Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 35
Filter
1.
Clinical Microbiology and Infection ; 2022.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-1821189

ABSTRACT

Background Oral drugs against SARS-COV-2 have received emergency use authorization for the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in nonhospitalized patients who are at high risk for clinical progression. Objectives To provide a clinical practice overview of first-generation oral antiviral agents against SARS-CoV-2. Sources References for this review were identified through searches of PubMed, Google Scholar, bioRxiv, medRxiv, regulatory drug agencies, and pharmaceutical companies' websites up to 16 February 2022. Content Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir have been authorized for use in nonhospitalized individuals with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who are at high risk for progression. In clinical trials, molnupiravir reduced the frequency of hospitalization or death by 3% (relative risk reduction 30%), and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir by 6% (relative risk reduction 89%). Their use in clinical practice requires early administration, review of drug-drug interactions (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir), considerations of embryo-fetal toxicity (molnupiravir), and compliance with ingestion of a high number of pills. Knowledge gaps include the efficacy of these agents in vaccinated, hospitalized, or immunosuppressed individuals with prolonged SARS-CoV-2 persistence. Implications First-generation oral antivirals represent progress in therapeutics against SARS-CoV-2, but also pose new challenges in clinical practice. Further advances in the development of new drugs are required.

2.
Int J Infect Dis ; 118: 197-202, 2022 Mar 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1778199

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We described the current incidence and risk factors of bacterial co-infection in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Observational cohort study was performed at the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona (February 2020-February 2021). All patients with COVID-19 who were admitted for >48 hours with microbiological sample collection and procalcitonin (PCT) determination within the first 48 hours were included. RESULTS: A total of 1125 consecutive adults met inclusion criteria. Co-infections were microbiologically documented in 102 (9.1%) patients. Most frequent microorganisms were Streptococcus pneumoniae (79%), Staphylococcus aureus (6.8%), and Haemophilus influenzae (6.8%). Test positivity was 1% (8/803) for blood cultures, 10.1% (79/780) for pneumococcal urinary antigen test, and 11.4% (15/132) for sputum culture. Patients with PCT higher than 0.2, 0.5, 1, and 2 ng/mL had significantly more co-infections than those with lower levels (p=0.017, p=0.031, p<0.001, and p<0.001, respectively). In multivariate analysis, oxygen saturation ≤94% (OR 2.47, CI 1.57-3.86), ferritin levels <338 ng/mL (OR 2.63, CI 1.69-4.07), and PCT higher than 0.2 ng/mL (OR 1.74, CI 1.11-2.72) were independent risk factors for co-infection at hospital admission owing to COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Bacterial co-infection in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 is relatively common. However, clinicians could spare antibiotics in patients with PCT values <0.2, especially with high ferritin values and oxygen saturation >94%.

3.
Transfusion ; 2022 Mar 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1765059

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite most controlled trials have shown no measurable benefit of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) in patients with COVID-19, some studies suggest that early administration of CCP with high-titer anti-SARS-CoV-2 can be beneficial in selected patients. We investigated the efficacy of early administration of high-titer CCP to patients with COVID-19 who required hospitalization, STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Observational, propensity score (PS) matched case-control study of COVID-19 patients treated with CCP within 72 h of hospital admission and untreated controls from August 2020 to February 2021. All CCP donations had a Euroimmun anti-SARS-CoV-2 sample-to-cutoff ratio ≥3. PS matching was based on prognostic factors and presented features with high-standardized differences between the treated and control groups. The primary endpoint was mortality within 30 days of diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 1604 patients were analyzed, 261 of whom received CCP, most (82%) within 24 h after admission. Median age was 67 years (interquartile range: 56-79), and 953 (60%) were men. Presenting factors independently associated with higher 30-day mortality were increased age, cardiac disease, hypoxemic respiratory failure, renal failure, and plasma d-dimer >700 ng/ml. After PS matching, transfusion of CCP was associated with a significant reduction in the 30-day mortality rate (odds ratio [OR]; 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91-0.98; p = .001) that extended to the 60th day after COVID-19 diagnosis (OR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.92-0.99; p = .01). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that CCP can still be helpful in selected patients with COVID-19 and call for further studies before withdrawing CCP from the COVID-19 therapeutic armamentarium.

4.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 5250, 2022 03 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1764201

ABSTRACT

Dexamethasone and tocilizumab have been associated with reduction in mortality, however, the beneficial effect is not for all patients and the impact on viral replication is not well defined. We hypostatized that C-reactive protein (CRP) could help in the identification of patients requiring anti-inflammatory therapy. Patients admitted for > 48 h in our hospital for a confirmed or suspected infection by SARS-CoV-2 from February 2020 to February 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. The primary outcome was mortality at 30 days. Demographics and the most relevant variables related with the outcome were included. CRP was stratified by percentiles. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed. A total of 3218 patients were included with a median (IQR) age of 66 (74-78) years and 58.9% were males. The rate of intensive care unit admission was 24.4% and the 30-day mortality rate was 11.8%. Within the first 5 days from admission, 1018 (31.7%) patients received dexamethasone and 549 tocilizumab (17.1%). The crude analysis showed a mortality reduction in patients receiving dexamethasone when CRP was > 13.75 mg/dL and > 3.5 mg/dL for those receiving tocilizumab. Multivariate analysis identified the interaction of CRP > 13.75 mg/dL with dexamethasone (OR 0.57; CI 95% 0.37-0.89, P = 0014) and CRP > 3.5 mg/dL with tocilizumab (0.65; CI95%:0.44-0.95, P = 0.029) as independent predictors of mortality. Our results suggest that dexamethasone and tocilizumab are associated with a reduction in mortality when prescribed to patients with a certain inflammatory activity assessed by C-reactive protein.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , C-Reactive Protein , COVID-19 , Dexamethasone , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , C-Reactive Protein/metabolism , COVID-19/drug therapy , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Male , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Front Microbiol ; 13: 826883, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1753389

ABSTRACT

We documented a hematologic patient with prolonged SARS-CoV-2 viral replication in whom emergence of viral mutations was documented after the consecutive use of antivirals and convalescent plasma. The virus detected in the last of 12 clinical samples (day 237) had accumulated 22 changes in amino acids and 29 in nucleotides. Some of these changes, such as the E484Q, were mutations of concern as defined by WHO. This finding represents an enormous epidemiological threat and poses a major clinical challenge. Combined antiviral strategies, as well as specific strategies related to the diagnostic approach of prolonged infections for this specific population, may be needed.

7.
Infect Dis Ther ; 11(1): 587-593, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1682191

ABSTRACT

The immense impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health systems has motivated the scientific community to search for clinical prognostic factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Low cycle threshold values (Ct) of diagnostic real-time RT-PCR assays in hospitalized patients have been associated with a poor prognosis in several studies, whereas other studies did not find this association. We explored whether SARS-CoV-2 Ct values at diagnosis were associated with a poor outcome (admission to hospital and death) in 604 community patients diagnosed at primary health centers. Although lower Ct values were found in patients who died of COVID-19, the Ct value was not significantly associated with a worse outcome in a multivariate analysis, while age remained an independent prognostic factor. We did not find evidence to support the role of Ct values as a prognostic factor of COVID-19 in community cases.

8.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(1): 127-132, 2022 01 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1621567

ABSTRACT

Hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experiencing respiratory symptoms have different complications (inflammatory, co-infection, and thrombotic) that are identifiable by analytics patterns. Personalized treatment decisions decreased early mortality (odds ratio [OR] .144; 95% confidence interval [CI] .03-.686; P = .015). Increasing age (OR 1.06; P = .038) and therapeutic effort limitation (OR 9.684; P < .001) were associated with higher mortality.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospitalization , Humans , Odds Ratio , SARS-CoV-2
9.
PLoS One ; 16(3): e0247251, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1574883

ABSTRACT

In the context of COVID-19 pandemic, we aimed to analyze the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, risk factors for mortality and impact of COVID-19 on outcomes of solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients compared to a cohort of non transplant patients, evaluating if transplantation could be considered a risk factor for mortality. From March to May 2020, 261 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were evaluated, including 41 SOT recipients. Of these, thirty-two were kidney recipients, 4 liver, 3 heart and 2 combined kidney-liver transplants. Median time from transplantation to COVID-19 diagnosis was 6 years. Thirteen SOT recipients (32%) required Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission and 5 patients died (12%). Using a propensity score match analysis, we found no significant differences between SOT recipients and non-transplant patients. Older age (OR 1.142; 95% [CI 1.08-1.197]) higher levels of C-reactive protein (OR 3.068; 95% [CI 1.22-7.71]) and levels of serum creatinine on admission (OR 3.048 95% [CI 1.22-7.57]) were associated with higher mortality. The clinical outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection in our cohort of SOT recipients appear to be similar to that observed in the non-transplant population. Older age, higher levels of C-reactive protein and serum creatinine were associated with higher mortality, whereas SOT was not associated with worse outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Organ Transplantation/mortality , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Allografts/physiology , Allografts/virology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Organ Transplantation/adverse effects , Organ Transplantation/methods , Pandemics , Propensity Score , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Spain/epidemiology , Transplant Recipients/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome
11.
Open forum infectious diseases ; 8(Suppl 1):S369-S370, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1564696

ABSTRACT

Background There are few real-world data on the use of remdesivir (RDV) looking at timing of initiation in relation to symptom onset and severity of presenting disease. Methods We conducted multi-country retrospective study of clinical practice and use of RDV in COVID-19 patients. De-identified medical records data were entered into an e-CRF. Primary endpoints were all-cause mortality at day 28 and hospitalization duration. We assessed time from symptom onset to RDV start and re-admission. We included adults with PCR-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 who were hospitalized after Aug 31, 2020 and received at least 1 dose of RDV. Descriptive analyses were conducted. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to calculate the mortality rate, LogRank test to compare groups defined by severity of disease. Competing risk regression with discharge and death as competing events was used to estimate duration of hospitalization, and Gray’s test to compare the groups. Results 448 patients in 5 countries (12 sites) were included. Demographics are summarized (table) by 3 disease severity groups at baseline: no supplemental oxygen (NSO), low flow oxygen ≤6 L/min (LFO), and high-flow oxygen > 6L/min (HFO). No demographic differences were found between groups except for the higher percentage of cancer/chemotherapy patients in NSO group. Corticosteroids use was HFO 73.6%, LFO 62.7%, NSO 58.0%. Mortality rate was significantly lower in NSO, and LFO groups compared with HFO (6.2%, 10.2%, 23.6%, respectively;Fig1). Median duration of hospitalization was 9 (95%CI 8-10), 9 (8-9), 13 (10-15) days, respectively (Fig2). Median time from first symptom to RDV start was 7 days in all 3 groups. Patients started RDV on day 1 of hospitalization in HFO and LFO and day 2 on NSO groups. And received a 5 day course (median). Readmission within 28-days of discharge was < 5% and similar across all 3 groups. Table 1. Patients baseline characteristics and primary and secondary outcomes Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality Figure 2. Competing-risks regression of discharge from hospital Conclusion In this real-world cohort of COVID-19 positive hospitalized patients, RDV use was consistent across countries. RDV was started within a median of 7 days from symptom within 2 days of admission and given for a median of 5 days. Higher mortality rate and duration of hospitalization was seen in the HFO group and similar rates seen in the LFO and NSO groups. Readmission was consistently low across all 3 groups. Disclosures François Raffi, MD, PhD, Gilead Sciences (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member)Janssen (Consultant)MSD (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member)Roche (Consultant)Theratechnologies (Advisor or Review Panel member)ViiV (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member) Nadir Arber, MD, MSc, MHA, Check cap (Consultant)Coved cd 24 (Board Member)Israel Innovation Authority (Research Grant or Support)Nucleix (Advisor or Review Panel member)Zion Pharmaceuticals (Advisor or Review Panel member) Casper Rokx, MD PhD, Gilead Sciences (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support)Merck (Grant/Research Support, Research Grant or Support)ViiV (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support) Ameet Bakhai, MBBS, MD, FRCP, FESC, Bayer AG (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau, Independent Contractor)Boehringer Ingelheim (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau, Independent Contractor)Bristol-Myers Squibb (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau, Independent Contractor)Daiichi-Sankyo Europe (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau, Independent Contractor)Gilead Sciences (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Janssen (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau, Independent Contractor)Johnson & Johnson (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau, Independent Contractor)MSD (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau, Independent Contractor)Novartis (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau, Independent Contractor)Pfizer (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau, Independent Contractor)Roche (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau, Independent Contractor)Sanofi (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau, Independent Contractor) Alex Soriano, MD, Angelini (Speaker's Bureau)Gilead Sciences (Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau)Menarini (Speaker's Bureau)MSD (Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau)Pfizer (Research Grant or Support, Speaker's Bureau)Shionogi (Speaker's Bureau) Carlos Lumbreras, MD, PhD, Gilead Sciences (Grant/Research Support)MSD (Consultant) Vicente Estrada, MD, PhD, Gilead Sciences (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Janssen (Advisor or Review Panel member)MSD (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Theratechnologies (Consultant)ViiV (Consultant) Adrian Curran, MD, PhD, Gilead Sciences (Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support)Janssen (Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support)MSD (Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support)ViiV (Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support) Essy Mozaffari, PharmD, MPH, MBA, Gilead Sciences (Employee, Shareholder) Richard Haubrich, MD, Gilead Sciences (Employee, Shareholder) Paul Hodgkins, PhD, MSc, Gilead Sciences (Employee, Shareholder) Anton Pozniak, MD, FRCP, Gilead Sciences (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support)Janssen (Grant/Research Support, Research Grant or Support)Merck (Advisor or Review Panel member)Theratec (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support)ViiV (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support)

12.
J Clin Med ; 10(8)2021 Apr 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526820

ABSTRACT

In the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we aimed to evaluate the impact of anti-cytokine therapies (AT) in kidney transplant recipients requiring hospitalization due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. This is an observational retrospective study, which included patients from March to May 2020. An inverse probability of treatment weighting from a propensity score to receive AT was used in all statistical analyses, and we applied a bootstrap procedure in order to calculate an estimation of the 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles of odds ratio (OR). outcomes were measured using an ordinal scale determination (OSD). A total of 33 kidney recipients required hospitalization and 54% of them received at least one AT, mainly tocilizumab (42%), followed by anakinra (12%). There was no statistical effect in terms of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, respiratory secondary infections (35% vs. 7%) or mortality (16% vs. 13%) comparing patients that received AT with those who did not. Nevertheless, patients who received AT presented better outcomes during hospitalization in terms of OSD ≥5 ((OR 0.31; 2.5th, 97.5th percentiles (0.10; 0.72)). These analyses indicate, as a plausible hypothesis, that the use of AT in kidney transplant recipients presenting with COVID-19 could be beneficial, even though multicenter randomized control trials using these therapies in transplanted patients are needed.

13.
Infect Dis Ther ; 11(1): 587-593, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1509379

ABSTRACT

The immense impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health systems has motivated the scientific community to search for clinical prognostic factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Low cycle threshold values (Ct) of diagnostic real-time RT-PCR assays in hospitalized patients have been associated with a poor prognosis in several studies, whereas other studies did not find this association. We explored whether SARS-CoV-2 Ct values at diagnosis were associated with a poor outcome (admission to hospital and death) in 604 community patients diagnosed at primary health centers. Although lower Ct values were found in patients who died of COVID-19, the Ct value was not significantly associated with a worse outcome in a multivariate analysis, while age remained an independent prognostic factor. We did not find evidence to support the role of Ct values as a prognostic factor of COVID-19 in community cases.

14.
Med Mycol Case Rep ; 34: 35-37, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1474898

ABSTRACT

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel coronavirus associated with immune dysregulation. The use of immunosuppressant drugs as part of COVID-19 treatment (such as Tocilizumab or high -dose corticosteroids) increases the risk of opportunistic infections. Here we present a case of a patient without prior immunosuppression that developed a serious fungal infection after the use of high dose corticosteroids in the setting of severe COVID-19 and cryptogenic organizing pneumonia.

15.
J Antimicrob Chemother ; 76(12): 3296-3302, 2021 11 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1393280

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The use of remdesivir has demonstrated a significant reduction in the time to recovery in patients with COVID-19. However, the impact on mortality is still controversial. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate whether there is a specific subgroup of patients in whom an active antiviral therapy also reduces the mortality. METHODS: Patients admitted for >48 h in our hospital for a SARS-CoV-2 confirmed or suspected infection from February 2020 to February 2021 were retrospectively analysed. The primary outcome of the study was mortality at 30 days. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictors of mortality. RESULTS: In total, 2607 patients (438 receiving remdesivir and 2169 not) were included with a median (IQR) age of 65 (54-77) years and 58% were male. Four hundred and seventy-six were admitted to the ICU (18.3%) and 264 required invasive mechanical ventilation (10.1%). The global 30 day mortality rate was 10.7%. Pre-admission symptom duration of 4-6 days and ≤3 days was associated with a 1.5- and 2.5-fold increase in the mortality rate, respectively, in comparison with >6 days and treatment with remdesivir was independently associated with a lower mortality rate (OR = 0.382, 95% CI = 0.218-0.671). The analysis showed that the major difference was among patients with shorter pre-admission symptom duration (<6 days). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ≤3 days and 4-6 days from symptom onset to admission are associated with a 2.5- and 1.5-fold higher risk of death, respectively. Remdesivir was associated with 62% reduced odds of death versus standard-of-care and its survival benefit increased with shorter duration of symptoms.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Aged , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Humans , Male , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Int J Infect Dis ; 104: 379-381, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1385707

ABSTRACT

Microbiological response of SARS-CoV-2 to remdesivir in immunocompromised patients has not been evaluated. We present the case of a severely immunocompromised patient with persistent replication of SARS-CoV-2, who required different courses of remdesivir. Short courses of remdesivir might be insufficient in immunocompromised patients due to prolonged viral clearance.


Subject(s)
Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , COVID-19/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Virus Replication/drug effects , Adenosine Monophosphate/administration & dosage , Adult , Alanine/administration & dosage , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects
18.
BMJ Open ; 11(8): e040775, 2021 08 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1361993

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Identifying undetected clinical signs is imperative in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2. OBJECTIVE: To establish the prevalence of clinical gustatory and olfactory dysfunctions in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Clinical outcomes and recovery rates associated with gustatory and olfactory dysfunctions were also assessed. DESIGN: A prospective study was performed in 80 patients admitted to Hospital Clínic of Barcelona (Spain) for COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients were re-evaluated in the ward daily until discharge. Gustatory and olfactory dysfunction symptoms were retrospectively collected from emergency room (ER) charts after first assessments. Follow-up was performed in telemedicine consultation. SETTING: The single-centre study was performed in a hospitalisation ward at a university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive patients meeting hospitalisation criteria for COVID-19 pneumonia were eligible. Study exclusion criteria were patients who could not speak, had previous gustatory and olfactory dysfunctions or whose PCR tests for SARS-CoV-19 were negative. INTERVENTIONS: Systematic assessment of gustatory and olfactory symptoms with standardised questions. OUTCOMES: Prevalence of gustatory and olfactory dysfunctions in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. RESULTS: Of the 80 study subjects, 62.5% were male and the median age was 57 years. Half of the cohort (n=40) presented with comorbidities. The prevalence of chemosensitive disorder was 73.8% (n=59) (95% CI: 63.8 to 83.8), although self-reported symptoms were recorded in only 26.3% (n=21) of patients in the ER. Gustatory and olfactory dysfunctions were observed in 58.8% (n=47) and 55% (n=44) of cases, respectively. They were also the first symptoms in 25% (n=20) of patients. Anosmia was associated with ageusia, OR: 7, 95% CI: 2.3 to 21.8, p=0.001). No differences in clinical outcomes were observed when patients with and without gustatory and olfactory dysfunctions were compared. Recovery rates were 20% (n=10) and 85% (n=42) at days 7 and 45, respectively. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of gustatory and olfactory dysfunctions in COVID-19 pneumonia was much higher than in self-report. Presence of gustatory and olfactory dysfunctions was not a predictor of clinical outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Olfaction Disorders , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Olfaction Disorders/epidemiology , Olfaction Disorders/etiology , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Taste Disorders
19.
Med Intensiva (Engl Ed) ; 2021 Jul 30.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1331047

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of thrombosis, bleeding and mortality comparing anticoagulant doses in critically ill COVID-19 patients. DESIGN: Retrospective observational and analytical cohort study. SETTING: COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital between March and April 2020. PATIENTS: 201 critically ill COVID-19 patients were included. Patients were categorized into three groups according to the highest anticoagulant dose received during hospitalization: prophylactic, intermediate and therapeutic. INTERVENTIONS: The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE), bleeding and mortality was compared between groups. We performed two logistic multivariable regressions to test the association between VTE and bleeding and the anticoagulant regimen. MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST: VTE, bleeding and mortality. RESULTS: 78 patients received prophylactic, 94 intermediate and 29 therapeutic doses. No differences in VTE and mortality were found, while bleeding events were more frequent in the therapeutic (31%) and intermediate (15%) dose group than in the prophylactic group (5%) (p<0.001 and p<0.05 respectively). The anticoagulant dose was the strongest determinant for bleeding (odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.26-4.58, p=0.008) but had no impact on VTE. CONCLUSIONS: Intermediate and therapeutic doses appear to have a higher risk of bleeding without a decrease of VTE events and mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

20.
Am J Transplant ; 21(12): 3971-3979, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1320381

ABSTRACT

Recently published studies have found an impaired immune response after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in solid organ recipients. However, most of these studies have not assessed immune cellular responses in liver and heart transplant recipients. We prospectively studied heart and liver transplant recipients eligible for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Patients with past history of SARS-CoV-2 infection or SARS-CoV-2 detectable antibodies (IgM or IgG) were excluded. We assessed IgM/IgG antibodies and ELISpot against the S protein 4 weeks after receiving the second dose of the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine. Side effects, troponin I, liver tests and anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSA) were also assessed. A total of 58 liver and 46 heart recipients received two doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine. Median time from transplantation to vaccination was 5.4 years (IQR 0.3-27). Sixty-four percent of the patients developed SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG antibodies and 79% S-ELISpot positivity. Ninety percent of recipients developed either humoral or cellular response (87% in heart recipients and 93% in liver recipients). Factors associated with vaccine unresponsiveness were hypogammaglobulinemia and vaccination during the first year after transplantation. Local and systemic side effects were mild or moderate, and none presented DSA or graft dysfunction after vaccination. Ninety percent of our patients did develop humoral or cellular responses to mRNA-1273 vaccine. Factors associated with vaccine unresponsiveness were hypogammaglobulinemia and vaccination during the first year after transplantation, highlighting the need to further protect these patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heart Transplantation , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Immunity, Humoral , Liver , SARS-CoV-2 , Transplant Recipients
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL