FDA approval and warning periods, even after adjusting for concurrent changes in the percentage of patients with COVID-19 treated with hydroxychloroquine and the number (and disease severity) of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 infections.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/administration & dosage , United States Food and Drug Administration , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Male , Medicare , Middle Aged , New York , Propensity Score , Retrospective Studies , United States , Young Adult
11.
Chest ; 159(3): 933-948, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1064923

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cytokine storm is a marker of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) illness severity and increased mortality. Immunomodulatory treatments have been repurposed to improve mortality outcomes. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do immunomodulatory therapies improve survival in patients with COVID-19 cytokine storm (CCS)? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of electronic health records across the Northwell Health system. COVID-19 patients hospitalized between March 1, 2020, and April 24, 2020, were included. CCS was defined by inflammatory markers: ferritin, > 700 ng/mL; C-reactive protein (CRP), > 30 mg/dL; or lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), > 300 U/L. Patients were subdivided into six groups: no immunomodulatory treatment (standard of care) and five groups that received either corticosteroids, anti-IL-6 antibody (tocilizumab), or anti-IL-1 therapy (anakinra) alone or in combination with corticosteroids. The primary outcome was hospital mortality. RESULTS: Five thousand seven hundred seventy-six patients met the inclusion criteria. The most common comorbidities were hypertension (44%-59%), diabetes (32%-46%), and cardiovascular disease (5%-14%). Patients most frequently met criteria with high LDH (76.2%) alone or in combination, followed by ferritin (63.2%) and CRP (8.4%). More than 80% of patients showed an elevated D-dimer. Patients treated with corticosteroids and tocilizumab combination showed lower mortality compared with patients receiving standard-of-care (SoC) treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 0.44; 95% CI, 0.35-0.55; P < .0001) and with patients treated with corticosteroids alone (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53-0.83; P = .004) or in combination with anakinra (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50-0.81; P = .003). Corticosteroids when administered alone (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.76; P < .0001) or in combination with tocilizumab (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.35-0.55; P < .0001) or anakinra (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.57-0.81; P < .0001) improved hospital survival compared with SoC treatment. INTERPRETATION: The combination of corticosteroids with tocilizumab showed superior survival outcome when compared with SoC treatment as well as treatment with corticosteroids alone or in combination with anakinra. Furthermore, corticosteroid use either alone or in combination with tocilizumab or anakinra was associated with reduced hospital mortality for patients with CCS compared with patients receiving SoC treatment.


Subject(s)
Adrenal Cortex Hormones/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , COVID-19 , Cytokine Release Syndrome , Immunomodulation , Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein/administration & dosage , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Cytokine Release Syndrome/immunology , Cytokine Release Syndrome/therapy , Cytokine Release Syndrome/virology , Drug Repositioning , Drug Therapy, Combination/methods , Electronic Health Records/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/administration & dosage , Medication Therapy Management/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Severity of Illness Index , Survival Analysis , United States/epidemiology
12.
Heart Rhythm ; 18(4): 501-507, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1046413

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most encountered arrhythmia and has been associated with worse in-hospital outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study was to determine the incidence of AF in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as well as its impact on in-hospital mortality. METHODS: Patients hospitalized with a positive COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction test between March 1 and April 27, 2020, were identified from the common medical record system of 13 Northwell Health hospitals. Natural language processing search algorithms were used to identify and classify AF. Patients were classified as having AF or not. AF was further classified as new-onset AF vs history of AF. RESULTS: AF occurred in 1687 of 9564 patients (17.6%). Of those, 1109 patients (65.7%) had new-onset AF. Propensity score matching of 1238 pairs of patients with AF and without AF showed higher in-hospital mortality in the AF group (54.3% vs 37.2%; P < .0001). Within the AF group, propensity score matching of 500 pairs showed higher in-hospital mortality in patients with new-onset AF as compared with those with a history of AF (55.2% vs 46.8%; P = .009). The risk ratio of in-hospital mortality for new-onset AF in patients with sinus rhythm was 1.56 (95% confidence interval 1.42-1.71; P < .0001). The presence of cardiac disease was not associated with a higher risk of in-hospital mortality in patients with AF (P = .1). CONCLUSION: In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 17.6% experienced AF. AF, particularly new-onset, was an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality.


Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Atrial Fibrillation/virology , COVID-19/diagnosis , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Propensity Score , Retrospective Studies
13.
Thromb Haemost ; 121(8): 1043-1053, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1038232

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We aimed to identify the prevalence and predictors of venous thromboembolism (VTE) or mortality in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of hospitalized adult patients admitted to an integrated health care network in the New York metropolitan region between March 1, 2020 and April 27, 2020. The final analysis included 9,407 patients with an overall VTE rate of 2.9% (2.4% in the medical ward and 4.9% in the intensive care unit [ICU]) and a VTE or mortality rate of 26.1%. Most patients received prophylactic-dose thromboprophylaxis. Multivariable analysis showed significantly reduced VTE or mortality with Black race, history of hypertension, angiotensin converting enzyme/angiotensin receptor blocker use, and initial prophylactic anticoagulation. It also showed significantly increased VTE or mortality with age 60 years or greater, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) of 3 or greater, patients on Medicare, history of heart failure, history of cerebrovascular disease, body mass index greater than 35, steroid use, antirheumatologic medication use, hydroxychloroquine use, maximum D-dimer four times or greater than the upper limit of normal (ULN), ICU level of care, increasing creatinine, and decreasing platelet counts. CONCLUSION: In our large cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients, the overall in-hospital VTE rate was 2.9% (4.9% in the ICU) and a VTE or mortality rate of 26.1%. Key predictors of VTE or mortality included advanced age, increasing CCI, history of cardiovascular disease, ICU level of care, and elevated maximum D-dimer with a cutoff at least four times the ULN. Use of prophylactic-dose anticoagulation but not treatment-dose anticoagulation was associated with reduced VTE or mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Blood Coagulation , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Venous Thromboembolism/blood , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Venous Thromboembolism/mortality , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL