Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Eur J Radiol Open ; 9: 100431, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1906978

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To compare temporal evolution of imaging features of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and influenza in computed tomography and evaluate their predictive value for distinction. Methods: In this retrospective, multicenter study 179 CT examinations of 52 COVID-19 and 44 influenza critically ill patients were included. Lung involvement, main pattern (ground glass opacity, crazy paving, consolidation) and additional lung and chest findings were evaluated by two independent observers. Additional findings and clinical data were compared patient-wise. A decision tree analysis was performed to identify imaging features with predictive value in distinguishing both entities. Results: In contrast to influenza patients, lung involvement remains high in COVID-19 patients > 14 days after the diagnosis. The predominant pattern in COVID-19 evolves from ground glass at the beginning to consolidation in later disease. In influenza there is more consolidation at the beginning and overall less ground glass opacity (p = 0.002). Decision tree analysis yielded the following: Earlier in disease course, pleural effusion is a typical feature of influenza (p = 0.007) whereas ground glass opacities indicate COVID-19 (p = 0.04). In later disease, particularly more lung involvement (p < 0.001), but also less pleural (p = 0.005) and pericardial (p = 0.003) effusion favor COVID-19 over influenza. Regardless of time point, less lung involvement (p < 0.001), tree-in-bud (p = 0.002) and pericardial effusion (p = 0.01) make influenza more likely than COVID-19. Conclusions: This study identified differences in temporal evolution of imaging features between COVID-19 and influenza. These findings may help to distinguish both diseases in critically ill patients when laboratory findings are delayed or inconclusive.

2.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 12(5)2022 May 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1869507

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 superinfection by Aspergillus (COVID-19-associated aspergillosis, CAPA) is increasingly observed due to increased awareness and use of corticosteroids. The aim of this study is to compare clinical and imaging features between COVID-19 patients with and without associated pulmonary aspergillosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this case-control study, hospitalized patients between March 2020 and March 2021 were evaluated. Two observers independently compared 105 chest CTs of 52 COVID-19 patients without pulmonary aspergillosis to 40 chest CTs of 13 CAPA patients. The following features were evaluated: lung involvement, predominant main pattern (ground glass opacity, crazy paving, consolidation) and additional lung and chest findings. Chronological changes in the abnormal extent upon CT and chronological changes in the main patterns were compared with mixed models. Patient-wise comparisons of additional features and demographic and clinical data were performed using Student's t-test, Chi-squared test, Fisher's exact tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. RESULTS: Compared to COVID-19 patients without pulmonary aspergillosis, CAPA patients were older (mean age (±SD): 70.3 (±7.8) versus 63.5 (±9.5) years (p = 0.01). The time-dependent evolution rates for consolidation (p = 0.02) and ground glass (p = 0.006) differed. In early COVID-19 disease, consolidation was associated with CAPA, whereas ground glass was less common. Chronological changes in the abnormal extent upon CT did not differ (p = 0.29). Regardless of the time point, bronchial wall thickening was observed more frequently in CAPA patients (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: CAPA patients showed a tendency for consolidation in early COVID-19 disease. Bronchial wall thickening and higher patient age were associated with CAPA. The overall lung involvement was similar between both groups.

3.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 11(1): 27, 2022 02 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1673927

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient evidence regarding the role of respirators in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analysed the impact of filtering facepiece class 2 (FFP2) versus surgical masks on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition among Swiss healthcare workers (HCW). METHODS: Our prospective multicentre cohort enrolled HCW from June to August 2020. Participants were asked about COVID-19 risk exposures/behaviours, including preferentially worn mask type when caring for COVID-19 patients outside of aerosol-generating procedures. The impact of FFP2 on (1) self-reported SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal PCR/rapid antigen tests captured during weekly surveys, and (2) SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion between baseline and January/February 2021 was assessed. RESULTS: We enrolled 3259 participants from nine healthcare institutions, whereof 716 (22%) preferentially used FFP2. Among these, 81/716 (11%) reported a SARS-CoV-2-positive swab, compared to 352/2543 (14%) surgical mask users; seroconversion was documented in 85/656 (13%) FFP2 and 426/2255 (19%) surgical mask users. Adjusted for baseline characteristics, COVID-19 exposure, and risk behaviour, FFP2 use was non-significantly associated with decreased risk for SARS-CoV-2-positive swab (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.8, 95% CI 0.6-1.0) and seroconversion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-1.0); household exposure was the strongest risk factor (aHR 10.1, 95% CI 7.5-13.5; aOR 5.0, 95% CI 3.9-6.5). In subgroup analysis, FFP2 use was clearly protective among those with frequent (> 20 patients) COVID-19 exposure (aHR 0.7 for positive swab, 95% CI 0.5-0.8; aOR 0.6 for seroconversion, 95% CI 0.4-1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Respirators compared to surgical masks may convey additional protection from SARS-CoV-2 for HCW with frequent exposure to COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Masks , Respiratory Protective Devices , Adolescent , Adult , Aerosols , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Seroconversion , Switzerland , Young Adult
4.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control ; 11(1): 12, 2022 01 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1643184

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite the adoption of strict infection prevention and control measures, many hospitals have reported outbreaks of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) during the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Following an outbreak of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) in our institution, we sought to systematically analyse characteristics of MDRO outbreaks in times of COVID-19, focussing on contributing factors and specific challenges in controlling these outbreaks. METHODS: We describe results of our own CRAB outbreak investigation and performed a systematic literature review for MDRO (including Candida auris) outbreaks which occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic (between December 2019 and March 2021). Search terms were related to pathogens/resistance mechanisms AND COVID-19. We summarized outbreak characteristics in a narrative synthesis and contrasted contributing factors with implemented control measures. RESULTS: The CRAB outbreak occurred in our intensive care units between September and December 2020 and comprised 10 patients (thereof seven with COVID-19) within two distinct genetic clusters (both ST2 carrying OXA-23). Both clusters presumably originated from COVID-19 patients transferred from the Balkans. Including our outbreak, we identified 17 reports, mostly caused by Candida auris (n = 6) or CRAB (n = 5), with an overall patient mortality of 35% (68/193). All outbreaks involved intensive care settings. Non-adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE) or hand hygiene (n = 11), PPE shortage (n = 8) and high antibiotic use (n = 8) were most commonly reported as contributing factors, followed by environmental contamination (n = 7), prolonged critical illness (n = 7) and lack of trained HCW (n = 7). Implemented measures mainly focussed on PPE/hand hygiene audits (n = 9), environmental cleaning/disinfection (n = 9) and enhanced patient screening (n = 8). Comparing potentially modifiable risk factors and control measures, we found the largest discrepancies in the areas of PPE shortage (risk factor in 8 studies, addressed in 2 studies) and patient overcrowding (risk factor in 5 studies, addressed in 0 studies). CONCLUSIONS: Reported MDRO outbreaks during the COVID-19 pandemic were most often caused by CRAB (including our outbreak) and C. auris. Inadequate PPE/hand hygiene adherence, PPE shortage, and high antibiotic use were the most commonly reported potentially modifiable factors contributing to the outbreaks. These findings should be considered for the prevention of MDRO outbreaks during future COVID-19 waves.


Subject(s)
Acinetobacter Infections/prevention & control , Acinetobacter baumannii , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Candidiasis/prevention & control , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Acinetobacter Infections/complications , Acinetobacter baumannii/drug effects , Aged , Candidiasis/complications , Carbapenems/pharmacology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial , Female , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Switzerland/epidemiology
5.
2021.
Preprint in English | Other preprints | ID: ppcovidwho-294881

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Background There is insufficient evidence regarding the role of respirators in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analysed the impact of filtering facepiece class 2 (FFP2) vs . surgical masks on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition among Swiss healthcare workers (HCW). Methods Our prospective multicentre cohort enrolled patient-facing HCWs from June to August 2020. Participants were asked about COVID-19 risk exposures/behaviours, including preferred mask type when caring for COVID-19 patients outside of aerosol-generating procedures (AGP). For those performing AGPs, we asked whether they used FFP2 irrespective of the patient’s COVID-19 status (i.e. universal use). The impact of FFP2 on i) self-reported SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal PCR/rapid antigen tests captured during weekly surveys, and ii) SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion between baseline and January/February 2021 was assessed. Results We enrolled 3’259 participants from nine healthcare institutions, whereof 716 (22%) preferentially used FFP2 respirators. Among these, 81/716 (11%) reported a SARS-CoV-2-positive swab, compared to 352/2543 (14%) surgical mask users (median follow-up 242 days);seroconversion was documented in 85/656 (13%) FFP2 and 426/2255 (19%) surgical mask users. Adjusted for baseline characteristics, COVID-19 exposure, and risk behaviour, FFP2 use was non-significantly associated with a decreased risk for SARS-CoV-2-positive swab (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0·8, 95% CI 0·6-1·0, p=0·052) and seroconversion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0·7, 95% CI 0·5-1·0, p=0·053);household exposure was the strongest risk factor (aHR for positive swab 10·1, p<0·001;aOR for seroconversion 5·0, p<0·001). In subgroup analysis, FFP2 use was clearly protective among those with frequent (>20 patients) COVID-19 exposure (aHR 0·7, p<0·001;aOR 0·6, p=0·035). Universal FFP2 use during AGPs showed no protective effect (aHR 1·1, p=0·7;aOR 0·9, p=0·53). Conclusion Respirators compared to surgical masks may convey additional protection from SARS-CoV-2 for HCW with frequent exposure to COVID-19 patients. Funding Swiss National Sciences Foundation, Federal Office of Public Health, Cantonal Health Department St.Gallen

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL