Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Intern Emerg Med ; 17(8): 2357-2365, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1959105

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Periodic surges of COVID-19 patients seeking care in the hospital environment overwhelm systems reduce the availability of resources for treatment of non-COVID-19 cases (Zheng et al. in J Hosp Infect 106:325-329, 2020). Hospital flow and resource management could be greatly enhanced by differentiating patients who are likely at risk of adverse clinical outcomes from those who could safely be discharged after evaluation and managed outside of the hospital setting (Sun et al. in J Infect Dis 223:38-46, 2021). Herein, we propose a prognostic score named PEGALUS (Predictivity of Elderly age, arterial blood Gas Analysis and Lung UltraSound) that could potentially help clinicians properly and rapidly choose the appropriate allocation of COVID-19 patients admitted to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This observational prospective study enrolled COVID-19 patients who were admitted to the ED of IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital (HSR). RESULTS: 230 COVID-19 patients were enrolled and 30-day follow-up data was collected. Composite outcome was death or need for oro-tracheal intubation (OTI). 50 patients (21.5%) reached the outcome during the observational period. In multivariate Cox analysis, age, PO2/FiO2 ratio, pCO2, duration of symptoms, and lung ultrasound evaluation were significantly associated with the adverse outcome. We obtained a new scorecard (PEGALUS) according to the hazard ratio of the identified predictors. PEGALUS score performed well in predicting the composite outcome (AUC 0.866, 95% IC 0.812-0.921; p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier showed that a PEGALUS score < 7 was associated with a good 30-day prognosis (survival rate 97.5%), compared to a PEGALUS score of 7-11 (survival rate 85.9%; p log-rank 0.009) and PEGALUS score > 11 (survival rate 49.3%; p log-rank < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PEGALUS score performed at the admission can predict adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19. The systematic application of this score might permit a more accurate and rapid treatment allocation in this setting.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Aged , Prospective Studies , Prognosis , Emergency Service, Hospital , Lung/diagnostic imaging
2.
Blood Purif ; 50(1): 102-109, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-643726

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is no information on acute kidney injury (AKI) and continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) among invasively ventilated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in Western healthcare systems. OBJECTIVE: To study the prevalence, characteristics, risk factors and outcome of AKI and CRRT among invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Observational study in a tertiary care hospital in Milan, Italy. RESULTS: Among 99 patients, 72 (75.0%) developed AKI and 17 (17.7%) received CRRT. Most of the patients developed stage 1 AKI (33 [45.8%]), while 15 (20.8%) developed stage 2 AKI and 24 (33.4%) a stage 3 AKI. Patients who developed AKI or needed CRRT at latest follow-up were older, and among CRRT treated patients a greater proportion had preexisting CKD. Hospital mortality was 38.9% for AKI and 52.9% for CRRT patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients, AKI is very common and CRRT use is common. Both carry a high risk of in-hospital mortality.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury/etiology , Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Acute Kidney Injury/mortality , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , Cohort Studies , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Treatment Outcome , Ventilators, Mechanical
3.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 2(8): e465-e473, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-599198

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Mortality in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyperinflammation is high. We aimed to examine whether mavrilimumab, an anti-granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor-α monoclonal antibody, added to standard management, improves clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyperinflammation. METHODS: This single-centre prospective cohort study included patients aged 18 years or older who were admitted to San Raffaele Hospital (Milan, Italy) with severe COVID-19 pneumonia, hypoxia, and systemic hyperinflammation. Patients received a single intravenous dose (6 mg/kg) of mavrilimumab added to standard care given by the hospital at the time. The control group consisted of contemporaneous patients with similar baseline characteristics who received standard care at the same hospital. The main outcome was time to clinical improvement (defined as improvement of two or more points on the seven-point ordinal scale of clinical status). Other outcomes included proportion of patients achieving clinical improvement, survival, mechanical ventilation-free survival, and time to fever resolution. Adverse events were monitored daily. FINDINGS: Between March 17 and April 15, 2020, 13 non-mechanically ventilated patients (median age 57 years [IQR 52-58], 12 [92%] men) received mavrilimumab and 26 patients (median age 60 [IQR 53-67], 17 [65%] men) in the control group received standard care. During the 28-day follow-up, no patients in the mavrilimumab group died, and seven (27%) patients in the control group died (p=0·086). At day 28, all patients in the mavrilimumab group and 17 (65%) patients in the control group showed clinical improvement (p=0·030), with earlier improvement in the mavrilimumab than in the control group (mean time to improvement 8 days [IQR 5 to 11] vs 19 days [11 to >28], p=0·0001). By day 28, one (8%) patient in the mavrilimumab group progressed to mechanical ventilation compared with nine (35%) patients in the control group who progressed to mechanical ventilation or died (p=0·14). By day 14, fever resolved in ten (91%) of 11 febrile patients in the mavrilimumab group, compared with 11 (61%) of 18 febrile patients in the control group (p=0·18); fever resolution was faster in mavrilimumab recipients versus controls (median time to resolution 1 day [IQR 1 to 2] vs 7 days [3 to >14], p=0·0093). Mavrilimumab was well tolerated, with no infusion reactions. Three (12%) patients in the control group developed infectious complications. INTERPRETATION: Mavrilimumab treatment was associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with standard care in non-mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyperinflammation. Treatment was well tolerated. Confirmation of efficacy requires controlled testing. FUNDING: IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL