Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 30
Filter
1.
Mayo Clin Proc ; 98(5): 736-747, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2319813

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate an updated lung injury prediction score for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (c-LIPS) tailored for predicting acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in COVID-19. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a registry-based cohort study using the Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study. Hospitalized adult patients between January 2020 and January 2022 were screened. Patients who qualified for ARDS within the first day of admission were excluded. Development cohort consisted of patients enrolled from participating Mayo Clinic sites. The validation analyses were performed on remaining patients enrolled from more than 120 hospitals in 15 countries. The original lung injury prediction score (LIPS) was calculated and enhanced using reported COVID-19-specific laboratory risk factors, constituting c-LIPS. The main outcome was ARDS development and secondary outcomes included hospital mortality, invasive mechanical ventilation, and progression in WHO ordinal scale. RESULTS: The derivation cohort consisted of 3710 patients, of whom 1041 (28.1%) developed ARDS. The c-LIPS discriminated COVID-19 patients who developed ARDS with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.79 compared with original LIPS (AUC, 0.74; P<.001) with good calibration accuracy (Hosmer-Lemeshow P=.50). Despite different characteristics of the two cohorts, the c-LIPS's performance was comparable in the validation cohort of 5426 patients (15.9% ARDS), with an AUC of 0.74; and its discriminatory performance was significantly higher than the LIPS (AUC, 0.68; P<.001). The c-LIPS's performance in predicting the requirement for invasive mechanical ventilation in derivation and validation cohorts had an AUC of 0.74 and 0.72, respectively. CONCLUSION: In this large patient sample c-LIPS was successfully tailored to predict ARDS in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Lung Injury , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Humans , COVID-19/complications , Cohort Studies , Lung , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology
2.
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes ; 7(2): 93-98, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2280745

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to considerable morbidity and mortality across the world. Lung transplant is a viable option for a few with COVID-19-related lung disease. Whom and when to transplant has been the major question impacting the transplant community given the novelty of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We describe a pitfall of presumed prolonged shedding of SARS-CoV-2 in a patient with COVID-19 associated acute respiratory distress syndrome leading to COVID-19 pneumonia after lung transplant. This raises concerns that replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 virus can persist for months post-infection and can lead to re-infection of grafts in the future.

3.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord ; 2022 Sep 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2258304

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to explore the racial disparities in the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), and acute kidney injury (AKI) in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of prospectively collected data of consecutive COVID-19 patients hospitalized from March 11, 2020 to May 27, 2021. The primary outcome measures were the incidence of DVT/PE and mortality. The secondary outcome measures included differences in the length of hospitalization, need for intensive care unit care, readmission, and AKI. Multivariable regression models were used to assess for independent predictors of the primary and secondary outcome measures. RESULTS: The present study included 876 hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The mean age was 64.4 ± 16.2 years, and 355 were women (40.5%). Of the 876 patients, 694 (79.2%) had identified as White, 111 (12.7%) as Black/African American, 48 (5.5%) as Asian, and 23 (2.6%) as other. The overall incidence of DVT/PE was 8.7%. The DVT/PE incidence rates differed across the race groups and was highest for Black/African American patients (n = 18; 16.2%), followed by Asian patients (n = 5; 10.4%), White patients (n = 52; 7.5%), and other (n = 1; 4.4%; P = .03). All but one of the hospitalization outcomes examined demonstrated no differences according to race, including the hospitalization stay (P = .33), need for intensive care unit care (P = .20), readmission rates (P = .52), and hospital all-cause mortality (P = .29). The AKI incidence differed among races, affecting a higher proportion of Black/African American patients (P=.003). On multivariable regression analysis, Black/African American race (odds ratio [OR], 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-4.0; P = .04) and higher D-dimer levels (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.1-1.2; P < .0001) were predictors of DVT/PE. In addition, Black/African American race (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.4-3.7; P = .001), lower hemoglobin levels (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.8-0.9; P ≤ .0001), male sex (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.4; P = .005), hypertension (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.4-3.1; P = .0005), and older age (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.006-1.03; P = .003) were predictors of AKI. CONCLUSIONS: In our single-center case series, we found a higher incidence of DVT/PE and AKI among Black/African American patients with COVID-19. Black/African American race and D-dimer levels were independent predictors of DVT/PE, and Black/African American race, hemoglobin, and D-dimer levels were independent predictors of AKI.

4.
Simul Healthc ; 2021 Nov 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2233980

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Frontline health care workers who perform potentially aerosol-generating procedures, such as endotracheal intubations, in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 may be at an increased risk of exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. To continue to care for patients with coronavirus disease 2019, minimizing exposure is paramount. Using simulation, we devised a testing method to evaluate devices that may mitigate the spread of aerosol and droplet-sized particles. METHODS: In this prospective single-center study, participants intubated a manikin 3 times using standard personal protective equipment, once with no barrier device, once with an acrylic box, and once with a modified horizontal drape. The micrometer-sized particle count, generated by a nebulization model, was recorded before and after each intubation. The first-pass intubation rate and time to intubation were recorded. Each operator completed a postsimulation survey about their experience using the barrier devices. RESULTS: Thirty airway proceduralists completed the simulation and survey. There was no significant difference in particle counts (aerosols or droplets) or first-pass intubation, but the horizontal drape was found to significantly increase intubation time (P = 0.01). Most participants preferred the drape over the acrylic box or no barrier device. CONCLUSIONS: The acrylic box and plastic drape did not mitigate particle spread. However, our testing method can be used to test barrier designs using negative pressure or other mitigation strategies for particle spread.

5.
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes ; 7(2): 109-121, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2181434

ABSTRACT

Objective: To test the hypothesis that the Monoclonal Antibody Screening Score performs consistently better in identifying the need for monoclonal antibody infusion throughout each "wave" of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant predominance during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and that the infusion of contemporary monoclonal antibody treatments is associated with a lower risk of hospitalization. Patients and Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we evaluated the efficacy of monoclonal antibody treatment compared with that of no monoclonal antibody treatment in symptomatic adults who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 regardless of their risk factors for disease progression or vaccination status during different periods of SARS-CoV-2 variant predominance. The primary outcome was hospitalization within 28 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. The study was conducted on patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 from November 19, 2020, through May 12, 2022. Results: Of the included 118,936 eligible patients, hospitalization within 28 days of COVID-19 diagnosis occurred in 2.52% (456/18,090) of patients who received monoclonal antibody treatment and 6.98% (7,037/100,846) of patients who did not. Treatment with monoclonal antibody therapies was associated with a lower risk of hospitalization when using stratified data analytics, propensity scoring, and regression and machine learning models with and without adjustments for putative confounding variables, such as advanced age and coexisting medical conditions (eg, relative risk, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.14-0.17). Conclusion: Among patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, including those who have been vaccinated, monoclonal antibody treatment was associated with a lower risk of hospital admission during each wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

6.
Open Respir Med J ; 16: e187430642207130, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2079931

ABSTRACT

Background: Better delineation of COVID-19 presentations in different climatological conditions might assist with prompt diagnosis and isolation of patients. Objectives: To study the association of latitude and altitude with COVID-19 symptomatology. Methods: This observational cohort study included 12267 adult COVID-19 patients hospitalized between 03/2020 and 01/2021 at 181 hospitals in 24 countries within the SCCM Discovery VIRUS: COVID-19 Registry. The outcome was symptoms at admission, categorized as respiratory, gastrointestinal, neurological, mucocutaneous, cardiovascular, and constitutional. Other symptoms were grouped as atypical. Multivariable regression modeling was performed, adjusting for baseline characteristics. Models were fitted using generalized estimating equations to account for the clustering. Results: The median age was 62 years, with 57% males. The median age and percentage of patients with comorbidities increased with higher latitude. Conversely, patients with comorbidities decreased with elevated altitudes. The most common symptoms were respiratory (80%), followed by constitutional (75%). Presentation with respiratory symptoms was not associated with the location. After adjustment, at lower latitudes (<30º), patients presented less commonly with gastrointestinal symptoms (p<.001, odds ratios for 15º, 25º, and 30º: 0.32, 0.81, and 0.98, respectively). Atypical symptoms were present in 21% of the patients and showed an association with altitude (p=.026, odds ratios for 75, 125, 400, and 600 meters above sea level: 0.44, 0.60, 0.84, and 0.77, respectively). Conclusions: We observed geographic variability in symptoms of COVID-19 patients. Respiratory symptoms were most common but were not associated with the location. Gastrointestinal symptoms were less frequent in lower latitudes. Atypical symptoms were associated with higher altitude.

7.
BMJ Open ; 12(9): e065453, 2022 09 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2038322

ABSTRACT

Vaccination is critical to control the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, but despite the availability of safe and effective vaccine in children over 5 years, vaccination rates remain low. There is paucity of data about vaccine acceptance and factors influencing parents' hesitancy about the COVID-19 vaccine for young children. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To estimate vaccine acceptance by parents of children 6 months through 4 years, and to evaluate the factors influencing vaccine hesitancy. METHODS: Electronic survey was sent to parents of children 6 months through 4 years through an online portal account at Mayo Clinic Health System, Northwest-Wisconsin. Data were captured via Research Electronic Data Capture secured data collection software. Bivariate and multivariate regression was used to determine most pertinent factors influencing parents' decisions against the outcome, 'Intent to Vaccinate'. RESULTS: 39.7% of the parents were 'very likely' or 'somewhat likely' to vaccinate their children once the vaccine became available, while 49.8% were not likely or highly unlikely to vaccinate. Routine childhood vaccination, receiving seasonal influenza vaccine, parents' perception of COVID-19 severity in children and safety and effectiveness of the vaccine were all associated with more vaccine acceptance. 71.4% of parents who will likely not vaccinate their children indicated that they are unlikely to change their decision. The need for more research on the vaccine and more information from the PCP office were the most common reasons behind the vaccine decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine hesitancy remains a major issue regarding uptake of the upcoming COVID-19 vaccine. Strong and clear evidence-based recommendations from primary care provider and more information from trusted websites such as Centers for Disease Control and Prevention can decrease vaccine hesitancy in parents. Further research targeted at understanding beliefs and perspectives of parents from different demographics can assist policy-makers in implementing measures to improve vaccination rates in children and tailor our dialogue to match the needs of our patients and families.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Child , Child, Preschool , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Pandemics , Parents , Wisconsin
8.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(1): e892-e894, 2022 Aug 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2008525

ABSTRACT

We characterized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) breakthrough cases admitted to a single center in Florida. With the emergence of delta variant, an increased number of hospitalizations was seen due to breakthrough infections. These patients were older and more likely to have comorbidities. Preventive measures should be maintained even after vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Florida/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes ; 6(5): 409-419, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1914806

ABSTRACT

Objective: To assess the proportion of indeterminate QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) results in patients admitted for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia and evaluate the factors associated with indeterminate QFT-Plus results. Patients and Methods: Data on COVID-19 admissions at Mayo Clinic in Florida were extracted between October 13, 2020, and September 20, 2021, and data from a prepandemic cohort were extracted between October 13, 2018, and September 20, 2019. A secondary analysis of the COVID-19 cohort was performed using gradient boosting modeling to generate variable importance and SHapley Additive exPlanations plots. Results: Our findings demonstrated more indeterminate QFT-Plus test results in patients hospitalized for severe COVID-19 infection than in patients without COVID-19 (139 of 495, 28.1%). The factors associated with indeterminate QFT-Plus test results included elevated levels of C-reactive protein, ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase and interleukin-6 and included lower levels of leukocyte, lymphocyte, and platelet counts. Conclusion: The patients with severe COVID-19 had a higher likelihood of indeterminate QFT-Plus results, which were associated with elevated levels of inflammatory markers consistent with severe infection. Interferon-gamma release assay screening tests are likely confounded by COVID-19 infection itself, limiting the screening ability for latent tuberculosis infection reactivation. Indeterminate QFT-Plus results may also require follow-up QFT-Plus testing after patient recovery from COVID-19, increasing the cost and complexity of medical decision making and management. Additional risk assessments may be needed in this patient population for screening for latent tuberculosis infection in patients with severe COVID-19.

10.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord ; 10(4): 939-944.e3, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1899997

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Recent studies have characterized racial disparities in the incidence of VTE. The aim of our study was to present a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between race and VTE in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review to evaluate the number of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) events reported by racial groups in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. For the qualitative analysis, independent reviewers extracted the data from eligible studies, and we used the Newcastle-Ottawa scale to assess the quality of design and content for accurate interpretation. For the quantitative analysis, we pooled the odds ratios with Der Simonian and Laird random effects models. RESULTS: The qualitative analysis included 11 studies, with 6 included in the meta-analysis. All studies were observational, retrospective cohort studies, except for one retrospective case-control study. Six studies were eligible for the meta-analysis owing to the high interstudy heterogeneity; thus, the variable reports of racial groups reduced the cohort to Black/African American and White patients (n = 9723) in the analysis. The estimated proportion for DVT and PE events for Black/African American and White patients was 0.07 (95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.10) and 0.04 (95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.07), respectively. The P value of .13 suggested nonsignificant differences in the VTE rates between Black/African American and White patients. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, the proportion of DVT and PE events between Black/African American and White patients with COVID-19 were comparable. Future COVID-19 studies should include systematic racial group reporting to identify any disparities in the setting of VTE events.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pulmonary Embolism , Venous Thromboembolism , Venous Thrombosis , COVID-19/complications , Case-Control Studies , Humans , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnosis , Pulmonary Embolism/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiology , Venous Thrombosis/diagnosis , Venous Thrombosis/epidemiology
12.
J Intern Med ; 292(1): 127-135, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1759213

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: While COVID-19 immunization programs attempted to reach targeted rates, cases rose significantly since the emergence of the delta variant. This retrospective cohort study describes the correlation between antispike antibodies and outcomes of hospitalized, breakthrough cases during the delta variant surge. METHODS: All patients with positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction hospitalized at Mayo Clinic Florida from 19 June 2021 to 11 November 2021 were considered for analysis. Cases were analyzed by vaccination status. Breakthrough cases were then analyzed by low and high antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, with a cut-off value of ≥132 U/ml. Outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), need for intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation, and mortality. We used 1:1 nearest neighbor propensity score matching without replacement to assess for confounders. RESULTS: Among 627 hospitalized patients with COVID-19, vaccine breakthrough cases were older with more comorbidities compared to unvaccinated. After propensity score matching, the unvaccinated patients had higher mortality (27 [28.4%] vs. 12 [12.6%], p = 0.002) and LOS (7 [1.0-57.0] vs. 5 [1.0-31.0] days, p = 0.011). In breakthrough cases, low-titer patients were more likely to be solid organ transplant recipients (16 [34.0%] vs. 9 [12.3%], p = 0.006), with higher need for ICU care (24 [51.1%] vs. 22 [11.0%], p = 0.034), longer hospital LOS (median 6 vs. 5 days, p = 0.013), and higher mortality (10 [21.3%] vs. 5 [6.8%], p = 0.025) than high-titer patients. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized breakthrough cases were more likely to have underlying risk factors than unvaccinated patients. Low-spike antibody titers may serve as an indicator for poor prognosis in breakthrough cases admitted to the hospital.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19 , Hospitalization , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/blood , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Ann Med ; 54(1): 775-789, 2022 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1730419

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Colchicine, because of its anti-inflammatory and possible anti-viral properties, has been proposed as potential therapeutic option for COVID-19. The role of colchicine to mitigate "cytokine storm" and to decrease the severity and mortality associated with COVID-19 has been evaluated in many studies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of colchicine on morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA recommendations. The literature search was conducted in 6 medical databases from inception to February 17, 2021 to identify studies evaluating colchicine as a therapeutic agent in COVID-19. All included studies were evaluated for risk of bias (ROB) using the Revised Cochrane ROB tool for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for case-control and cohort studies. RESULTS: Four RCTs and four observational studies were included in the final analysis. One study evaluated colchicine in outpatients, while all others evaluated inpatient use of colchicine. There was significant variability in treatment protocols for colchicine and standard of care in all studies. A statistically significant decrease in all-cause mortality was observed in three observational studies. The risk of mechanical ventilation was significantly reduced only in one observational study. Length of hospitalisation was significantly reduced in two RCTs. Risk for hospitalisation was not significantly decreased in the study evaluating colchicine in outpatients. Very few studies had low risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Based on the available data, colchicine shall not be recommended to treat COVID-19. Further high-quality and multi-center RCTs are required to assess the meaningful impact of this drug in COVID-19.KEY MESSAGESColchicine, an anti-inflammatory agent has demonstrated anti-viral properties in in-vitro studies by degrading the microtubules, as well as by inhibiting the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines.Colchicine has been studied as a potential therapeutic option for COVID-19, with variable results.Until further research can establish the efficacy of colchicine in COVID-19, the use of colchicine in COVID-19 shall be restricted to clinical trials.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Colchicine/therapeutic use , Humans , Morbidity , Observational Studies as Topic , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2
14.
BMC Nephrol ; 23(1): 63, 2022 02 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690946

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV2 develop acute kidney injury (AKI) frequently, yet gaps remain in understanding why adults seem to have higher rates compared to children. Our objectives were to evaluate the epidemiology of SARS-CoV2-related AKI across the age spectrum and determine if known risk factors such as illness severity contribute to its pattern. METHODS: Secondary analysis of ongoing prospective international cohort registry. AKI was defined by KDIGO-creatinine only criteria. Log-linear, logistic and generalized estimating equations assessed odds ratios (OR), risk differences (RD), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for AKI and mortality adjusting for sex, pre-existing comorbidities, race/ethnicity, illness severity, and clustering within centers. Sensitivity analyses assessed different baseline creatinine estimators. RESULTS: Overall, among 6874 hospitalized patients, 39.6% (n = 2719) developed AKI. There was a bimodal distribution of AKI by age with peaks in older age (≥60 years) and middle childhood (5-15 years), which persisted despite controlling for illness severity, pre-existing comorbidities, or different baseline creatinine estimators. For example, the adjusted OR of developing AKI among hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV2 was 2.74 (95% CI 1.66-4.56) for 10-15-year-olds compared to 30-35-year-olds and similarly was 2.31 (95% CI 1.71-3.12) for 70-75-year-olds, while adjusted OR dropped to 1.39 (95% CI 0.97-2.00) for 40-45-year-olds compared to 30-35-year-olds. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV2-related AKI is common with a bimodal age distribution that is not fully explained by known risk factors or confounders. As the pandemic turns to disproportionately impacting younger individuals, this deserves further investigation as the presence of AKI and SARS-CoV2 infection increases hospital mortality risk.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , Inpatients/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Acute Kidney Injury/etiology , Adolescent , Adult , Age Distribution , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Comorbidity , Confidence Intervals , Creatinine/blood , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Registries/statistics & numerical data , Severity of Illness Index
15.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord ; 10(3): 578-584.e2, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1650575

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the radiographic resolution of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) examinations in patients diagnosed with acute PE while hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to understand the mid-term and long-term implications of anticoagulation therapy. METHODS: We identified patients with acute PE per CECT and at least one follow-up CECT from March 11, 2020, to May 27, 2021, using a prospective registry of all hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection receiving care within a multicenter Health System. Initial and follow-up CECT examinations were reviewed independently by two radiologists to evaluate for PE resolution. The Modified Miller Score was used to assess for thrombus burden at diagnosis and on follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 6070 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection, 5.7% (348/6070) were diagnosed with acute PE and 13.5% (47/348) had a follow-up CECT examination. The mean ± standard deviation time to follow-up imaging was 44 ± 48 days (range, 3-161 days). Of 47 patients, 47 (72.3%) had radiographic resolution of PE, with a mean time to follow-up of 48 ± 43 days (range, 6-239 days). All patients received anticoagulation monotherapy for a mean of 149 ± 95 days and this included apixaban (63.8%), warfarin (12.8%), and rivaroxaban (8.5%), among others. The mean Modified Miller Score at PE diagnosis and follow-up was 4.8 ± 4.2 (range, 1-14) and 1.4 ± 3.3 (range, 0-16; P < .0001), respectively. Nine patients (19%) died at a mean of 13 ± 8 days after follow-up CECT (range, 1-27 days) and at a mean of 28 ± 16 days after admission (range, 11-68 days). Seen of the nine deaths (78%) deaths were associated with progression of COVID-19 pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 have a clinically apparent 5.7% rate of developing PE. In patients with follow-up imaging, 72.3% had radiographic thrombus resolution at a mean of 44 days while on anticoagulation. Prospective studies of the natural history of PEs with COVID-19 that include systematic follow-up imaging are warranted to help guide anticoagulation recommendations.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , COVID-19 , Pulmonary Embolism , Acute Disease , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , Humans , Prospective Studies , Pulmonary Embolism/diagnostic imaging , Pulmonary Embolism/drug therapy , Treatment Outcome
16.
Critical Care Medicine ; 50:83-83, 2022.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1593486

ABSTRACT

Repurposed medications, including antivirals, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine, immunomodulators and therapeutic dose anticoagulants were evaluated using multivariable adjusted random effects logistic regression models and unsupervised clustering. B Results: b Among 7069 adults hospitalized with COVID-19, 1979 (28%) received antivirals, 2876 (41%) received corticosteroids, 1779 (25%) received hydroxychloroquine, 620 (9%) received immunomodulators and 2154 (31%) received therapeutic dose anticoagulants. Contribution of hospital site to risk-adjusted variation was 46% for antivirals, 30% for corticosteroids, 48% for hydroxychloroquine, 46% for immunomodulators, and 19% for therapeutic dose anticoagulants. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of Critical Care Medicine is the property of Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

17.
J Clin Pharm Ther ; 47(2): 243-247, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511340

ABSTRACT

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Procalcitonin (PCT) levels rise in systemic inflammation, especially if bacterial in origin. COVID-19, caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, presents with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Elevated procalcitonin in COVID-19 is considered as a marker for severity of disease. There is no study available that indicates whether elevated PCT in COVID-19 is associated with inflammation or superimposed bacterial infection. The objective of this study is to evaluate the association between PCT levels and superadded bacterial infection, and the effect of discontinuation of antibiotic in the low PCT (<0.25 ng/ml) group on patients' outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients admitted with COVID-19 pneumonia at a single tertiary care centre. We collected information on demographics, co-morbidities, PCT level, antibiotic use, culture results for bacterial infection, hospital length of stay (LOS) and mortality. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Continuous variables were summarized with the sample median, interquartile range, mean and range. Categorical variables were summarized with number and percentage of patients. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: We studied a total of 147 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. 101 (69%) patients had a low PCT level (< 0.25 ng/ml). Bacterial culture results were negative for all patients, except 1 who had a markedly elevated PCT level (141.ng/ml). In patients with low PCT, 42% received no antibiotics, 59% received antibiotics initially, 32 (57%) patients antibiotic discontinued early (within 24 hours) and their culture remained negative for bacterial infections during hospitalizations. LOS was shorter (6 days in low PCT group compared to 9 days) in high PCT group. LOS was 1 day shorter (5 days vs 6 days) in no antibiotic group compared to antibiotic group. Our study examines the association between PCT level and superadded bacterial infection in COVID-19 pneumonia. Our results demonstrate that most patients admitted with COVID-19 have a low PCT (<0.25 ng/ml), which suggests no superadded bacterial infection and supports the previously published literature regarding low PCT in viral pneumonia. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Procalcitonin level remains low in the absence of bacterial infection. Early de-escalation/discontinuation of antibiotics is safe without adverse outcomes in COVID-19 pneumonia. Early de-escalation/discontinuation of antibiotics is associated with lower LOS.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antimicrobial Stewardship/methods , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , COVID-19/blood , Procalcitonin/blood , Withholding Treatment , Aged , Biomarkers/blood , Female , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Crit Care Explor ; 3(11): e0566, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1505988

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: At the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, medications repurposed for management of coronavirus disease 2019 were used in the absence of clinical trial evidence. OBJECTIVES: To describe the variation and evolution in use of repurposed medications for coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational cohort study of adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 between February 15, 2020, and April 12, 2021, across 76 United States and international hospitals within the Society of Critical Care Medicine's Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study coronavirus disease 2019 registry. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Hospital variation was quantified using multivariable adjusted random effects logistic regression models and unsupervised clustering. Repurposed medications included antivirals, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine, immunomodulators, and therapeutic dose anticoagulants. RESULTS: Among 7,069 adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019, 1,979 (28%) received antivirals, 2,876 (41%) received corticosteroids, 1,779 (25%) received hydroxychloroquine, 620 (9%) received immunomodulators, and 2,154 (31%) received therapeutic dose anticoagulants. Contribution of hospital site to risk-adjusted variation was 46% for antivirals, 30% for corticosteroids, 48% for hydroxychloroquine, 46% for immunomodulators, and 52% for therapeutic dose anticoagulants. Compared with the early pandemic, the later pandemic practice phenotypes converged with increased use of antivirals (odds ratio, 3.14; 95% CI, 2.40-4.10) and corticosteroids (odds ratio, 5.43; 95% CI, 4.23-6.97), with decreased use of hydroxychloroquine (odds ratio, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.01-0.04) and immunomodulators (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.34-0.70). There was no clinically significant change in the use of therapeutic dose anticoagulants (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02). There were no differences in risk-adjusted mortality between hospitals with high rates of repurposed medication use compared with hospitals with low rates of use. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Hospital variation in the use of repurposed medications varied widely across hospitals early in the pandemic and later converged with the emergence of randomized clinical trials. Platforms developed for rapid activation and enrollment in clinical trials of repurposed medications are needed prior to the next pandemic to expedite effective, evidence-based practice.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL