Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
1.
J Pers Med ; 12(7)2022 Jul 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1938882

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Asthma, along with inhaled steroids, was initially considered a risk factor for worse clinical outcomes in COVID-19. This was related to the higher morbidity observed in asthma patients during previous viral outbreaks. This retrospective study aimed at evaluating the prevalence of asthma among patients admitted due to SARS-CoV-2 infection as well as the impact of inhaled therapies on their outcomes. Furthermore, a comparison between patients with asthma, COPD and the general population was made. Methods: All COVID-19 inpatients were recruited between February and July 2020 from four large hospitals in Northwest Italy. Data concerning medical history, the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and the hospital stay, including length, drugs and COVID-19 complications (respiratory failure, lung involvement, and the need for respiratory support) were collected, as well as the type of discharge. Results: patients with asthma required high-flow oxygen therapy (33.3 vs. 14.3%, p = 0.001) and invasive mechanical ventilation (17.9 vs. 9.5%, p = 0.048) more frequently when compared to the general population, but no other difference was observed. Moreover, asthma patients were generally younger than patients with COPD (59.2 vs. 76.8 years, p < 0.001), they showed both a lower mortality rate (15.4 vs. 39.4%, p < 0.001) and a lower CCI (3.4 vs. 6.2, p < 0.001). Patients with asthma in regular therapy with ICS at home had significantly shorter hospital stay compared to those with no treatments (25.2 vs. 11.3 days, p = 0.024). Discussion: Our study showed that asthma is not associated with worse outcomes of COVID-19, despite the higher need for respiratory support compared with the general population, while the use of ICS allowed for a shorter hospital stay. In addition, the comparison of asthma with COPD patients confirmed the greater frailty of the latter, according to their multiple comorbidities.

2.
Panminerva Med ; 2022 Jun 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1904100

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 is a single-stranded RNA virus, known to be the causative agent of COVID-19. As the resulting disease shows a very heterogeneous range of clinical manifestations, the identification of early biomarkers allowing patients stratification according to the expected disease severity is still an unmet clinical need. METHODS: In this observational prospective cohort study, 137 consecutive patients, testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection by nasopharyngeal swab RT-PCR or antigenic test, were enrolled to evaluate their plasma viral load at the time of hospitalization. RESULTS: Even if all of them had a molecular diagnosis of COVID-19, only 29 patients showed a detectable plasma SARSCoV-2 RNAemia. Such viremic patients also showed other clinical and laboratory finding alterations (increased troponin I, IL-6, RDW-CV and creatinine levels along with decreased platelet count and glomerular filtration rate). A plasma detectable RNA viral load predicted in hospital death or ICU admission with an odds ratio of 3.53 (C.I. 1.44-8.64, p=0.0058), while the lack of a detectable viral load was associated with a faster recovery, with an odds ratio of 4.06 (C.I. 1.72-9.59, p=0.0014). These findings were confirmed in multivariate models including age, sex and baseline National Early Warning Score 2 and arterial oxygen tension over inspired oxygen fraction ratio. CONCLUSIONS: Our data thus suggest that plasma viral RNA load at the time of hospital admission could represent a useful independent biomarker allowing early patients' stratification according to the expected disease evolution, and driving clinical decisions tailored on the specific needs of the individual patient.

3.
Panminerva Med ; 2022 Feb 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1702913

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: An aspect of COVID-19 baffling physicians is the presentation of patients with acute respiratory failure, but normal mental faculties and no perception of dyspnea (i.e. "silent hypoxemia"). The aim of this study was to investigate the frequency, characteristics, and outcome of COVID-19 patients with silent hypoxemic status and comparing them with a symptomatic severity-matched group. METHODS: This is a retrospective monocentric observational study involving all patients with PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, admitted at Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo (Italy) from Emergency Department due to acute respiratory failure, during the first Italian pandemic peak (February-April 2020). RESULTS: Overall 28-day mortality in 1,316 patients was 26.9%. Patients who did not report dyspnea at admission (N 469, 35.6%) had a lower 28-day mortality (22.6 vs. 29.3%, p=0.009). The severity matching analysis (i.e. PaO2/FiO2 and imaging) led to the identification of two groups of 254 patients that did not differ for sex prevalence, age, BMI, smoking history, comorbidities, and PaCO2 at admission. The use of CPAP during the first 24 hours, such as the need of endotracheal intubation (ETI) during the overall admission were significantly lower in matched patients with silent hypoxemia, whereas 28-day mortality resulted similar (p=0.21). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of dyspnea is common in patients suffering from severe COVID-19 pneumonia leading to respiratory failure, since up to a third of them could be asymptomatic on admission. Dyspnea per se correlates with pneumonia severity, and prognosis. However, dyspnea loses its predictive relevance once other findings to evaluate pneumonia severity are available such as PaO2/FiO2 and imaging. Silent hypoxemic patients are less likely to receive CPAP during the first 24 hours and ETI during the hospitalization, in spite of a comparable mortality to the dyspneic ones.

4.
Panminerva Med ; 63(4): 529-538, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1689607

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has changed bronchoscopy practices worldwide. Bronchoscopy is a high-risk aerosol-generating procedure with a potential for direct SARS-CoV-2 exposure and hospital-acquired infection. Current guidelines about personal protective equipment and environment considerations represent key competencies to minimize droplets dispersion and reduce the risk of transmission. Different measures should be put in field based on setting, patient's clinical characteristics, urgency and indications of bronchoscopy. The use of this technique in SARS-CoV-2 patients is reported primarily for removal of airway plugs and for obtaining microbiological culture samples. In mechanically ventilated patients with SARS-CoV-2, bronchoscopy is commonly used to manage complications such as hemoptysis, atelectasis or lung collapse when prone positioning, physiotherapy or recruitment maneuvers have failed. Further indications are represented by assistance during percutaneous tracheostomy. Continuous positive airway pressure, non-invasive ventilation support and high flow nasal cannula oxygen are frequently used in patient affected by Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): management of patients' airways and ventilation strategies differs from bronchoscopy indications, patient's clinical status and in course or required ventilatory support. Sedation is usually administered by the pulmonologist (performing the bronchoscopy) or by the anesthetist depending on the complexity of the procedure and the level of sedation required. Lastly, elective bronchoscopy for diagnostic indications during COVID-19 pandemic should be carried on respecting rigid standards which allow to minimize potential viral transmission, independently from patient's COVID-19 status. This narrative review aims to evaluate the indications, procedural measures and ventilatory strategies of bronchoscopy performed in different settings during COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Bronchoscopy/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Noninvasive Ventilation , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Tracheostomy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cannula , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure , Humans , Pandemics , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Panminerva Med ; 64(2): 208-214, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1478868

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Early chest physiotherapy is recommended for patients with post-COVID syndrome to improve dyspnea, relieve anxiety, minimize disability, preserve lung function and improve Quality of Life. However, there is still no consensus on the best treatments to manage respiratory symptoms. We aimed to test a method based on a guided in/expiratory (I/E) modulation to treat the lung inhomogeneity. METHODS: Twenty patients with post-COVID syndrome and mild-to-moderate obstructive syndrome performed 3 15-min sessions/day using the I/E mode of the T-PEP®4 device (Medical Products Research Srl, Legnano, Milan, Italy), for 15 consecutive days. Lung function parameters, dyspnea, and Quality of Life scores, as well as exercise capacity were assessed before and after treatment. RESULTS: All patients concluded the treatment and showed significant improvements in symptoms (chest pain during deep inspiration, chest tightness, inability to yawn, fatigue during activities of daily living [ADL], desaturation ≥4% during ADL) and in health status (BCSS -1.75, P=0.0003; CAT -5.2, P=0.0001). Lung function (FVC +10.9%, P=0.0002; FEV1 +8%, P=0.0001) and respiratory muscle strength (MIP +13.8%, P<0.0001; SNIP +13.6%, P=0.0122; MEP +7.6%, P=0.0045) improved. Exercise capacity also improved (6MWT +14.2%, P=0.005). At the end of treatment, only 2 patients reported symptoms and ADL-induced desaturation, while 14 still had fatigue during ADL. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that chest physiotherapy using an I/E device to actively recruit peripheral lungs in COVID-19 patients early after hospital discharge improved lung function tests as well as respiratory muscle strength, exercise capacity and Quality of Life.


Subject(s)
Activities of Daily Living , COVID-19 , Dyspnea/therapy , Exercise Tolerance/physiology , Fatigue , Feasibility Studies , Forced Expiratory Volume , Humans , Lung , Physical Therapy Modalities , Quality of Life
6.
Panminerva Med ; 63(4): 529-538, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1451032

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has changed bronchoscopy practices worldwide. Bronchoscopy is a high-risk aerosol-generating procedure with a potential for direct SARS-CoV-2 exposure and hospital-acquired infection. Current guidelines about personal protective equipment and environment considerations represent key competencies to minimize droplets dispersion and reduce the risk of transmission. Different measures should be put in field based on setting, patient's clinical characteristics, urgency and indications of bronchoscopy. The use of this technique in SARS-CoV-2 patients is reported primarily for removal of airway plugs and for obtaining microbiological culture samples. In mechanically ventilated patients with SARS-CoV-2, bronchoscopy is commonly used to manage complications such as hemoptysis, atelectasis or lung collapse when prone positioning, physiotherapy or recruitment maneuvers have failed. Further indications are represented by assistance during percutaneous tracheostomy. Continuous positive airway pressure, non-invasive ventilation support and high flow nasal cannula oxygen are frequently used in patient affected by Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): management of patients' airways and ventilation strategies differs from bronchoscopy indications, patient's clinical status and in course or required ventilatory support. Sedation is usually administered by the pulmonologist (performing the bronchoscopy) or by the anesthetist depending on the complexity of the procedure and the level of sedation required. Lastly, elective bronchoscopy for diagnostic indications during COVID-19 pandemic should be carried on respecting rigid standards which allow to minimize potential viral transmission, independently from patient's COVID-19 status. This narrative review aims to evaluate the indications, procedural measures and ventilatory strategies of bronchoscopy performed in different settings during COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Bronchoscopy/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Noninvasive Ventilation , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Tracheostomy , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cannula , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure , Humans , Pandemics , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Pol Arch Intern Med ; 131(9): 854-861, 2021 09 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1444602

ABSTRACT

Infection with SARS-CoV-2, responsible for COVID-19, has spread all over the world since the beginning of 2020. Healthcare providers and researchers have been overwhelmed not only by the rapid diffusion of the disease resulting in a pandemic with more than 4 million cases of death, but also by the lack of therapeutic options. After more than 1 year, the knowledge on COVID-19 has increased thanks to the enormous effort of the scientific community. To date, some algorithms of management have been adopted. While asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients should receive only a symptom-based treatment and clinical monitoring when necessary, inpatients could be candidates for antiviral treatment due to fully symptomatic disease. Corticosteroid treatment should be limited to patients with severe disease, particularly those with respiratory failure or acute respiratory distress syndrome. Since the main clinical features of COVID-19 are hypoxemia and dyspnea, oxygen therapy remains the cornerstone of managing more severe cases. In this context, the first-line approach should be represented by low-flow oxygen delivery via a nasal cannula or, more frequently, via a face mask with a known fraction of inspired oxygen. When low-flow oxygen fails to significantly improve oxygen saturation, oxygen therapy using a high-flow nasal cannula is recommended. The current challenges in the treatment of COVID-19 include the need to define the role of convalescent plasma and monoclonal antibodies as well as to identify the optimal target and time for anticoagulation. In this review, we highlight the main aspects of these challenges in light of recent updates.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Front Public Health ; 9: 705916, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1399192

ABSTRACT

Lipid profile alterations have been observed in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in relation to disease severity and mortality. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression of studies reporting total, HDL, and LDL-cholesterol, and triglyceride concentrations in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus, between January 2020 and January 2021, for studies describing lipid concentrations, COVID-19 severity, and survival status (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021253401). Twenty-two studies in 10,122 COVID-19 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled results showed that hospitalized patients with severe disease or non-survivor status had significantly lower total cholesterol (standardized mean difference, SMD = -0.29, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.16, p < 0.001), LDL-cholesterol (SMD = -0.30, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.18, p < 0.001), and HDL-cholesterol (SMD = -0.44, 95% CI -0.62 to -0.26, p < 0.001), but not triglyceride (SMD = 0.04, 95% CI -0.10 to -0.19, p = 0.57), concentrations compared to patients with milder disease or survivor status during follow up. Between-study heterogeneity was large-to-extreme. In sensitivity analysis, the effect size of different lipid fractions was not affected when each study was in turn removed. The Begg's and Egger's t-tests did not show evidence of publication bias, except for studies investigating LDL-cholesterol. In meta-regression, significant associations were observed between the SMD of LDL-cholesterol and age and hypertension, and between the SMD of triglycerides and study endpoint and aspartate aminotransferase. In our systematic review and meta-analysis, lower total, HDL, and LDL-cholesterol, but not triglyceride, concentrations were significantly associated with COVID-19 severity and mortality. Cholesterol concentrations might be useful, in combination with other clinical and demographic variables, for risk stratification and monitoring in this group. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021253401.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cholesterol , Cholesterol, HDL , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Triglycerides
9.
J Breath Res ; 15(4)2021 09 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1379422

ABSTRACT

The evidence that severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a risk factor for development of mycotic respiratory infection with an increased mortality is rising. Immunosuppressed are among the most susceptible patients andAspergillusspecies is the most feared superinfection. In this study we evaluated mycotic isolation prevalence on bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) of patients who underwent bronchoscopy in search of severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA. Moreover, we described the clinical characteristics and main outcomes of these patients. We included 118 patients, 35.9% of them were immunosuppressed for different reasons: in 23.7% we isolated SARS-CoV-2 RNA, in 33.1% we identified at least one mycotic agent and both in 15.4%. On BAL we observed in three casesAspergillusspp, in six casesPneumocystisand in 32Candidaspp. The prevalence of significant mold infection was 29.3% and 70.7% of cases were false positive or clinically irrelevant infections. In-hospital mortality of patients with fungal infection was 15.3%. The most frequent computed tomography (CT) pattern, evaluated with the Radiological Society of North America consensus statement, among patients with a mycotic pulmonary infection was the atypical one (p< 0.0001). Mycotic isolation on BAL may be interpreted as an innocent bystander, but its identification could influence the prognosis of patients, especially in those who need invasive investigations during the COVID-19 pandemic; BAL plays a fundamental role in resolving clinical complex cases, especially in immunosuppressed patients independently from radiological features, without limiting its role in ruling out SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
Bronchoalveolar Lavage , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Mycoses/diagnosis , Mycoses/epidemiology , Nasopharynx/microbiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Male , Middle Aged , Mycoses/microbiology , Nasopharynx/virology , Pandemics , Prevalence , Prognosis , RNA, Viral/analysis , RNA, Viral/genetics , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
10.
Minerva Med ; 112(6): 779-785, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1278855

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pneumomediastinum (PNM) can develop as a severe complication of severe COVID-19 and may be correlated with greater morbidity and mortality. PNM is a rarely reported complication in COVID-19 patients and usually associated with endotracheal intubation. METHODS: Our aim was to describe the characteristics of patients with PNM in twenty-one patients with COVID-19 related pneumonia and acute respiratory failure in a retrospective case series. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were diagnosed, four were treated with high-flow nasal cannula, thirteen with non invasive ventilation and four with invasive mechanical ventilation. In five cases PNM was massive and associated to subcutaneous emphysema; more rarely PNM was associated with pneumothorax. Conservative management was the most used therapeutic strategy. CONCLUSIONS: PNM is a serious and not extremely rare complication of severe forms of pulmonary involvement of COVID-19. The clinician should consider this rare complication; moreover, we suggest being careful when clinicians start mechanical ventilation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Mediastinal Emphysema/etiology , Pneumonia/etiology , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Mediastinal Emphysema/diagnosis , Mediastinal Emphysema/therapy , Middle Aged , Pneumonia/complications , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index , Young Adult
11.
Minerva Med ; 112(3): 329-337, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1239284

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has high mortality rate mainly stemming from acute respiratory distress leading to respiratory failure (ARF). Aim of the study was to evaluate the management of severe ARF due to COVID-19 pneumonia using noninvasive ventilatory support (NIVS), studying safety and effectiveness of NIVS. METHODS: This is a retrospective, multicenter study. Primary outcomes were NIVS failure with intubation rate and hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were hospital stay and factors related to NIVS failure and mortality. These outcomes were compared with patients intubated and admitted to ICU. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-two patients were hospitalized because of severe respiratory failure (PaO2/FiO2 ratio <250). One hundred thirty-eight patients were admitted to Respiratory Intermediate Care Unit (RICU) for a NIVS trial. One hundred patients were treated successfully with NIVS (74.5%); 38 failed NIVS trial (27.5%). In-hospital mortality was 23.18% in RICU group and 30.55% in ICU group. Patients with NIVS failure were older, had a lower number of lymphocytes, a higher IL-6, lower PaO2, PaC O2, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, higher respiratory rate (RR) and heart rate at admission and lower PaO2, and PaO2/FiO2 ratio and higher RR after 1-6 hours. Multivariate analysis identified higher age, C-reactive protein as well as RR after 1-6 hours and PaO2/FiO2 ratio after 1-6 hours as an independent predictor mortality. CONCLUSIONS: NIVS is a safe and effective strategy in the treatment of severe ARF due to COVID-19 related pneumonia, that reduces mortality and length of hospital stay in the carefully selected patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Noninvasive Ventilation , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Acute Disease , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19/drug therapy , Female , Heart Rate , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Noninvasive Ventilation/adverse effects , Noninvasive Ventilation/methods , Noninvasive Ventilation/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Insufficiency/mortality , Respiratory Rate , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Failure , Treatment Outcome
12.
14.
Panminerva Med ; 63(1): 51-61, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1068211

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Findings from February 2020, indicate that the clinical spectrum of COVID-19 can be heterogeneous, probably due to the infectious dose and viral load of SARS-CoV-2 within the first weeks of the outbreak. The aim of this study was to investigate predictors of overall 28-day mortality at the peak of the Italian outbreak. METHODS: Retrospective observational study of all COVID-19 patients admitted to the main hospital of Bergamo, from February 23 to March 14, 2020. RESULTS: Five hundred and eight patients were hospitalized, predominantly male (72.4%), mean age of 66±15 years; 49.2% were older than 70 years. Most of patients presented with severe respiratory failure (median value [IQR] of PaO2/FiO2: 233 [149-281]). Mortality rate at 28 days resulted of 33.7% (N.=171). Thirty-nine percent of patients were treated with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), 9.5% with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and 13.6% with endotracheal intubation. 9.5% were admitted to Semi-Intensive Respiratory Care Unit, and 18.9% to Intensive Care Unit. Risk factors independently associated with 28-day mortality were advanced age (≥78 years: odds ratio [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 38.91 [10.67-141.93], P<0.001; 70-77 years: 17.30 [5.40-55.38], P<0.001; 60-69 years: 3.20 [1.00-10.20], P=0.049), PaO2/FiO2<200 at presentation (3.50 [1.70-7.20], P=0.001), need for CPAP/NIV in the first 24 hours (8.38 [3.63-19.35], P<0.001), and blood urea value at admission (1.01 [1.00-1.02], P=0.015). CONCLUSIONS: At the peak of the outbreak, with a probable high infectious dose and viral load, older age, the severity of respiratory failure and renal impairment at presentation, but not comorbidities, are predictors of 28-day mortality in COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Age Factors , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/pathology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Severity of Illness Index
15.
Minerva Med ; 112(3): 329-337, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1034290

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has high mortality rate mainly stemming from acute respiratory distress leading to respiratory failure (ARF). Aim of the study was to evaluate the management of severe ARF due to COVID-19 pneumonia using noninvasive ventilatory support (NIVS), studying safety and effectiveness of NIVS. METHODS: This is a retrospective, multicenter study. Primary outcomes were NIVS failure with intubation rate and hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were hospital stay and factors related to NIVS failure and mortality. These outcomes were compared with patients intubated and admitted to ICU. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-two patients were hospitalized because of severe respiratory failure (PaO2/FiO2 ratio <250). One hundred thirty-eight patients were admitted to Respiratory Intermediate Care Unit (RICU) for a NIVS trial. One hundred patients were treated successfully with NIVS (74.5%); 38 failed NIVS trial (27.5%). In-hospital mortality was 23.18% in RICU group and 30.55% in ICU group. Patients with NIVS failure were older, had a lower number of lymphocytes, a higher IL-6, lower PaO2, PaC O2, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, higher respiratory rate (RR) and heart rate at admission and lower PaO2, and PaO2/FiO2 ratio and higher RR after 1-6 hours. Multivariate analysis identified higher age, C-reactive protein as well as RR after 1-6 hours and PaO2/FiO2 ratio after 1-6 hours as an independent predictor mortality. CONCLUSIONS: NIVS is a safe and effective strategy in the treatment of severe ARF due to COVID-19 related pneumonia, that reduces mortality and length of hospital stay in the carefully selected patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Noninvasive Ventilation , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Acute Disease , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19/drug therapy , Female , Heart Rate , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Noninvasive Ventilation/adverse effects , Noninvasive Ventilation/methods , Noninvasive Ventilation/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Insufficiency/mortality , Respiratory Rate , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Failure , Treatment Outcome
17.
J Asthma ; 59(2): 239-242, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-966588

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Severe asthma is considered a risk factor for SARS-Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection but scientific evidences are lacking. METHODS: we performed a literature search and review based on PubMed database national, international recommendations as well as papers on severe asthmatic patients and their management during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. RESULTS: the majority of international recommendations, expert panels and editorials provide indications about management of severe asthmatic patients. No published studies evaluated the effects of biologic agents on severe asthmatic patients during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 and asthma is variable worldwide and severe asthmatic patients were seldom reported in published cohorts. International recommendations suggest maintaining asthma under control to limit exacerbations occurrence, by using all available treatment. The minimum steroid dosage effective to control symptoms should be maintained to avoid exacerbations; biologic agents administration should be regularly scheduled encouraging patient support programmes.


Subject(s)
Anti-Asthmatic Agents/therapeutic use , Asthma/diet therapy , Asthma/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Anti-Asthmatic Agents/administration & dosage , Humans , Pandemics , Patient Acuity , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Respiration ; 99(11): 970-978, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-884925

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) during the SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2) pandemic should be reserved to a limited number of clinical indications. The yield of BAL for the diagnosis of suspected or confirmed pulmonary SARS-CoV-2 infection is still unknown. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic ratio of BAL in detecting SARS-CoV-2 pulmonary infection in patients undergoing bronchoscopy for different indications as well as describe the clinical, radiological, and endoscopic characteristics of patients with SARS-CoV-2 on BAL. METHOD: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study including all patients who underwent bronchoscopy for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 on BAL. Clinical, computed tomography (CT), endoscopic, and microbiologic data were gathered from March 16th to May 27th, 2020. RESULTS: 131 patients were included. Bronchoscopy was performed for suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection (65.5%), alternative diagnosis (12.9%), suspected superinfections (19.8%), and lung atelectasis (1.5%). SARS-CoV-2 was isolated on BAL 43 times (32.8%) and the highest isolation rate was in patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection (74.4%); 76% of positive patients had a double-negative nasopharyngeal swab. Peripheral, posterior and multilobar CT opacities were more frequent in SARS-CoV-2 patients, and the number of CT findings was higher in positive patients, particularly those with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. We recorded a progressive reduction of SARS-CoV-2 isolation during the observation period. CONCLUSIONS: In our centers, the rate of detection of SARS-CoV-2 on BAL in patients with suspected infection was 37.2%. The agreement of BAL with nasopharyngeal swabs was high; CT alterations could predict the pretest probability of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but suspicion of viral infection should be always considered.


Subject(s)
Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid/virology , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Aged , Bronchoalveolar Lavage , Bronchoscopy , Female , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Retrospective Studies , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL